Memorial day thoughts>
Dear Friends of the American Monetary Institute,
Memorial day is the most reflective of American Holidays, when we ought to honor and devote our attention to those who've given above and beyond to the advancement of humanity.
How far we have strayed from such an honor system! Look and see who is "honored" in our nation, and for what. Our society is so very sick, that instead of honoring those who contribute to its well being, the diseased mostly promote and emulate those who have unjustly accumulated an obscene share of our nation's wealth and power. There is often a direct relation between how much damage someone does and how much wealth they receive in payment for it! For example in the media: Rush Limbaugh, Shawn Hannity and even characters like ABC's Stephanopoulis and Gibson. We have no real media in this country. Keith Olberman is a rare exception but remember one third of Americans (the poorest and least educated) don't have cable television.
However the media problem is small change compared to the macro-destroyers operating against America - the financial sector (and the same is true in other lands). This does not require a conspiracy because in any case it would be the inevitable result of our flawed monetary and banking system. It results from the privatization of control over the nation's money system which has removed it from the checks and balances of our constitutional republic. Allowing it to function on a fractional reserve basis, which gives the banking system a huge accounting privilege. Letting the miscreants keep the loot they have stolen under color of law; so called "laws of economics" which deify the market.
That has fostered the accumulation of unearned wealth to obscene levels that are destructive to democracy, to justice and to humanity. With present day weaponry, it now even risks the annihilation of the species.
Thus the banking/money system promoted real estate speculation and created the real estate bubble, instead of focusing on repairing our vital infrastructure. New Orleans and Minneapolis and the army of unemployed pay the price so far, while the financial establishment gets bailed out. Who pays for the bailouts? One way or another the people of our country. Why? Because they don't understand how our money system operates against the general welfare. Their legislators also either don't understand, or find it convenient to pretend they don't understand.
The media does its best to block understanding, in order to promote the interests of the medias ultimate owners/controllers: the financial sector.
Memorial Day rightfully honors our veterans and our warriors who have and are now paying the ultimate price for the misdirection of our society by corrupt finance. A more meaningful thing would be to take better care of them. To pretend that America does not have the ability and resources to do that is an obscene lie.
Am I, as Director of the AMI overly passionate about this? Perhaps. You see we are involved in this battle on a daily basis. To get an idea how we are in combat against this insane system, please see our website at http://www.monetary.org/ Attached is a two page summary of the problem and solution: The Need for Monetary Reform. We try to make our materials easy to understand, yet accurate.
And we do this without comfortable funding. The Institute did not begin with an endowment but with a donation of books in 1996. We have survived and will continue to grow and move forward based on much appreciated donations, and the sales of our classic research achievement, the Lost Scence of Money book, and our CD's. (see http://www.monetary.org/lostscienceofmoney.html )
But to continue our work in a more effective way, we really need your help. I better repeat that:WE CAN REALLY MAKE A BIGGER DIFFERENCE WITH YOUR HELP!
With a slightly higher level of funding, we could be moving five times as rapidly. So we ask your assistance this memorial day: Please support us in this battle. Make a tax deductible contribution at our website, through Paypal or by mailing a check. The American Monetary Institute will use your contribution to achieve monetary reform, to move our country towards justice, truth, freedom and what should be the American way.
I've just returned from the Northwest U.S. where we made important strides with forming AMI Chapters in Portland, and Seattle and Albuquerque. Seattle drew some really sharp young people who understand the challenge. Albuquerque attracted an older more experienced group who want to move forward on monetary reform activities. In neither city were they afraid of taking up this challenge.
With better funding for trips more chapters could be organized much faster. These chapters educate our citizens and state and local legislators on the need for monetary reform, and how it can help solve their most pressing local problems. With the assistance and support of such local politicos, and normal down to earth citizens, really effective pressure will be brought to bear at the national level.
You can help by joining a chapter in your area and by making a donation, or purchasing a copy of our book The Lost Science of Money, at our website. Consider attending the 4th annual AMI Monetary Reform Conference at Roosevelt University in Chicago, this September 25-28th. We bring together twenty of the most knowledgeable speakers on monetary questions, and we make it an enjoyable event. See the description at the website, and since I have not had a chance until now to remind people, the conference discount ($245 instead of $295 will remain in effect if postmarked by May 31. (registration form is at http://www.monetary.org/2008conference.html)
Stay in touch and don't be shy about communicating any questions or comments.A happy, thoughtful Memorial Day to you!Sincerely,Stephen ZarlengaAMI
viernes 30 de mayo de 2008
jueves 29 de mayo de 2008
Crimes against humanity committed by Bush Administration
Harry Belafonte at Riverside Church in the ‘Final Hour’
Listen: Speech (4.6 MB)
WE GO IN THE FINAL HOUR,
TO THE MOST IMPORTANT LINE OF BATTLE:
THE PEOPLE THEMSELVES
by Harry Belafonte
On January 20-22, 2006, the International Commission of Inquiry on Crimes Against Humanity Committed by the Bush Administration (www.bushcommission.org) held an unprecedented citizen’s tribunal at Riverside Church in New York City to examine, with rigor and substance, whether the Bush Administration is guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity.
Internationally-known expert witnesses and whistle blowers, including former commander of Abu Ghraib prison Brig. Gen. Janis Karpinski, former British ambassador to Uzbekistan Craig Murray, and former UN arms inspector Scott Ritter, testified in the areas of war, torture, global environment, global health, and Katrina. The Commission’s summary findings will be released on February 2, 2006 at the National Press Club in Washington DC at 9:30am.
The following remarks by Harry Belafonte opened this historic session.
Thank you very much. I would to first express my great sense of privilege, and opportunity to be part of this evening’s tribunal and what we will be seeing and hearing. I would like to also extend my respects to the panel and to the tasks you have before you, and what we will be hearing.
It is most gratuitous that this should be taking place at the end of a week of celebration of the memory of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. This nation has never, ever produced a greater citizen, who stood and still stands for the principles for why we are all gathered here: the pursuit of justice, the pursuit of human rights, the pursuit of human dignity.
Theodore Roosevelt once said that when the powers of state, that having been mandated to reach out and to protect the interest of the people, begin to usurp the Constitution and undermine our laws, that it is the responsibility of the citizens to rise up and to speak against this process. And to in fact insist upon the changing of the guard, the changing of regime. (Applause) And those, those citizens who fail to hear that call, in fact should be charged with patriotic treason. (Applause) I think none gathered here this evening can be so charged.
It is important when all the instruments of government collapse, we go in the final hour, to the most important line of battle: the people themselves. The people of this nation, I think, and I know it, are awake, and are being more awakened every day. They are hearing and sensing the danger that sits on the horizon. Looking at the international oppressions that we are a part of, looking at how we have violated international humanity and law, one day this tribunal I hope, will reach out, and in its investigation look at the oppression and illegal experiences people in this nation are experiencing themselves.
On 9/11, we were all stunned by the tragic events that took place when the Twin Towers collapsed, and this terrorism was put upon our people. Two thousand lost their lives. Two thousand who were innocent, two thousand who did not cause war. And we said they were terrorists and we should hunt them down and bring them to justice. Tell me, where for you does the line blur?
When a nation as powerful as this, the most powerful in the history of human existence, and those who have dubiously come to power and who are reigning over the will of this nation, when they lie and mislead the citizens of this country, when they put before us fear and then govern by terrorism—where does the line blur for you? When our sons and daughters are sent to die in foreign battlefields, each day we claim the lives of tens and thousands of innocent men, women, and children, in other places—where for you does terrorism end and where does it begin, and who are the terrorists? (Applause).
Those who would choose to detract [from] the real meaning of this tribunal, the real meaning of this people’s moment, would suggest to you that we are somehow perhaps irrelevant. Well, I guess Paul Revere was considered at one point irrelevant, when he called for the alarm against the red coats.
I know very well that at the beginning, Dr. Martin Luther King was considered irrelevant. I know that there are so many that have called for the awakening of our citizens to look at what is happening to us and to seize our rights to put us back into democratic governance. Always in the beginning, we are minimalized, marginalized and relegated to the dustbins of history. We have prevailed before and we will prevail again.
I am honored to be a part of this process, and anything I can do to help broaden its base, to help broaden its inquiry, and to help save the soul of our nation, I welcome the opportunity and I will so serve. Thank you.
TAGS: abu ghraib crimes criticism environment harry belafonte humanity katrina torture
Listen: Speech (4.6 MB)
WE GO IN THE FINAL HOUR,
TO THE MOST IMPORTANT LINE OF BATTLE:
THE PEOPLE THEMSELVES
by Harry Belafonte
On January 20-22, 2006, the International Commission of Inquiry on Crimes Against Humanity Committed by the Bush Administration (www.bushcommission.org) held an unprecedented citizen’s tribunal at Riverside Church in New York City to examine, with rigor and substance, whether the Bush Administration is guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity.
Internationally-known expert witnesses and whistle blowers, including former commander of Abu Ghraib prison Brig. Gen. Janis Karpinski, former British ambassador to Uzbekistan Craig Murray, and former UN arms inspector Scott Ritter, testified in the areas of war, torture, global environment, global health, and Katrina. The Commission’s summary findings will be released on February 2, 2006 at the National Press Club in Washington DC at 9:30am.
The following remarks by Harry Belafonte opened this historic session.
Thank you very much. I would to first express my great sense of privilege, and opportunity to be part of this evening’s tribunal and what we will be seeing and hearing. I would like to also extend my respects to the panel and to the tasks you have before you, and what we will be hearing.
It is most gratuitous that this should be taking place at the end of a week of celebration of the memory of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. This nation has never, ever produced a greater citizen, who stood and still stands for the principles for why we are all gathered here: the pursuit of justice, the pursuit of human rights, the pursuit of human dignity.
Theodore Roosevelt once said that when the powers of state, that having been mandated to reach out and to protect the interest of the people, begin to usurp the Constitution and undermine our laws, that it is the responsibility of the citizens to rise up and to speak against this process. And to in fact insist upon the changing of the guard, the changing of regime. (Applause) And those, those citizens who fail to hear that call, in fact should be charged with patriotic treason. (Applause) I think none gathered here this evening can be so charged.
It is important when all the instruments of government collapse, we go in the final hour, to the most important line of battle: the people themselves. The people of this nation, I think, and I know it, are awake, and are being more awakened every day. They are hearing and sensing the danger that sits on the horizon. Looking at the international oppressions that we are a part of, looking at how we have violated international humanity and law, one day this tribunal I hope, will reach out, and in its investigation look at the oppression and illegal experiences people in this nation are experiencing themselves.
On 9/11, we were all stunned by the tragic events that took place when the Twin Towers collapsed, and this terrorism was put upon our people. Two thousand lost their lives. Two thousand who were innocent, two thousand who did not cause war. And we said they were terrorists and we should hunt them down and bring them to justice. Tell me, where for you does the line blur?
When a nation as powerful as this, the most powerful in the history of human existence, and those who have dubiously come to power and who are reigning over the will of this nation, when they lie and mislead the citizens of this country, when they put before us fear and then govern by terrorism—where does the line blur for you? When our sons and daughters are sent to die in foreign battlefields, each day we claim the lives of tens and thousands of innocent men, women, and children, in other places—where for you does terrorism end and where does it begin, and who are the terrorists? (Applause).
Those who would choose to detract [from] the real meaning of this tribunal, the real meaning of this people’s moment, would suggest to you that we are somehow perhaps irrelevant. Well, I guess Paul Revere was considered at one point irrelevant, when he called for the alarm against the red coats.
I know very well that at the beginning, Dr. Martin Luther King was considered irrelevant. I know that there are so many that have called for the awakening of our citizens to look at what is happening to us and to seize our rights to put us back into democratic governance. Always in the beginning, we are minimalized, marginalized and relegated to the dustbins of history. We have prevailed before and we will prevail again.
I am honored to be a part of this process, and anything I can do to help broaden its base, to help broaden its inquiry, and to help save the soul of our nation, I welcome the opportunity and I will so serve. Thank you.
TAGS: abu ghraib crimes criticism environment harry belafonte humanity katrina torture
US prepares to attack Chavez, says Prof Heinz Dieterich
The possibility of a US military incursion into Venezuela "is nearby," according to German political expert Heinz Dieterich.
"Washington is not prepared to lose Latin America in the competition with India, China and Europe," said Dieterich on Tuesday night during a debate in Montevideo, DPA quoted.
He thinks it is a "live-or-die" situation for the US government. Therefore, they would be ready to implement a military plan, which could include an invasion or an attack from Colombia.
"For that reason, they brought the Fourth Fleet back, wiped out the Colombian guerrillas and will make Colombia play the same role that Honduras played against Nicaragua" in 1979.
In the opinion of the German expert, a PhD in Social Sciences of Bremen University who holds a Master degree from Frankfurt's Goethe University, "conventional military pressure will increase" on Venezuela.
"If this happens," he said, "Venezuelan generals will stage a coup d'état against President Hugo Chávez. Most generals are not to immolate in a war against gringos."
++++++++++++++++++++++++
After weakening the FARC and Bolivian President Evo Morales,
the governments of Venezuela and Ecuador would be next.
EL UNIVERSAL
In the opinion of German scholar Heinz Dieterich, the reason for the "increasing military provocations" of the Colombian government and the US military in the Caribbean would be to "put in check mate" the governments of Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez and his Ecuadorian counterpart Rafael Correa's.
The leftwing PhD in Economic Sciences said in an article posted on Kaosenlared.net that Washington has come to the conclusion that, on the one hand, the Colombian Revolutionary Armed Forces (FARC) have lost their operational capacity and, on the other hand, it has managed to neutralize the government of Bolivian President Evo Morales. Therefore, its success in these two countries would be the background for the final move against Chávez and Correa.
The master plan
According to Dieterich, the US strategy to destroy the "Latin American liberation forces" has been a flexible one, by including new challenges as they emerge. The starting point of this plan, he added, was the removal of Colombian guerrillas with the implementation of Plan Colombia and the "inauguration of the 'Master of Shadows' Álvaro Uribe."
The scholar explained that when Chávez took office, he became the second target of the "imperial oligarchic interests." Therefore, Washington set to overthrow him in 2002. However, in the face of the failed coup, the US government needed urgently to wipe out the FARC, "because Colombia is just a platform for the military attack."
In his view, the White House planned to neutralize the FARC around 2007-2008 "to unleash an overall offensive against Chávez and the Bolivarian forces from 2008-2009."
Morales and CorreaThe third target of Washington, according to Dieterich, was Evo Morales in Bolivia. His government would be finished "by means of separatism, the Trojan horse of the Constituent Assembly and the organization of the International Confederation for Freedom and Local Autonomy (Confilar)."
In Ecuador, the "imperialist" standard would be repeated upon Rafael Correa's takeover. The scholar explained that the spearhead of imperialism are the Guayaquil's oligarchy and a disappointed indigenous movement.
Decisive software
Dieterich maintains that the Pentagon assumption is that the losing operational capacity of FARC and Morales are irreversible. "This situation has helped it unleash the paramilitary subversion from Colombia and the military subversion from the US Fourth Fleet against Venezuela and Ecuador."
Translated by Conchita Delgado
"Washington is not prepared to lose Latin America in the competition with India, China and Europe," said Dieterich on Tuesday night during a debate in Montevideo, DPA quoted.
He thinks it is a "live-or-die" situation for the US government. Therefore, they would be ready to implement a military plan, which could include an invasion or an attack from Colombia.
"For that reason, they brought the Fourth Fleet back, wiped out the Colombian guerrillas and will make Colombia play the same role that Honduras played against Nicaragua" in 1979.
In the opinion of the German expert, a PhD in Social Sciences of Bremen University who holds a Master degree from Frankfurt's Goethe University, "conventional military pressure will increase" on Venezuela.
"If this happens," he said, "Venezuelan generals will stage a coup d'état against President Hugo Chávez. Most generals are not to immolate in a war against gringos."
++++++++++++++++++++++++
After weakening the FARC and Bolivian President Evo Morales,
the governments of Venezuela and Ecuador would be next.
EL UNIVERSAL
In the opinion of German scholar Heinz Dieterich, the reason for the "increasing military provocations" of the Colombian government and the US military in the Caribbean would be to "put in check mate" the governments of Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez and his Ecuadorian counterpart Rafael Correa's.
The leftwing PhD in Economic Sciences said in an article posted on Kaosenlared.net that Washington has come to the conclusion that, on the one hand, the Colombian Revolutionary Armed Forces (FARC) have lost their operational capacity and, on the other hand, it has managed to neutralize the government of Bolivian President Evo Morales. Therefore, its success in these two countries would be the background for the final move against Chávez and Correa.
The master plan
According to Dieterich, the US strategy to destroy the "Latin American liberation forces" has been a flexible one, by including new challenges as they emerge. The starting point of this plan, he added, was the removal of Colombian guerrillas with the implementation of Plan Colombia and the "inauguration of the 'Master of Shadows' Álvaro Uribe."
The scholar explained that when Chávez took office, he became the second target of the "imperial oligarchic interests." Therefore, Washington set to overthrow him in 2002. However, in the face of the failed coup, the US government needed urgently to wipe out the FARC, "because Colombia is just a platform for the military attack."
In his view, the White House planned to neutralize the FARC around 2007-2008 "to unleash an overall offensive against Chávez and the Bolivarian forces from 2008-2009."
Morales and CorreaThe third target of Washington, according to Dieterich, was Evo Morales in Bolivia. His government would be finished "by means of separatism, the Trojan horse of the Constituent Assembly and the organization of the International Confederation for Freedom and Local Autonomy (Confilar)."
In Ecuador, the "imperialist" standard would be repeated upon Rafael Correa's takeover. The scholar explained that the spearhead of imperialism are the Guayaquil's oligarchy and a disappointed indigenous movement.
Decisive software
Dieterich maintains that the Pentagon assumption is that the losing operational capacity of FARC and Morales are irreversible. "This situation has helped it unleash the paramilitary subversion from Colombia and the military subversion from the US Fourth Fleet against Venezuela and Ecuador."
Translated by Conchita Delgado
martes 27 de mayo de 2008
The History of Money--Part 3
THE HISTORY OF MONEY PART 3
WORLD WAR I (1914-1918) The Germans borrowed money from the German Rothschilds bank, the British from the British Rothschilds bank, and the French from the French Rothschilds. American super banker J.P. Morgan was amongst other things also a sales agent for war materials. Six months into the war his spending of $10 million a day made him the largest consumer on the planet. The Rockefeller's and the head of president Willson's War Industries Board, Bernard Baruch each made some 200 million dollars while families contributed their sons to the bloody front lines, but profit was not the only motive for involvement. Russia had spoiled the money changers plan to split America in two, and remained the last major country not to have its own central bank. However, three years after the start of the war the entire Russian Royal Family was killed and Communism began. You might find it strange to learn that the Russian Revolution was also fuelled with British money. Capitalist businessmen financing Communism? Author Gary Allen gives his explanation: "If one understands that socialism is not a share-the-wealth programme, but is in reality a method to consolidate and control the wealth, then the seeming paradox of super-rich men promoting socialism becomes no paradox at all. Instead, it becomes logical, even the perfect tool of power-seeking megalomaniacs. Communism or more accurately, socialism, is not a movement of the downtrodden masses, but of the economic elite."Gary Allen, Author W.Cleon Skousen wrote in his book 'The Naked Capitalist'. "Power from any source tends to create an appetite for additional power... It was almost inevitable that the super-rich would one day aspire to control not only their own wealth, but the wealth of the whole world. To achieve this, they were perfectly willing to feed the ambitions of the power-hungry political conspirators who were committed to the overthrow of all existing governments and the establishments of a central world-wide dictatorship."W.Cleon Skousen Extreme revolutionary groups were controlled by being financed when they complied and cut off, with money sometimes being given to their opposition, when they didn't. If you find this hard to believe, listen to what the so called dictator of the new Soviet Union had to say. "The state does not function as we desired. The car does not obey. A man is at the wheel and seems to lead it, but the car does not drive in the desired direction. It moves as another force wishes."Vladimir Lenin 1 Rep. Louis T. McFadden, chairman of the House Banking and Currency Committee throughout the 1920-30s explained it this way. "The course of Russian history has, indeed, been greatly affected by the operations of international bankers... The Soviet Government has been given United States Treasury funds by the Federal Reserve Board... acting through the Chase Bank. ... England has drawn money from us through the Federal Reserve Banks and has re-lent it at high rates of interest to the Soviet Government... The Dnieperstory Dam was built with funds unlawfully taken from the United States Treasury by the corrupt and dishonest Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Reserve Banks." Rep. Louis T.McFadden (D-PA) 2 Even when Communism collapsed in the Soviet Union, Boris Yeltsin revealed that most of the foreign aid was ending up, we quote. "straight back into the coffers of western banks in debt service."1. Wurmbrand, "Marx and Satan," p. 492.United States Congressional Record, June 15, 1934 WORLD DOMINATION With Russia down the money changers now had control of every major national economy. Like a steam roller moving and a wolf gathering its pack, there was only one thing left to do and that was to go global. The first attempt was the proposal at the Paris Peace Conference after WWI to set up the League of Nations. Old habits die hard, and even what they called 'the war to end all wars' was not enough to convince nations to dissolve their boundaries. The League died. If politicians really were being controlled, you would think at least one would break ranks and cry out against it. Many did. One was no less than former New York City Mayor John Haylan "These international bankers and Rockefeller-Standard Oil interests control the majority of the newspapers and magazines in this country. They use the columns of these papers to club into submission or drive out of office public officials who refuse to do the bidding of the powerful corrupt cliques which compose the invisible government.... The warning of Theodore Roosevelt has much timeliness today, for the real menace of our republic is this invisible government which like a giant octopus sprawls its slimy length over City, State, and nation... It seizes in its long and powerful tentacles our executive officers, our legislative bodies, our schools, our courts, our newspapers, and every agency created for the public protection... To depart from mere generalisations, let me say that at the head of this octopus are the Rockefeller-Standard Oil interest and a small group of powerful banking houses generally referred to as the international bankers. The little coterie of powerful international bankers virtually run the United States government for their own selfish purposes. They practically control both parties, write political platforms, make catspaws of party leaders, use the leading men of private organisations, and resort to every device to place in nomination for high public office only such candidates as will be amenable to the dictates of corrupt big business... These international bankers and Rockefeller-Standard Oil interests control the majority of newspapers and magazines in this country."John Hylan, Mayor of New York 1927, 1 These warnings fell on deaf ears, drowned out by the music and excitement of the roaring 20's. People don't tend to complain much in times of prosperity, so the money changers used this boom time they had created to defuse any complaints about their growing control.1. (Former New York City Mayor John Haylan speaking in Chicago and quoted in the March 27, 1927, New York Times) DEPRESSION IN 1929 Stack in front of you the biographies of all the Wall Street giants, J.P. Morgan, Joe F. Kennedy, J.D Rockefeller, Bernard Baruch, and you'll find they all marvel at how they got out of the stock market and put their assets in gold just before the crash. Non mention a secret directive, since revealed, sent by the father of the Federal Reserve, Paul Warburg, warning of the coming collapse and depression. With control of the press and the education system, few Americans are aware that the Fed caused the depression. It is however a well known fact among leading top economists. "The Federal Reserve definitely caused the Great depression by contracting the amount of currency in circulation by one-third from 1929 to 1933."Milton Friedman, Nobel Prize winning economist "It was not accidental. It was a carefully contrived occurrence... The international bankers sought to bring about a condition of despair here so that they might emerge as rulers of us all."Rep. Louis T.McFadden (D-PA) "I think it can hardly be disputed that the statesmen and financiers of Europe are ready to take almost any means to re-acquire rapidly the gold stock which Europe lost to America as the result of World War I."Rep. Louis T.McFadden (D-PA) 40 billion dollars somehow vanished in the crash. It didn't really vanish, it simply shifted into the hands of the money changers. This is how Joe Kennedy went from having 4 million dollars in 1929 to having over 100 million in 1935. During this time the Fed caused a 33% reduction of the money supply, causing deeper depression.
HOW THE FED CREATES MONEY
We've been talking about how the privately owned Federal Reserve can produce money from thin air.
Here's how it's done.
1. The purchase of bonds is approved by the Federal Open Market Committee.
2. The Fed buys the bonds which it pays for with electronic credits made to the sellers bank. These credits are based on nothing.
3. The receiving banks then use these credits as reserves from which they can loan out ten times the amount. To reduce the amount of money in the economy they simply reverse the process.
The Fed sells bonds to the public and money is drawn from the purchasers bank to pay for them. Each million withdrawn lowers the banks ability to loan by 10 million. The Federal bank in this way has overall control of the US money supply, as each country's central bank does in the same way.
The bankers, through the magic of fractional reserve banking have been delegated the right to create 90% of the money supply. This control makes a mockery of any elected government.
It places so called leaders behind a toy steering wheel, like the plastic ones, set up to amuse small children. Or as Rep.Charles Lindbergh father of famous aviator Lucky Lindy puts it when commenting on the Federal Reserve Act: "This act establishes the most gigantic trust on earth. When the President signs this bill, the invisible government by the Monetary Power will be legalised. The people may not know it immediately, but the day of reckoning is only a few years removed...
The worst legislative crime of the ages is perpetrated by this banking bill."Rep. Charles Lindbergh (R-MN) Or as Woodrow Wilson put it: "We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled governments in the civilised world - no longer a government of free opinion, no longer a government by... a vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men. Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organised, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they had better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it.
"Woodrow Wilson In order to clearly establish that this is not a conspiracy theory, but is actually how things are controlled, we further quote Charles Lindbergh. From the house of representatives, Lindbergh was well placed to see exactly what was happening back then and continues to happen today. "To cause high prices all the federal reserve board will do will be to lower the re-discount rate..., producing an expansion of credit and a rising stock market; then when... business men are adjusted to these conditions, it can check... prosperity in mid-career by arbitrarily raising the rate of interest. It can cause the pendulum of a rising and falling market to swing gently back and forth by slight changes in the discount rate, or cause violent fluctuations by greater rate variation, and in either case it will possess inside information as to financial conditions and advance knowledge of the coming change, either up or down.
This is the strangest, most dangerous advantage ever placed in the hands of a special privilege class by any Government that ever existed. The system is private, conducted for the sole purpose of obtaining the greatest possible profits from the use of other people's money. They know in advance when to create panics to their advantage. They also know when to stop panic. Inflation and deflation work equally well for them when they control finance..." Rep. Charles Lindbergh (R-MN)
ADOLF'S BANKERS
Most all will be aware of Hitler's rise to power. What they probably don't know is that he was almost completely financed by money drawn from the privately owned American Federal Reserve. "After WWI, Germany fell into the hands of the international bankers.
Those bankers bought her and they now own her, lock, stock, and barrel. They have purchased her industries, they have mortgages on her soil, they control her production, they control all her public utilities. The international German bankers have subsidised the present Government of Germany and they have also supplied every dollar of the money Adolph Hitler has used in his lavish campaign to build up threat to the government of Bruening. When Bruening fails to obey the orders of the German International Bankers, Hitler is brought forth to scare the Germans into submission... Through the Federal Reserve Board over $30 billion of American money has been pumped into Germany. You have all heard of the spending that has taken place in Germany... Modernistic dwellings, her great planetariums, her gymnasiums, her swimming pools, her fine public highways, her perfect factories. All this was done on our money.
All this was given to Germany through the Federal Reserve Board. The Federal Reserve Board has pumped so many billions of dollars into Germany that they dare not name the total." Congressman Louis T.McFadden (D-PA) who served twelve years as Chairman of the Committee on Banking and Currency.
FORT KNOX
In 1933 new President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed a bill forcing all the American people, to hand over all their gold at base rate. With the exception of rare coins. He disowned himself from the bill claiming to not have read it and his secretary of the treasury claimed this was "what the experts wanted". Bought at bargain basement price with money produced from nothing by the Federal Reserve, the gold was melted down and stacked in the newly built bullion depository called Fort Knox. Once collected in 1935 the price of gold was raised from $20.66 up to $35 per ounce, but only non American gold qualified to be sold.
This meant those who had avoided the crash by investing in gold they had shipped to London could now nearly double their money while the rest of America starved. But that's not all folks. By the end of WWII Fort Knox did hold 70% of the world's gold, but over the years it was sold off to the European money changers while a public audit of Fort Knox reserves was repeatedly denied. Rumours spread about missing gold. "Allegations of missing gold from our Fort Knox vaults are being widely discussed in European circles. But what is puzzling is that the Administration is not hastening to demonstrate conclusively that there is no cause for concern over our gold treasure - if indeed it is in a position to do so."Edith Roosevelt Finally in 1981 President Ronald Reagan was convinced to have a look into Fort Knox with a view to re-introducing the Gold Standard. He appointed a group called The Gold Commission.
They found that the US Treasury owned no gold at all. All the Fort Knox gold remaining is now being held as collateral by the Federal Reserve against the national debt. Using credits made from nothing. The Fed had robbed the largest treasure of gold on earth.
WORLD WAR II (1939-1945)
World War II saw the US debt increased by 598%, while Japan's debt went up by 1,348%, with France up by 583% and Canada up by 417%. When you hear this, what is your first impression? Do you automatically think this is bad or this is good? Most of us feel a well programmed sense of desperation when we hear figures like this, but remember, to the money changers, this is music to their ears. With the hot war over, the cold war began, the arms race causing more and more borrowing. Now the money changers could really concentrate on global domination. Step one, the European Monetary Union and NAFTA. Step two, centralise the global economy via the World Bank, the IMF and GATT (now the WTO).
THE WORLD CENTRAL BANK (1948 - Present)
In Washington, the headquarters of both the World Bank and the IMF (International Monetary Fund) face each other on the same street. What are these organisations, and who controls them? To find out we need to look back to just after WWI. At this point the money changers were attempting to consolidate the central banks under the guise of peacemaking. To stop future wars they put forward the formation of a world central bank named the Bank of International Settlements, a world court called the World Court in the Hague, and a world executive for legislation called the League of Nations. In his 1966 book entitled Tragedy and Hope, president Clinton's mentor Carroll Quigley writes about this. "The powers of financial capitalism had [a] far-reaching [plan], nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole.
This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the system was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank... Sought to dominate its government by its ability to control treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."
Carroll Quigley, Professor, Georgetown University They got 2 out of 3. The league of nations failed largely owing to the suspicions of the people and while opposition concentrated on this, the other two proposals snuck their way through. It would take another war to wear the public resistance down. Wall street invested heavily to rebuild Germany, as the Chase bank had propped up the Russian revolution. Now the Chase merged with the Warburg's Manhattan Bank to form the Chase Manhattan which would later merge with the Chemical Bank to become the largest bank on Wall Street.
In 1944 the US approved its full participation in the IMF and the World Bank. By 1945 the second League of Nations was approved under the new name 'The United Nations'. The war had dissolved all opposition. The methods used in the National Banking Act of 1864 and the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 were now simply used on a Global scale. The Federal Reserve Act allowing the creation of Federal Reserve notes is mirrored by the IMF's authority to produce money called Special Drawing Rights (SDR's). It is estimated the IMF has produced $30 billion dollars worth of SDR's so far. In the United States SDR's are already accepted as legal money, and all other member nations are being pressured to follow suit.
With SDR's being partially backed by gold, a world gold standard is sneaking its way in through the back door, which comes with no objection from the money changers who now hold two-thirds of the worlds gold and can use this to structure the worlds economy to their further advantage. We have gone from the goldsmith's fraud being reproduced on a national scale through the Bank of England and the Federal Reserve, to a Global level with the IMF and the World Bank.
Unless we together stop giving these exchange units their power by our collective faith in them, the future will probably see the Intergalactic Bank and the Federation of Planets Reserve set up in much the same way. This radical transfer of power has taken place with absolutely no mandate from the people. Nations borrow Special Drawing Right from the International Monetary Fund in order to pay interest on their mounting debts. With these SDR's produced at no cost, the IMF charges more interest. This contrary to bold claims does not alleviate poverty or further any development. It just creates a steady flow of wealth from borrowing nations to the money changers who now control the IMF and the World Bank.
The permanent debt of Third World Countries is constantly being increased to provide temporary relief from the poverty being caused by previous borrowing. These repayments already exceed the amount of new loans. By 1992 Africa's debt had reached $290 billion dollars, which is two and a half times greater than it was in 1980. A noble attempt to repay it has caused increased infant mortality and unemployment, plus deteriorating schools, and general health and welfare problems. As world resources continue to be sucked into this insatiable black hole of greed, if allowed to continue the entire world will face a simular fate. As one prominent Brazilian politician, Luis Ignacio Silva,ðput it."Without being radical or overly bold, I will tell you that the Third World War has already started - a silent war, not for that reason any the less sinister. This war is tearing down Brazil, Latin America and practically all the Third World. Instead of soldiers dying there are children, instead of millions of wounded there are millions of unemployed; instead of destruction of bridges there is the tearing down of factories, schools, hospitals, and entire economies . . . It is a war by the United States against the Latin American continent and the Third World. It is a war over the foreign debt, one which has as its main weapon interest, a weapon more deadly than the atom bomb, more shattering than a laser beam . ."1 If a group or organisation had used its hard earned money to help these developing nations, then we might sympathise that there should be a real effort to repay these loans. But the money used was created from fractional reserve banking. The money loaned to the Third World came from the 90% the banks allow themselves to loan on the 10% they actually held. It didn't exist, it was created from nothing, and now people are suffering and dying in an effort to pay it back. This has gone beyond clever financing, it's whole sale murder and it's time we stopped it. We can!If you haven't already, read XAT3 to see how.1. Luis Ignacio Silva, at the Havana Debt Conference in August 1985, quoted by Susan George, A Fate Worse Than Death p 238
WORLD WAR I (1914-1918) The Germans borrowed money from the German Rothschilds bank, the British from the British Rothschilds bank, and the French from the French Rothschilds. American super banker J.P. Morgan was amongst other things also a sales agent for war materials. Six months into the war his spending of $10 million a day made him the largest consumer on the planet. The Rockefeller's and the head of president Willson's War Industries Board, Bernard Baruch each made some 200 million dollars while families contributed their sons to the bloody front lines, but profit was not the only motive for involvement. Russia had spoiled the money changers plan to split America in two, and remained the last major country not to have its own central bank. However, three years after the start of the war the entire Russian Royal Family was killed and Communism began. You might find it strange to learn that the Russian Revolution was also fuelled with British money. Capitalist businessmen financing Communism? Author Gary Allen gives his explanation: "If one understands that socialism is not a share-the-wealth programme, but is in reality a method to consolidate and control the wealth, then the seeming paradox of super-rich men promoting socialism becomes no paradox at all. Instead, it becomes logical, even the perfect tool of power-seeking megalomaniacs. Communism or more accurately, socialism, is not a movement of the downtrodden masses, but of the economic elite."Gary Allen, Author W.Cleon Skousen wrote in his book 'The Naked Capitalist'. "Power from any source tends to create an appetite for additional power... It was almost inevitable that the super-rich would one day aspire to control not only their own wealth, but the wealth of the whole world. To achieve this, they were perfectly willing to feed the ambitions of the power-hungry political conspirators who were committed to the overthrow of all existing governments and the establishments of a central world-wide dictatorship."W.Cleon Skousen Extreme revolutionary groups were controlled by being financed when they complied and cut off, with money sometimes being given to their opposition, when they didn't. If you find this hard to believe, listen to what the so called dictator of the new Soviet Union had to say. "The state does not function as we desired. The car does not obey. A man is at the wheel and seems to lead it, but the car does not drive in the desired direction. It moves as another force wishes."Vladimir Lenin 1 Rep. Louis T. McFadden, chairman of the House Banking and Currency Committee throughout the 1920-30s explained it this way. "The course of Russian history has, indeed, been greatly affected by the operations of international bankers... The Soviet Government has been given United States Treasury funds by the Federal Reserve Board... acting through the Chase Bank. ... England has drawn money from us through the Federal Reserve Banks and has re-lent it at high rates of interest to the Soviet Government... The Dnieperstory Dam was built with funds unlawfully taken from the United States Treasury by the corrupt and dishonest Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Reserve Banks." Rep. Louis T.McFadden (D-PA) 2 Even when Communism collapsed in the Soviet Union, Boris Yeltsin revealed that most of the foreign aid was ending up, we quote. "straight back into the coffers of western banks in debt service."1. Wurmbrand, "Marx and Satan," p. 492.United States Congressional Record, June 15, 1934 WORLD DOMINATION With Russia down the money changers now had control of every major national economy. Like a steam roller moving and a wolf gathering its pack, there was only one thing left to do and that was to go global. The first attempt was the proposal at the Paris Peace Conference after WWI to set up the League of Nations. Old habits die hard, and even what they called 'the war to end all wars' was not enough to convince nations to dissolve their boundaries. The League died. If politicians really were being controlled, you would think at least one would break ranks and cry out against it. Many did. One was no less than former New York City Mayor John Haylan "These international bankers and Rockefeller-Standard Oil interests control the majority of the newspapers and magazines in this country. They use the columns of these papers to club into submission or drive out of office public officials who refuse to do the bidding of the powerful corrupt cliques which compose the invisible government.... The warning of Theodore Roosevelt has much timeliness today, for the real menace of our republic is this invisible government which like a giant octopus sprawls its slimy length over City, State, and nation... It seizes in its long and powerful tentacles our executive officers, our legislative bodies, our schools, our courts, our newspapers, and every agency created for the public protection... To depart from mere generalisations, let me say that at the head of this octopus are the Rockefeller-Standard Oil interest and a small group of powerful banking houses generally referred to as the international bankers. The little coterie of powerful international bankers virtually run the United States government for their own selfish purposes. They practically control both parties, write political platforms, make catspaws of party leaders, use the leading men of private organisations, and resort to every device to place in nomination for high public office only such candidates as will be amenable to the dictates of corrupt big business... These international bankers and Rockefeller-Standard Oil interests control the majority of newspapers and magazines in this country."John Hylan, Mayor of New York 1927, 1 These warnings fell on deaf ears, drowned out by the music and excitement of the roaring 20's. People don't tend to complain much in times of prosperity, so the money changers used this boom time they had created to defuse any complaints about their growing control.1. (Former New York City Mayor John Haylan speaking in Chicago and quoted in the March 27, 1927, New York Times) DEPRESSION IN 1929 Stack in front of you the biographies of all the Wall Street giants, J.P. Morgan, Joe F. Kennedy, J.D Rockefeller, Bernard Baruch, and you'll find they all marvel at how they got out of the stock market and put their assets in gold just before the crash. Non mention a secret directive, since revealed, sent by the father of the Federal Reserve, Paul Warburg, warning of the coming collapse and depression. With control of the press and the education system, few Americans are aware that the Fed caused the depression. It is however a well known fact among leading top economists. "The Federal Reserve definitely caused the Great depression by contracting the amount of currency in circulation by one-third from 1929 to 1933."Milton Friedman, Nobel Prize winning economist "It was not accidental. It was a carefully contrived occurrence... The international bankers sought to bring about a condition of despair here so that they might emerge as rulers of us all."Rep. Louis T.McFadden (D-PA) "I think it can hardly be disputed that the statesmen and financiers of Europe are ready to take almost any means to re-acquire rapidly the gold stock which Europe lost to America as the result of World War I."Rep. Louis T.McFadden (D-PA) 40 billion dollars somehow vanished in the crash. It didn't really vanish, it simply shifted into the hands of the money changers. This is how Joe Kennedy went from having 4 million dollars in 1929 to having over 100 million in 1935. During this time the Fed caused a 33% reduction of the money supply, causing deeper depression.
HOW THE FED CREATES MONEY
We've been talking about how the privately owned Federal Reserve can produce money from thin air.
Here's how it's done.
1. The purchase of bonds is approved by the Federal Open Market Committee.
2. The Fed buys the bonds which it pays for with electronic credits made to the sellers bank. These credits are based on nothing.
3. The receiving banks then use these credits as reserves from which they can loan out ten times the amount. To reduce the amount of money in the economy they simply reverse the process.
The Fed sells bonds to the public and money is drawn from the purchasers bank to pay for them. Each million withdrawn lowers the banks ability to loan by 10 million. The Federal bank in this way has overall control of the US money supply, as each country's central bank does in the same way.
The bankers, through the magic of fractional reserve banking have been delegated the right to create 90% of the money supply. This control makes a mockery of any elected government.
It places so called leaders behind a toy steering wheel, like the plastic ones, set up to amuse small children. Or as Rep.Charles Lindbergh father of famous aviator Lucky Lindy puts it when commenting on the Federal Reserve Act: "This act establishes the most gigantic trust on earth. When the President signs this bill, the invisible government by the Monetary Power will be legalised. The people may not know it immediately, but the day of reckoning is only a few years removed...
The worst legislative crime of the ages is perpetrated by this banking bill."Rep. Charles Lindbergh (R-MN) Or as Woodrow Wilson put it: "We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled governments in the civilised world - no longer a government of free opinion, no longer a government by... a vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men. Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organised, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they had better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it.
"Woodrow Wilson In order to clearly establish that this is not a conspiracy theory, but is actually how things are controlled, we further quote Charles Lindbergh. From the house of representatives, Lindbergh was well placed to see exactly what was happening back then and continues to happen today. "To cause high prices all the federal reserve board will do will be to lower the re-discount rate..., producing an expansion of credit and a rising stock market; then when... business men are adjusted to these conditions, it can check... prosperity in mid-career by arbitrarily raising the rate of interest. It can cause the pendulum of a rising and falling market to swing gently back and forth by slight changes in the discount rate, or cause violent fluctuations by greater rate variation, and in either case it will possess inside information as to financial conditions and advance knowledge of the coming change, either up or down.
This is the strangest, most dangerous advantage ever placed in the hands of a special privilege class by any Government that ever existed. The system is private, conducted for the sole purpose of obtaining the greatest possible profits from the use of other people's money. They know in advance when to create panics to their advantage. They also know when to stop panic. Inflation and deflation work equally well for them when they control finance..." Rep. Charles Lindbergh (R-MN)
ADOLF'S BANKERS
Most all will be aware of Hitler's rise to power. What they probably don't know is that he was almost completely financed by money drawn from the privately owned American Federal Reserve. "After WWI, Germany fell into the hands of the international bankers.
Those bankers bought her and they now own her, lock, stock, and barrel. They have purchased her industries, they have mortgages on her soil, they control her production, they control all her public utilities. The international German bankers have subsidised the present Government of Germany and they have also supplied every dollar of the money Adolph Hitler has used in his lavish campaign to build up threat to the government of Bruening. When Bruening fails to obey the orders of the German International Bankers, Hitler is brought forth to scare the Germans into submission... Through the Federal Reserve Board over $30 billion of American money has been pumped into Germany. You have all heard of the spending that has taken place in Germany... Modernistic dwellings, her great planetariums, her gymnasiums, her swimming pools, her fine public highways, her perfect factories. All this was done on our money.
All this was given to Germany through the Federal Reserve Board. The Federal Reserve Board has pumped so many billions of dollars into Germany that they dare not name the total." Congressman Louis T.McFadden (D-PA) who served twelve years as Chairman of the Committee on Banking and Currency.
FORT KNOX
In 1933 new President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed a bill forcing all the American people, to hand over all their gold at base rate. With the exception of rare coins. He disowned himself from the bill claiming to not have read it and his secretary of the treasury claimed this was "what the experts wanted". Bought at bargain basement price with money produced from nothing by the Federal Reserve, the gold was melted down and stacked in the newly built bullion depository called Fort Knox. Once collected in 1935 the price of gold was raised from $20.66 up to $35 per ounce, but only non American gold qualified to be sold.
This meant those who had avoided the crash by investing in gold they had shipped to London could now nearly double their money while the rest of America starved. But that's not all folks. By the end of WWII Fort Knox did hold 70% of the world's gold, but over the years it was sold off to the European money changers while a public audit of Fort Knox reserves was repeatedly denied. Rumours spread about missing gold. "Allegations of missing gold from our Fort Knox vaults are being widely discussed in European circles. But what is puzzling is that the Administration is not hastening to demonstrate conclusively that there is no cause for concern over our gold treasure - if indeed it is in a position to do so."Edith Roosevelt Finally in 1981 President Ronald Reagan was convinced to have a look into Fort Knox with a view to re-introducing the Gold Standard. He appointed a group called The Gold Commission.
They found that the US Treasury owned no gold at all. All the Fort Knox gold remaining is now being held as collateral by the Federal Reserve against the national debt. Using credits made from nothing. The Fed had robbed the largest treasure of gold on earth.
WORLD WAR II (1939-1945)
World War II saw the US debt increased by 598%, while Japan's debt went up by 1,348%, with France up by 583% and Canada up by 417%. When you hear this, what is your first impression? Do you automatically think this is bad or this is good? Most of us feel a well programmed sense of desperation when we hear figures like this, but remember, to the money changers, this is music to their ears. With the hot war over, the cold war began, the arms race causing more and more borrowing. Now the money changers could really concentrate on global domination. Step one, the European Monetary Union and NAFTA. Step two, centralise the global economy via the World Bank, the IMF and GATT (now the WTO).
THE WORLD CENTRAL BANK (1948 - Present)
In Washington, the headquarters of both the World Bank and the IMF (International Monetary Fund) face each other on the same street. What are these organisations, and who controls them? To find out we need to look back to just after WWI. At this point the money changers were attempting to consolidate the central banks under the guise of peacemaking. To stop future wars they put forward the formation of a world central bank named the Bank of International Settlements, a world court called the World Court in the Hague, and a world executive for legislation called the League of Nations. In his 1966 book entitled Tragedy and Hope, president Clinton's mentor Carroll Quigley writes about this. "The powers of financial capitalism had [a] far-reaching [plan], nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole.
This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the system was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank... Sought to dominate its government by its ability to control treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."
Carroll Quigley, Professor, Georgetown University They got 2 out of 3. The league of nations failed largely owing to the suspicions of the people and while opposition concentrated on this, the other two proposals snuck their way through. It would take another war to wear the public resistance down. Wall street invested heavily to rebuild Germany, as the Chase bank had propped up the Russian revolution. Now the Chase merged with the Warburg's Manhattan Bank to form the Chase Manhattan which would later merge with the Chemical Bank to become the largest bank on Wall Street.
In 1944 the US approved its full participation in the IMF and the World Bank. By 1945 the second League of Nations was approved under the new name 'The United Nations'. The war had dissolved all opposition. The methods used in the National Banking Act of 1864 and the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 were now simply used on a Global scale. The Federal Reserve Act allowing the creation of Federal Reserve notes is mirrored by the IMF's authority to produce money called Special Drawing Rights (SDR's). It is estimated the IMF has produced $30 billion dollars worth of SDR's so far. In the United States SDR's are already accepted as legal money, and all other member nations are being pressured to follow suit.
With SDR's being partially backed by gold, a world gold standard is sneaking its way in through the back door, which comes with no objection from the money changers who now hold two-thirds of the worlds gold and can use this to structure the worlds economy to their further advantage. We have gone from the goldsmith's fraud being reproduced on a national scale through the Bank of England and the Federal Reserve, to a Global level with the IMF and the World Bank.
Unless we together stop giving these exchange units their power by our collective faith in them, the future will probably see the Intergalactic Bank and the Federation of Planets Reserve set up in much the same way. This radical transfer of power has taken place with absolutely no mandate from the people. Nations borrow Special Drawing Right from the International Monetary Fund in order to pay interest on their mounting debts. With these SDR's produced at no cost, the IMF charges more interest. This contrary to bold claims does not alleviate poverty or further any development. It just creates a steady flow of wealth from borrowing nations to the money changers who now control the IMF and the World Bank.
The permanent debt of Third World Countries is constantly being increased to provide temporary relief from the poverty being caused by previous borrowing. These repayments already exceed the amount of new loans. By 1992 Africa's debt had reached $290 billion dollars, which is two and a half times greater than it was in 1980. A noble attempt to repay it has caused increased infant mortality and unemployment, plus deteriorating schools, and general health and welfare problems. As world resources continue to be sucked into this insatiable black hole of greed, if allowed to continue the entire world will face a simular fate. As one prominent Brazilian politician, Luis Ignacio Silva,ðput it."Without being radical or overly bold, I will tell you that the Third World War has already started - a silent war, not for that reason any the less sinister. This war is tearing down Brazil, Latin America and practically all the Third World. Instead of soldiers dying there are children, instead of millions of wounded there are millions of unemployed; instead of destruction of bridges there is the tearing down of factories, schools, hospitals, and entire economies . . . It is a war by the United States against the Latin American continent and the Third World. It is a war over the foreign debt, one which has as its main weapon interest, a weapon more deadly than the atom bomb, more shattering than a laser beam . ."1 If a group or organisation had used its hard earned money to help these developing nations, then we might sympathise that there should be a real effort to repay these loans. But the money used was created from fractional reserve banking. The money loaned to the Third World came from the 90% the banks allow themselves to loan on the 10% they actually held. It didn't exist, it was created from nothing, and now people are suffering and dying in an effort to pay it back. This has gone beyond clever financing, it's whole sale murder and it's time we stopped it. We can!If you haven't already, read XAT3 to see how.1. Luis Ignacio Silva, at the Havana Debt Conference in August 1985, quoted by Susan George, A Fate Worse Than Death p 238
The History of Money--Part 3
THE HISTORY OF MONEY PART 3
WORLD WAR I (1914-1918)
The Germans borrowed money from the German Rothschilds bank, the British from the British Rothschilds bank, and the French from the French Rothschilds. American super banker J.P. Morgan was amongst other things also a sales agent for war materials. Six months into the war his spending of $10 million a day made him the largest consumer on the planet. The Rockefeller's and the head of president Willson's War Industries Board, Bernard Baruch each made some 200 million dollars while families contributed their sons to the bloody front lines, but profit was not the only motive for involvement. Russia had spoiled the money changers plan to split America in two, and remained the last major country not to have its own central bank. However, three years after the start of the war the entire Russian Royal Family was killed and Communism began.
You might find it strange to learn that the Russian Revolution was also fuelled with British money. Capitalist businessmen financing Communism? Author Gary Allen gives his explanation: "If one understands that socialism is not a share-the-wealth programme, but is in reality a method to consolidate and control the wealth, then the seeming paradox of super-rich men promoting socialism becomes no paradox at all. Instead, it becomes logical, even the perfect tool of power-seeking megalomaniacs. Communism or more accurately, socialism, is not a movement of the downtrodden masses, but of the economic elite."Gary Allen, Author W.Cleon Skousen wrote in his book 'The Naked Capitalist'. "Power from any source tends to create an appetite for additional power... It was almost inevitable that the super-rich would one day aspire to control not only their own wealth, but the wealth of the whole world. To achieve this, they were perfectly willing to feed the ambitions of the power-hungry political conspirators who were committed to the overthrow of all existing governments and the establishments of a central world-wide dictatorship."W.Cleon Skousen
Extreme revolutionary groups were controlled by being financed when they complied and cut off, with money sometimes being given to their opposition, when they didn't. If you find this hard to believe, listen to what the so called dictator of the new Soviet Union had to say. "The state does not function as we desired. The car does not obey. A man is at the wheel and seems to lead it, but the car does not drive in the desired direction. It moves as another force wishes."Vladimir Lenin 1
Rep. Louis T. McFadden, chairman of the House Banking and Currency Committee throughout the 1920-30s explained it this way. "The course of Russian history has, indeed, been greatly affected by the operations of international bankers... The Soviet Government has been given United States Treasury funds by the Federal Reserve Board... acting through the Chase Bank. ... England has drawn money from us through the Federal Reserve Banks and has re-lent it at high rates of interest to the Soviet Government... The Dnieperstory Dam was built with funds unlawfully taken from the United States Treasury by the corrupt and dishonest Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Reserve Banks." Rep. Louis T.McFadden (D-PA) 2
Even when Communism collapsed in the Soviet Union, Boris Yeltsin revealed that most of the foreign aid was ending up, we quote. "straight back into the coffers of western banks in debt service."1. Wurmbrand, "Marx and Satan," p. 492.United States Congressional Record, June 15, 1934 WORLD DOMINATION With Russia down the money changers now had control of every major national economy. Like a steam roller moving and a wolf gathering its pack, there was only one thing left to do and that was to go global. The first attempt was the proposal at the Paris Peace Conference after WWI to set up the League of Nations. Old habits die hard, and even what they called 'the war to end all wars' was not enough to convince nations to dissolve their boundaries. The League died. If politicians really were being controlled, you would think at least one would break ranks and cry out against it. Many did.
One was no less than former New York City Mayor John Haylan "These international bankers and Rockefeller-Standard Oil interests control the majority of the newspapers and magazines in this country. They use the columns of these papers to club into submission or drive out of office public officials who refuse to do the bidding of the powerful corrupt cliques which compose the invisible government.... The warning of Theodore Roosevelt has much timeliness today, for the real menace of our republic is this invisible government which like a giant octopus sprawls its slimy length over City, State, and nation... It seizes in its long and powerful tentacles our executive officers, our legislative bodies, our schools, our courts, our newspapers, and every agency created for the public protection... To depart from mere generalisations, let me say that at the head of this octopus are the Rockefeller-Standard Oil interest and a small group of powerful banking houses generally referred to as the international bankers.
The little coterie of powerful international bankers virtually run the United States government for their own selfish purposes. They practically control both parties, write political platforms, make catspaws of party leaders, use the leading men of private organisations, and resort to every device to place in nomination for high public office only such candidates as will be amenable to the dictates of corrupt big business... These international bankers and Rockefeller-Standard Oil interests control the majority of newspapers and magazines in this country."John Hylan, Mayor of New York 1927, 1 These warnings fell on deaf ears, drowned out by the music and excitement of the roaring 20's. People don't tend to complain much in times of prosperity, so the money changers used this boom time they had created to defuse any complaints about their growing control.1. (Former New York City Mayor John Haylan speaking in Chicago and quoted in the March 27, 1927, New York Times) DEPRESSION IN 1929 Stack in front of you the biographies of all the Wall Street giants, J.P. Morgan, Joe F. Kennedy, J.D Rockefeller, Bernard Baruch, and you'll find they all marvel at how they got out of the stock market and put their assets in gold just before the crash. Non mention a secret directive, since revealed, sent by the father of the Federal Reserve, Paul Warburg, warning of the coming collapse and depression. With control of the press and the education system, few Americans are aware that the Fed caused the depression. It is however a well known fact among leading top economists. "The Federal Reserve definitely caused the Great depression by contracting the amount of currency in circulation by one-third from 1929 to 1933.
"Milton Friedman, Nobel Prize winning economist "It was not accidental. It was a carefully contrived occurrence... The international bankers sought to bring about a condition of despair here so that they might emerge as rulers of us all."Rep. Louis T.McFadden (D-PA) "I think it can hardly be disputed that the statesmen and financiers of Europe are ready to take almost any means to re-acquire rapidly the gold stock which Europe lost to America as the result of World War I."Rep. Louis T.McFadden (D-PA) 40 billion dollars somehow vanished in the crash. It didn't really vanish, it simply shifted into the hands of the money changers.
This is how Joe Kennedy went from having 4 million dollars in 1929 to having over 100 million in 1935. During this time the Fed caused a 33% reduction of the money supply, causing deeper depression.
HOW THE FED CREATES MONEY
We've been talking about how the privately owned Federal Reserve can produce money from thin air. Here's how it's done. 1. The purchase of bonds is approved by the Federal Open Market Committee. 2. The Fed buys the bonds which it pays for with electronic credits made to the sellers bank. These credits are based on nothing. 3. The receiving banks then use these credits as reserves from which they can loan out ten times the amount. To reduce the amount of money in the economy they simply reverse the process. The Fed sells bonds to the public and money is drawn from the purchasers bank to pay for them. Each million withdrawn lowers the banks ability to loan by 10 million. The Federal bank in this way has overall control of the US money supply, as each country's central bank does in the same way. The bankers, through the magic of fractional reserve banking have been delegated the right to create 90% of the money supply. This control makes a mockery of any elected government. It places so called leaders behind a toy steering wheel, like the plastic ones, set up to amuse small children. Or as Rep.Charles Lindbergh father of famous aviator Lucky Lindy puts it when commenting on the Federal Reserve Act: "This act establishes the most gigantic trust on earth. When the President signs this bill, the invisible government by the Monetary Power will be legalised. The people may not know it immediately, but the day of reckoning is only a few years removed... The worst legislative crime of the ages is perpetrated by this banking bill."Rep. Charles Lindbergh (R-MN) Or as Woodrow Wilson put it: "We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled governments in the civilised world - no longer a government of free opinion, no longer a government by... a vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men. Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organised, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they had better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it."Woodrow Wilson In order to clearly establish that this is not a conspiracy theory, but is actually how things are controlled, we further quote Charles Lindbergh. From the house of representatives, Lindbergh was well placed to see exactly what was happening back then and continues to happen today. "To cause high prices all the federal reserve board will do will be to lower the re-discount rate..., producing an expansion of credit and a rising stock market; then when... business men are adjusted to these conditions, it can check... prosperity in mid-career by arbitrarily raising the rate of interest. It can cause the pendulum of a rising and falling market to swing gently back and forth by slight changes in the discount rate, or cause violent fluctuations by greater rate variation, and in either case it will possess inside information as to financial conditions and advance knowledge of the coming change, either up or down. This is the strangest, most dangerous advantage ever placed in the hands of a special privilege class by any Government that ever existed. The system is private, conducted for the sole purpose of obtaining the greatest possible profits from the use of other people's money. They know in advance when to create panics to their advantage. They also know when to stop panic. Inflation and deflation work equally well for them when they control finance..." Rep. Charles Lindbergh (R-MN)
ADOLF'S BANKERS
Most all will be aware of Hitler's rise to power. What they probably don't know is that he was almost completely financed by money drawn from the privately owned American Federal Reserve. "After WWI, Germany fell into the hands of the international bankers. Those bankers bought her and they now own her, lock, stock, and barrel. They have purchased her industries, they have mortgages on her soil, they control her production, they control all her public utilities. The international German bankers have subsidised the present Government of Germany and they have also supplied every dollar of the money Adolph Hitler has used in his lavish campaign to build up threat to the government of Bruening. When Bruening fails to obey the orders of the German International Bankers, Hitler is brought forth to scare the Germans into submission... Through the Federal Reserve Board over $30 billion of American money has been pumped into Germany. You have all heard of the spending that has taken place in Germany... Modernistic dwellings, her great planetariums, her gymnasiums, her swimming pools, her fine public highways, her perfect factories. All this was done on our money. All this was given to Germany through the Federal Reserve Board. The Federal Reserve Board has pumped so many billions of dollars into Germany that they dare not name the total." Congressman Louis T.McFadden (D-PA) who served twelve years as Chairman of the Committee on Banking and Currency.
FORT KNOX
In 1933 new President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed a bill forcing all the American people, to hand over all their gold at base rate. With the exception of rare coins. He disowned himself from the bill claiming to not have read it and his secretary of the treasury claimed this was "what the experts wanted". Bought at bargain basement price with money produced from nothing by the Federal Reserve, the gold was melted down and stacked in the newly built bullion depository called Fort Knox. Once collected in 1935 the price of gold was raised from $20.66 up to $35 per ounce, but only non American gold qualified to be sold. This meant those who had avoided the crash by investing in gold they had shipped to London could now nearly double their money while the rest of America starved. But that's not all folks. By the end of WWII Fort Knox did hold 70% of the world's gold, but over the years it was sold off to the European money changers while a public audit of Fort Knox reserves was repeatedly denied. Rumours spread about missing gold. "Allegations of missing gold from our Fort Knox vaults are being widely discussed in European circles. But what is puzzling is that the Administration is not hastening to demonstrate conclusively that there is no cause for concern over our gold treasure - if indeed it is in a position to do so."Edith Roosevelt Finally in 1981 President Ronald Reagan was convinced to have a look into Fort Knox with a view to re-introducing the Gold Standard. He appointed a group called The Gold Commission. They found that the US Treasury owned no gold at all. All the Fort Knox gold remaining is now being held as collateral by the Federal Reserve against the national debt. Using credits made from nothing. The Fed had robbed the largest treasure of gold on earth.
WORLD WAR II (1939-1945)
World War II saw the US debt increased by 598%, while Japan's debt went up by 1,348%, with France up by 583% and Canada up by 417%. When you hear this, what is your first impression? Do you automatically think this is bad or this is good? Most of us feel a well programmed sense of desperation when we hear figures like this, but remember, to the money changers, this is music to their ears. With the hot war over, the cold war began, the arms race causing more and more borrowing. Now the money changers could really concentrate on global domination. Step one, the European Monetary Union and NAFTA. Step two, centralise the global economy via the World Bank, the IMF and GATT (now the WTO).
THE WORLD CENTRAL BANK (1948 - Present)
In Washington, the headquarters of both the World Bank and the IMF (International Monetary Fund) face each other on the same street. What are these organisations, and who controls them? To find out we need to look back to just after WWI. At this point the money changers were attempting to consolidate the central banks under the guise of peacemaking. To stop future wars they put forward the formation of a world central bank named the Bank of International Settlements, a world court called the World Court in the Hague, and a world executive for legislation called the League of Nations. In his 1966 book entitled Tragedy and Hope, president Clinton's mentor Carroll Quigley writes about this. "The powers of financial capitalism had [a] far-reaching [plan], nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the system was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank... Sought to dominate its government by its ability to control treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."Carroll Quigley, Professor, Georgetown University They got 2 out of 3. The league of nations failed largely owing to the suspicions of the people and while opposition concentrated on this, the other two proposals snuck their way through. It would take another war to wear the public resistance down. Wall street invested heavily to rebuild Germany, as the Chase bank had propped up the Russian revolution. Now the Chase merged with the Warburg's Manhattan Bank to form the Chase Manhattan which would later merge with the Chemical Bank to become the largest bank on Wall Street. In 1944 the US approved its full participation in the IMF and the World Bank. By 1945 the second League of Nations was approved under the new name 'The United Nations'. The war had dissolved all opposition. The methods used in the National Banking Act of 1864 and the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 were now simply used on a Global scale. The Federal Reserve Act allowing the creation of Federal Reserve notes is mirrored by the IMF's authority to produce money called Special Drawing Rights (SDR's). It is estimated the IMF has produced $30 billion dollars worth of SDR's so far. In the United States SDR's are already accepted as legal money, and all other member nations are being pressured to follow suit. With SDR's being partially backed by gold, a world gold standard is sneaking its way in through the back door, which comes with no objection from the money changers who now hold two-thirds of the worlds gold and can use this to structure the worlds economy to their further advantage. We have gone from the goldsmith's fraud being reproduced on a national scale through the Bank of England and the Federal Reserve, to a Global level with the IMF and the World Bank. Unless we together stop giving these exchange units their power by our collective faith in them, the future will probably see the Intergalactic Bank and the Federation of Planets Reserve set up in much the same way. This radical transfer of power has taken place with absolutely no mandate from the people. Nations borrow Special Drawing Right from the International Monetary Fund in order to pay interest on their mounting debts. With these SDR's produced at no cost, the IMF charges more interest. This contrary to bold claims does not alleviate poverty or further any development. It just creates a steady flow of wealth from borrowing nations to the money changers who now control the IMF and the World Bank. The permanent debt of Third World Countries is constantly being increased to provide temporary relief from the poverty being caused by previous borrowing. These repayments already exceed the amount of new loans. By 1992 Africa's debt had reached $290 billion dollars, which is two and a half times greater than it was in 1980. A noble attempt to repay it has caused increased infant mortality and unemployment, plus deteriorating schools, and general health and welfare problems. As world resources continue to be sucked into this insatiable black hole of greed, if allowed to continue the entire world will face a simular fate. As one prominent Brazilian politician, Luis Ignacio Silva,ðput it."Without being radical or overly bold, I will tell you that the Third World War has already started - a silent war, not for that reason any the less sinister. This war is tearing down Brazil, Latin America and practically all the Third World. Instead of soldiers dying there are children, instead of millions of wounded there are millions of unemployed; instead of destruction of bridges there is the tearing down of factories, schools, hospitals, and entire economies . . . It is a war by the United States against the Latin American continent and the Third World. It is a war over the foreign debt, one which has as its main weapon interest, a weapon more deadly than the atom bomb, more shattering than a laser beam . ."1 If a group or organisation had used its hard earned money to help these developing nations, then we might sympathise that there should be a real effort to repay these loans. But the money used was created from fractional reserve banking.
The money loaned to the Third World came from the 90% the banks allow themselves to loan on the 10% they actually held. It didn't exist, it was created from nothing, and now people are suffering and dying in an effort to pay it back.
This has gone beyond clever financing, it's whole sale murder and it's time we stopped it. We can!If you haven't already,
read XAT3 to see how.1.
Luis Ignacio Silva, at the Havana Debt Conference in August 1985, quoted by Susan George, A Fate Worse Than Death p 238
WORLD WAR I (1914-1918)
The Germans borrowed money from the German Rothschilds bank, the British from the British Rothschilds bank, and the French from the French Rothschilds. American super banker J.P. Morgan was amongst other things also a sales agent for war materials. Six months into the war his spending of $10 million a day made him the largest consumer on the planet. The Rockefeller's and the head of president Willson's War Industries Board, Bernard Baruch each made some 200 million dollars while families contributed their sons to the bloody front lines, but profit was not the only motive for involvement. Russia had spoiled the money changers plan to split America in two, and remained the last major country not to have its own central bank. However, three years after the start of the war the entire Russian Royal Family was killed and Communism began.
You might find it strange to learn that the Russian Revolution was also fuelled with British money. Capitalist businessmen financing Communism? Author Gary Allen gives his explanation: "If one understands that socialism is not a share-the-wealth programme, but is in reality a method to consolidate and control the wealth, then the seeming paradox of super-rich men promoting socialism becomes no paradox at all. Instead, it becomes logical, even the perfect tool of power-seeking megalomaniacs. Communism or more accurately, socialism, is not a movement of the downtrodden masses, but of the economic elite."Gary Allen, Author W.Cleon Skousen wrote in his book 'The Naked Capitalist'. "Power from any source tends to create an appetite for additional power... It was almost inevitable that the super-rich would one day aspire to control not only their own wealth, but the wealth of the whole world. To achieve this, they were perfectly willing to feed the ambitions of the power-hungry political conspirators who were committed to the overthrow of all existing governments and the establishments of a central world-wide dictatorship."W.Cleon Skousen
Extreme revolutionary groups were controlled by being financed when they complied and cut off, with money sometimes being given to their opposition, when they didn't. If you find this hard to believe, listen to what the so called dictator of the new Soviet Union had to say. "The state does not function as we desired. The car does not obey. A man is at the wheel and seems to lead it, but the car does not drive in the desired direction. It moves as another force wishes."Vladimir Lenin 1
Rep. Louis T. McFadden, chairman of the House Banking and Currency Committee throughout the 1920-30s explained it this way. "The course of Russian history has, indeed, been greatly affected by the operations of international bankers... The Soviet Government has been given United States Treasury funds by the Federal Reserve Board... acting through the Chase Bank. ... England has drawn money from us through the Federal Reserve Banks and has re-lent it at high rates of interest to the Soviet Government... The Dnieperstory Dam was built with funds unlawfully taken from the United States Treasury by the corrupt and dishonest Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Reserve Banks." Rep. Louis T.McFadden (D-PA) 2
Even when Communism collapsed in the Soviet Union, Boris Yeltsin revealed that most of the foreign aid was ending up, we quote. "straight back into the coffers of western banks in debt service."1. Wurmbrand, "Marx and Satan," p. 492.United States Congressional Record, June 15, 1934 WORLD DOMINATION With Russia down the money changers now had control of every major national economy. Like a steam roller moving and a wolf gathering its pack, there was only one thing left to do and that was to go global. The first attempt was the proposal at the Paris Peace Conference after WWI to set up the League of Nations. Old habits die hard, and even what they called 'the war to end all wars' was not enough to convince nations to dissolve their boundaries. The League died. If politicians really were being controlled, you would think at least one would break ranks and cry out against it. Many did.
One was no less than former New York City Mayor John Haylan "These international bankers and Rockefeller-Standard Oil interests control the majority of the newspapers and magazines in this country. They use the columns of these papers to club into submission or drive out of office public officials who refuse to do the bidding of the powerful corrupt cliques which compose the invisible government.... The warning of Theodore Roosevelt has much timeliness today, for the real menace of our republic is this invisible government which like a giant octopus sprawls its slimy length over City, State, and nation... It seizes in its long and powerful tentacles our executive officers, our legislative bodies, our schools, our courts, our newspapers, and every agency created for the public protection... To depart from mere generalisations, let me say that at the head of this octopus are the Rockefeller-Standard Oil interest and a small group of powerful banking houses generally referred to as the international bankers.
The little coterie of powerful international bankers virtually run the United States government for their own selfish purposes. They practically control both parties, write political platforms, make catspaws of party leaders, use the leading men of private organisations, and resort to every device to place in nomination for high public office only such candidates as will be amenable to the dictates of corrupt big business... These international bankers and Rockefeller-Standard Oil interests control the majority of newspapers and magazines in this country."John Hylan, Mayor of New York 1927, 1 These warnings fell on deaf ears, drowned out by the music and excitement of the roaring 20's. People don't tend to complain much in times of prosperity, so the money changers used this boom time they had created to defuse any complaints about their growing control.1. (Former New York City Mayor John Haylan speaking in Chicago and quoted in the March 27, 1927, New York Times) DEPRESSION IN 1929 Stack in front of you the biographies of all the Wall Street giants, J.P. Morgan, Joe F. Kennedy, J.D Rockefeller, Bernard Baruch, and you'll find they all marvel at how they got out of the stock market and put their assets in gold just before the crash. Non mention a secret directive, since revealed, sent by the father of the Federal Reserve, Paul Warburg, warning of the coming collapse and depression. With control of the press and the education system, few Americans are aware that the Fed caused the depression. It is however a well known fact among leading top economists. "The Federal Reserve definitely caused the Great depression by contracting the amount of currency in circulation by one-third from 1929 to 1933.
"Milton Friedman, Nobel Prize winning economist "It was not accidental. It was a carefully contrived occurrence... The international bankers sought to bring about a condition of despair here so that they might emerge as rulers of us all."Rep. Louis T.McFadden (D-PA) "I think it can hardly be disputed that the statesmen and financiers of Europe are ready to take almost any means to re-acquire rapidly the gold stock which Europe lost to America as the result of World War I."Rep. Louis T.McFadden (D-PA) 40 billion dollars somehow vanished in the crash. It didn't really vanish, it simply shifted into the hands of the money changers.
This is how Joe Kennedy went from having 4 million dollars in 1929 to having over 100 million in 1935. During this time the Fed caused a 33% reduction of the money supply, causing deeper depression.
HOW THE FED CREATES MONEY
We've been talking about how the privately owned Federal Reserve can produce money from thin air. Here's how it's done. 1. The purchase of bonds is approved by the Federal Open Market Committee. 2. The Fed buys the bonds which it pays for with electronic credits made to the sellers bank. These credits are based on nothing. 3. The receiving banks then use these credits as reserves from which they can loan out ten times the amount. To reduce the amount of money in the economy they simply reverse the process. The Fed sells bonds to the public and money is drawn from the purchasers bank to pay for them. Each million withdrawn lowers the banks ability to loan by 10 million. The Federal bank in this way has overall control of the US money supply, as each country's central bank does in the same way. The bankers, through the magic of fractional reserve banking have been delegated the right to create 90% of the money supply. This control makes a mockery of any elected government. It places so called leaders behind a toy steering wheel, like the plastic ones, set up to amuse small children. Or as Rep.Charles Lindbergh father of famous aviator Lucky Lindy puts it when commenting on the Federal Reserve Act: "This act establishes the most gigantic trust on earth. When the President signs this bill, the invisible government by the Monetary Power will be legalised. The people may not know it immediately, but the day of reckoning is only a few years removed... The worst legislative crime of the ages is perpetrated by this banking bill."Rep. Charles Lindbergh (R-MN) Or as Woodrow Wilson put it: "We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled governments in the civilised world - no longer a government of free opinion, no longer a government by... a vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men. Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organised, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they had better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it."Woodrow Wilson In order to clearly establish that this is not a conspiracy theory, but is actually how things are controlled, we further quote Charles Lindbergh. From the house of representatives, Lindbergh was well placed to see exactly what was happening back then and continues to happen today. "To cause high prices all the federal reserve board will do will be to lower the re-discount rate..., producing an expansion of credit and a rising stock market; then when... business men are adjusted to these conditions, it can check... prosperity in mid-career by arbitrarily raising the rate of interest. It can cause the pendulum of a rising and falling market to swing gently back and forth by slight changes in the discount rate, or cause violent fluctuations by greater rate variation, and in either case it will possess inside information as to financial conditions and advance knowledge of the coming change, either up or down. This is the strangest, most dangerous advantage ever placed in the hands of a special privilege class by any Government that ever existed. The system is private, conducted for the sole purpose of obtaining the greatest possible profits from the use of other people's money. They know in advance when to create panics to their advantage. They also know when to stop panic. Inflation and deflation work equally well for them when they control finance..." Rep. Charles Lindbergh (R-MN)
ADOLF'S BANKERS
Most all will be aware of Hitler's rise to power. What they probably don't know is that he was almost completely financed by money drawn from the privately owned American Federal Reserve. "After WWI, Germany fell into the hands of the international bankers. Those bankers bought her and they now own her, lock, stock, and barrel. They have purchased her industries, they have mortgages on her soil, they control her production, they control all her public utilities. The international German bankers have subsidised the present Government of Germany and they have also supplied every dollar of the money Adolph Hitler has used in his lavish campaign to build up threat to the government of Bruening. When Bruening fails to obey the orders of the German International Bankers, Hitler is brought forth to scare the Germans into submission... Through the Federal Reserve Board over $30 billion of American money has been pumped into Germany. You have all heard of the spending that has taken place in Germany... Modernistic dwellings, her great planetariums, her gymnasiums, her swimming pools, her fine public highways, her perfect factories. All this was done on our money. All this was given to Germany through the Federal Reserve Board. The Federal Reserve Board has pumped so many billions of dollars into Germany that they dare not name the total." Congressman Louis T.McFadden (D-PA) who served twelve years as Chairman of the Committee on Banking and Currency.
FORT KNOX
In 1933 new President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed a bill forcing all the American people, to hand over all their gold at base rate. With the exception of rare coins. He disowned himself from the bill claiming to not have read it and his secretary of the treasury claimed this was "what the experts wanted". Bought at bargain basement price with money produced from nothing by the Federal Reserve, the gold was melted down and stacked in the newly built bullion depository called Fort Knox. Once collected in 1935 the price of gold was raised from $20.66 up to $35 per ounce, but only non American gold qualified to be sold. This meant those who had avoided the crash by investing in gold they had shipped to London could now nearly double their money while the rest of America starved. But that's not all folks. By the end of WWII Fort Knox did hold 70% of the world's gold, but over the years it was sold off to the European money changers while a public audit of Fort Knox reserves was repeatedly denied. Rumours spread about missing gold. "Allegations of missing gold from our Fort Knox vaults are being widely discussed in European circles. But what is puzzling is that the Administration is not hastening to demonstrate conclusively that there is no cause for concern over our gold treasure - if indeed it is in a position to do so."Edith Roosevelt Finally in 1981 President Ronald Reagan was convinced to have a look into Fort Knox with a view to re-introducing the Gold Standard. He appointed a group called The Gold Commission. They found that the US Treasury owned no gold at all. All the Fort Knox gold remaining is now being held as collateral by the Federal Reserve against the national debt. Using credits made from nothing. The Fed had robbed the largest treasure of gold on earth.
WORLD WAR II (1939-1945)
World War II saw the US debt increased by 598%, while Japan's debt went up by 1,348%, with France up by 583% and Canada up by 417%. When you hear this, what is your first impression? Do you automatically think this is bad or this is good? Most of us feel a well programmed sense of desperation when we hear figures like this, but remember, to the money changers, this is music to their ears. With the hot war over, the cold war began, the arms race causing more and more borrowing. Now the money changers could really concentrate on global domination. Step one, the European Monetary Union and NAFTA. Step two, centralise the global economy via the World Bank, the IMF and GATT (now the WTO).
THE WORLD CENTRAL BANK (1948 - Present)
In Washington, the headquarters of both the World Bank and the IMF (International Monetary Fund) face each other on the same street. What are these organisations, and who controls them? To find out we need to look back to just after WWI. At this point the money changers were attempting to consolidate the central banks under the guise of peacemaking. To stop future wars they put forward the formation of a world central bank named the Bank of International Settlements, a world court called the World Court in the Hague, and a world executive for legislation called the League of Nations. In his 1966 book entitled Tragedy and Hope, president Clinton's mentor Carroll Quigley writes about this. "The powers of financial capitalism had [a] far-reaching [plan], nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the system was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank... Sought to dominate its government by its ability to control treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."Carroll Quigley, Professor, Georgetown University They got 2 out of 3. The league of nations failed largely owing to the suspicions of the people and while opposition concentrated on this, the other two proposals snuck their way through. It would take another war to wear the public resistance down. Wall street invested heavily to rebuild Germany, as the Chase bank had propped up the Russian revolution. Now the Chase merged with the Warburg's Manhattan Bank to form the Chase Manhattan which would later merge with the Chemical Bank to become the largest bank on Wall Street. In 1944 the US approved its full participation in the IMF and the World Bank. By 1945 the second League of Nations was approved under the new name 'The United Nations'. The war had dissolved all opposition. The methods used in the National Banking Act of 1864 and the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 were now simply used on a Global scale. The Federal Reserve Act allowing the creation of Federal Reserve notes is mirrored by the IMF's authority to produce money called Special Drawing Rights (SDR's). It is estimated the IMF has produced $30 billion dollars worth of SDR's so far. In the United States SDR's are already accepted as legal money, and all other member nations are being pressured to follow suit. With SDR's being partially backed by gold, a world gold standard is sneaking its way in through the back door, which comes with no objection from the money changers who now hold two-thirds of the worlds gold and can use this to structure the worlds economy to their further advantage. We have gone from the goldsmith's fraud being reproduced on a national scale through the Bank of England and the Federal Reserve, to a Global level with the IMF and the World Bank. Unless we together stop giving these exchange units their power by our collective faith in them, the future will probably see the Intergalactic Bank and the Federation of Planets Reserve set up in much the same way. This radical transfer of power has taken place with absolutely no mandate from the people. Nations borrow Special Drawing Right from the International Monetary Fund in order to pay interest on their mounting debts. With these SDR's produced at no cost, the IMF charges more interest. This contrary to bold claims does not alleviate poverty or further any development. It just creates a steady flow of wealth from borrowing nations to the money changers who now control the IMF and the World Bank. The permanent debt of Third World Countries is constantly being increased to provide temporary relief from the poverty being caused by previous borrowing. These repayments already exceed the amount of new loans. By 1992 Africa's debt had reached $290 billion dollars, which is two and a half times greater than it was in 1980. A noble attempt to repay it has caused increased infant mortality and unemployment, plus deteriorating schools, and general health and welfare problems. As world resources continue to be sucked into this insatiable black hole of greed, if allowed to continue the entire world will face a simular fate. As one prominent Brazilian politician, Luis Ignacio Silva,ðput it."Without being radical or overly bold, I will tell you that the Third World War has already started - a silent war, not for that reason any the less sinister. This war is tearing down Brazil, Latin America and practically all the Third World. Instead of soldiers dying there are children, instead of millions of wounded there are millions of unemployed; instead of destruction of bridges there is the tearing down of factories, schools, hospitals, and entire economies . . . It is a war by the United States against the Latin American continent and the Third World. It is a war over the foreign debt, one which has as its main weapon interest, a weapon more deadly than the atom bomb, more shattering than a laser beam . ."1 If a group or organisation had used its hard earned money to help these developing nations, then we might sympathise that there should be a real effort to repay these loans. But the money used was created from fractional reserve banking.
The money loaned to the Third World came from the 90% the banks allow themselves to loan on the 10% they actually held. It didn't exist, it was created from nothing, and now people are suffering and dying in an effort to pay it back.
This has gone beyond clever financing, it's whole sale murder and it's time we stopped it. We can!If you haven't already,
read XAT3 to see how.1.
Luis Ignacio Silva, at the Havana Debt Conference in August 1985, quoted by Susan George, A Fate Worse Than Death p 238
The History of Money--Part 2
WHERE THERE'S WAR, THERE'S MONEY
War uses up more materials,
more quickly than most anything else on earth
THE HISTORY OF MONEY PART 2
The 19th century became known as the age of the Rothschild's when it was estimated they controlled half of the world's wealth. While their wealth continues to increase today, they have managed to blend into the background, giving an impression that their power has waned. They only apply the Rothschild name to a small fraction of the companies they actually control. Some authors claim that the Rothschild's had not only taken over the Bank of England but they had also in 1816 backed a new privately owned Central Bank in America called The Second Bank of The United States, causing huge problems to the American president. ANDREW JACKSON (1828 - 1836) When the American congress voted to renew the charter of The Second Bank of The United States, Jackson responded by using his veto to prevent the renewal bill from passing. His response gives us an interesting insight. "It is not our own citizens only who are to receive the bounty of our government. More than eight millions of the stock of this bank are held by foreigners... is there no danger to our liberty and independence in a bank that in its nature has so little to bind it to our country?... Controlling our currency, receiving our public moneys, and holding thousands of our citizens in dependence... would be more formidable and dangerous than a military power of the enemy. If government would confine itself to equal protection, and, as Heaven does its rains, shower its favour alike on the high and the low, the rich and the poor, it would be an unqualified blessing. In the act before me there seems to be a wide and unnecessary departure from these just principles."Andrew Jackson 1 In 1832 Jackson ordered the withdrawal of government deposits from the Second bank and instead had them put into safe banks. The Second Banks head, Nicholas Biddle was quite candid about the power and intention of the bank when he openly threatened to cause a depression if the bank was not re-chartered, we quote. "Nothing but widespread suffering will produce any effect on Congress... Our only safety is in pursuing a steady course of firm restriction - and I have no doubt that such a course will ultimately lead to restoration of the currency and the re-charter of the bank." Nicholas Biddle 1836 By calling in existing loans and refusing to issue new loans he did cause a massive depression, but in 1836 when the charter ran out, the Second Bank ceased to function. It was then he made these two famous statements: "The Bank is trying to kill me - but I will kill it!" and later "If the American people only understood the rank injustice of our money and banking system - there would be a revolution before morning..."Andrew Jackson When asked what he felt was the greatest achievement of his career Andrew Jackson replied without hesitation "I killed the bank!" However we will see this was not the end of private financial influence passing itself off as official when we look at...1. Andrew Jackson, Veto of the Bank Bill, to the Senate, (1832) ABRAHAM LINCOLN AND THE CIVIL WAR (1861 - 1865) With the Central Bank killed off, fractional reserve banking moved like a virus through numerous state chartered banks instead causing the instability this form of economics thrives on. When people lose their homes someone else wins them for a fraction of their worth. Depression is good news to the lender; but war causes even more debt and dependency than anything else, so if the money changers couldn't have their Central Bank with a license to print money, a war it would have to be. We can see from this quote of the then chancellor of Germany that slavery was not the only cause for the American Civil War. "The division of the United States into federations of equal force was decided long before the Civil War by the high financial powers of Europe. These bankers were afraid that the US, if they remained as one block, and as one nation, would attain economic and financial independence, which would upset their financial domination over the world."Otto von Bismark chancellor of Germany 1876 On the 12th of April 1861 this economic war began. Predictably Lincoln, needing money to finance his war effort, went with his secretary of the treasury to New York to apply for the necessary loans. The money changers wishing the Union to fail offered loans at 24% to 36%. Lincoln declined the offer. An old friend of Lincoln's, Colonel Dick Taylor of Chicago was put in charge of solving the problem of how to finance the war. His solution is recorded as this. "Just get Congress to pass a bill authorising the printing of full legal tender treasury notes... and pay your soldiers with them and go ahead and win your war with them also."Colonel Dick Taylor When Lincoln asked if the people of America would accept the notes Taylor said. "The people or anyone else will not have any choice in the matter, if you make them full legal tender. They will have the full sanction of the government and be just as good as any money; as Congress is given that express right by the Constitution."Colonel Dick Taylor 1 Lincoln agreed to try this solution and printed 450 million dollars worth of the new bills using green ink on the back to distinguish them from other notes. "The government should create, issue and circulate all the currency and credit needed to satisfy the spending power of the government and the buying power of consumers..... The privilege of creating and issuing money is not only the supreme prerogative of Government, but it is the Government's greatest creative opportunity. By the adoption of these principles, the long-felt want for a uniform medium will be satisfied. The taxpayers will be saved immense sums of interest, discounts and exchanges. The financing of all public enterprises, the maintenance of stable government and ordered progress, and the conduct of the Treasury will become matters of practical administration. The people can and will be furnished with a currency as safe as their own government. Money will cease to be the master and become the servant of humanity. Democracy will rise superior to the money power." Abraham Lincoln 2 From this we see that the solution worked so well Lincoln was seriously considering adopting this emergency measure as a permanent policy. This would have been great for everyone except the money changers who quickly realised how dangerous this policy would be for them. They wasted no time in expressing their view in the London Times. Oddly enough, while the article seems to have been designed to discourage this creative financial policy, in its put down we're clearly able to see the policies goodness. "If this mischievous financial policy, which has its origin in North America, shall become endurated down to a fixture, then that Government will furnish its own money without cost. It will pay off debts and be without debt. It will have all the money necessary to carry on its commerce. It will become prosperous without precedent in the history of the world. The brains, and wealth of all countries will go to North America. That country must be destroyed or it will destroy every monarchy on the globe." Hazard Circular - London Times 1865 From this extract its plan to see that it is the advantage provided by the adopting of this policy which poses a threat to those not using it. 1863, nearly there, Lincoln needed just a bit more money to win the war, and seeing him in this vulnerable state, and knowing that the president could not get the congressional authority to issue more greenbacks, the money changers proposed the passing of the National Bank Act. The act went through. From this point on the entire US money supply would be created out of debt by bankers buying US government bonds and issuing them from reserves for bank notes. The greenbacks continued to be in circulation until 1994, their numbers were not increased but in fact decreased. "In numerous years following the war, the Federal Government ran a heavy surplus. It could not (however) pay off its debt, retire its securities, because to do so meant there would be no bonds to back the national bank notes. To pay off the debt was to destroy the money supply."John Kenneth Galbrath The American economy has been based on government debt since 1864 and it is locked into this system. Talk of paying off the debt without first reforming the banking system is just talk and a complete impossibility. That same year Lincoln had a pleasant surprise. Turns out the Tsar of Russia, Alexander II, was well aware of the money changers scam. The Tsar was refusing to allow them to set up a central bank in Russia. If Lincoln could limit the power of the money changers and win the war, the bankers would not be able to split America and hand it back to Britain and France as planned. The Tsar knew that this handing back would come at a cost which would eventually need to be paid back by attacking Russia, it being clearly in the money changers sights. The Tsar declared that if France or Britain gave help to the South, Russia would consider this an act of war. Britain and France would instead wait in vain to have the wealth of the colonies returned to them, and while they waited Lincoln won the civil war. With an election coming up the next year, Lincoln himself would wait for renewed public support before reversing the National Bank Act he had been pressured into approving during the war. Lincoln's opposition to the central banks financial control and a proposed return to the gold standard is well documented. He would certainly have killed off the national banks monopoly had he not been killed himself only 41 days after being re-elected. The money changers were pressing for a gold standard because gold was scarce and easier to have a monopoly over. Much of this was already waiting in their hands and each gold merchant was well aware that what they really had could be easily made to seem like much much more. Silver would only widen the field and lower the share so they pressed for... 1. Lincoln By Emil Ludwig 1930, containing a letter from Lincoln, also reprinted in Glory to God and the Sucker Democracy A Manuscript Collection of the Letters of Charles H. Lanphier compiled by Charles C. Patton.2. Abraham Lincoln. Senate document 23, Page 91. 1865. THE RETURN OF THE GOLD STANDARD (1866 - 1881) "Right after the Civil War there was considerable talk about reviving Lincoln's brief experiment with the Constitutional monetary system. Had not the European money-trust intervened, it would have no doubt become an established institution." W.Cleon Skousen. Even after his death, the idea that America might print its own debt free money set off warning bells throughout the entire European banking community. On April 12th in 1866, the American congress passed the Contraction Act, allowing the treasury to call in and retire some of Lincoln's greenbacks, With only the banks standing to gain from this, it's not hard to work out the source of this action. To give the American public the false impression that they would be better off under the gold standard, the money changers used the control they had to cause economic instability and panic the people. This was fairly easy to do by calling in existing loans and refusing to issue new ones, a tried and proven method of causing depression. They would then spread the word through the media they largely controlled that the lack of a single gold standard was the cause of the hardship which ensued, while all this time using the Contraction Act to lower the amount of money in circulation. It went from $1.8 billion in circulation in 1866 allowing $50.46 per person,to $1.3 billion in 1867 allowing $44.00 per person,to $0.6 billion in 1876 making only $14.60 per person and downto $0.4 billion only ten years later leaving only $6.67 per person and a continually growing population. Most people believe the economists when they tell us that recessions and depressions are part of the natural flow, but in truth the money supply is controlled by a small minority who have always done so and will continue to do so if we let them. By 1872 the American public was beginning to feel the squeeze, so the Bank of England, scheming in the back rooms, sent Ernest Seyd, with lots of money to bribe congress into demonetising silver. Ernest drafted the legislation himself, which came into law with the passing of the Coinage Act, effectively stopping the minting of silver that year. Here's what he said about his trip, obviously pleased with himself. "I went to America in the winter of 1872-73, authorised to secure, if I could, the passage of a bill demonetising silver. It was in the interest of those I represented - the governors of the Bank of England - to have it done. By 1873, gold coins were the only form of coin money." Ernest Seyd Or as explained by Senator Daniel of Virginia "In 1872 silver being demonetized in Germany, England, and Holland, a capital of 100,000 pounds ($500,000.00) was raised, Ernest Seyd was sent to this country with this fund as agent for foreign bond holders to effect the same object (demonetization of silver)". 1 Within three years, with 30% of the work force unemployed, the American people began to harken back to the days of silver backed money and the greenbacks. The US Silver Commission was set up to study the problem and responded with telling history: "The disaster of the Dark Ages was caused by decreasing money and falling prices... Without money, civilisation could not have had a beginning, and with a diminishing supply, it must languish and unless relieved, finally perish. At the Christian era the metallic money of the Roman Empire amounted to $1,800,million. By the end of the fifteenth century it had shrunk to less than $200,million. History records no other such disastrous transition as that from the Roman Empire to the Dark Ages..."United States Silver Commission While they obviously could see the problems being caused by the restricted money supply, this declaration did little to help the problem, and in 1877 riots broke out all over the country. The bank's response was to do nothing except to campaign against the idea that greenbacks should be reissued. The American Bankers Association secretary James Buel expressed the bankers attitude well in a letter to fellow members of the association. He wrote: "It is advisable to do all in your power to sustain such prominent daily and weekly newspapers, especially the Agricultural and Religious Press, as will oppose the greenback issue of paper money and that you will also withhold patronage from all applicants who are not willing to oppose the government issue of money. To repeal the Act creating bank notes, or to restore to circulation the government issue of money will be to provide the people with money and will therefore seriously affect our individual profits as bankers and lenders. See your congressman at once and engage him to support our interest that we may control legislation."James Buel American Bankers Association 2 What this statement exposes is the difference in mentality between your average person and a banker. With a banker 'less really is more' and every need an opportunity to exploit. James Garfield became President in 1881 with a firm grasp of where the problem lay. "Whosoever controls the volume of money in any country is absolute master of all industry and commerce... And when you realise that the entire system is very easily controlled, one way or another, by a few powerful men at the top, you will not have to be told how periods of inflation and depression originate." James Garfield 1881 Within weeks of releasing this statement President Garfield was assassinated. The cry from the streets was to...1. Senator Daniel of Virginia, May 22, 1890, from a speech in Congress, to be found in the Congressional Record, page 5128, quoting from the Bankers Magazine of August, 18732. from a circular issued by authority of the Associated Bankers of New York, Philadelphia, and Boston signed by one James Buel, secretary, sent out from 247 Broadway, New York in 1877, to the bankers in all of the States FREE SILVER (1891 - 1912) Fleecing of the flock is the term the money changers use for the process of booms and depressions which make it possible for them to repossess property at a fraction of its worth. In 1891 a major fleece was being planned. "On Sept 1st, 1894, we will not renew our loans under any consideration. On Sept 1st we will demand our money. We will foreclose and become mortgagees in possession. We can take two-thirds of the farms west of the Mississippi, and thousands of them east of the Mississippi as well, at our own price... Then the farmers will become tenants as in England..."1891 American Bankers Association as printed in the Congressional Record of April 29, 1913 The continued gold standard made this possible. William Jennings Bryan was the Democratic candidate for president in 1896, campaigning to bring silver back as a money standard. (free Silver) "We will answer their demand for a gold standard by saying to them: You shall not press down upon the brow of labour this crown of thorns, you shall not crucify mankind upon a cross of gold."William Jennings Bryan Of course the money changers supported his opposition on the Republican side so long as he wanted the gold standard maintained. The factory bosses were somehow convinced to tell their work force that business would close down if Bryan was elected, and everyone would lose their jobs. The Republicans won by a small margin. Bryan tried again in 1900 and in 1908 but lost both times. He became secretary of state under Wilson in 1912 but became disenchanted and resigned in 1915 under suspicious circumstances connected with the sinking of the Lusitania which drove America into the First World War. J.P.MORGAN AND THE CRASH OF 1907 If you want to work out the cause of the crash of 1907, checking who benefited is where you might like to look first. With the stock market slump causing most of the over extended banks to falter, in steps J.P. Morgan offering to save the day. People will do strange things when in a panic, and this might explain why Morgan was authorised to print $200 million from nothing, which he then used to prop things up. Some of the troubled banks with less than 1% in reserve had no choice. It was accept this solution or go under. Even if they had worked out that their problems had been caused by the same people now offering the solution, there is not a lot they could have done about it. J.P.Morgan was hailed a hero. "All this trouble could be averted if we appointed a committee of six or seven men like J.P.Morgan to handle the affairs of our country."Woodrow Wilson But not everyone was fooled. "Those not favourable to the money trust could be squeezed out of business and the people frightened into demanding changes in the banking and currency laws which the Money Trust would frame."Rep. Charles A. Lindbergh (R-MN) Apart from making a small number rich at the expense of the many, in this case the instability also served the second purpose of encouraging the public to believe that they would be better off living under a Central Bank and a Gold Standard. Desperate people have little time for logic. LINCOLN WATCHES In Washington the statue of Lincoln sitting in his chair is facing a building called the Federal Reserve Headquarters. This institution would not be there if Lincoln's monetary policy had been adopted by the USA. It is not Federal and it has doubtful reserves. The name is an open deception designed to give this private bank the appearance that it is operating in the public's interest, when in fact it is run solely to gain private profit for its select stock holders. It came into being as the result of one of the slickest moves in financial history. On 23rd December 1913 the house of representatives had past the Federal Reserve Act, but it was still having difficulty getting it out of the senate. Most members of congress had gone home for the holidays, but unfortunately the senate had not adjourned sene die (without day) so they were technically still in session. There were only three members still present. On a unanimous consent voice vote the 1913 Federal Reserve Act was passed. No objection was made, possibly because there was no one there to object. Charles Lindbergh would have objected. "The financial system has been turned over to... the federal reserve board. That board administers the finance system by authority of... a purely profiteering group. The system is private, conducted for the sole purpose of obtaining the greatest possible profits from the use of other peoples money."Rep Charles A, Lindbergh (R-MN) Louis T. McFadden would have objected. "We have in this country one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever known. I refer to the Federal Reserve Board... This evil institution has impoverished... the people of the United States... and has practically bankrupted our Government. It has done this through... the corrupt practice of the moneyed vultures who control it."Rep. Louis T, McFadden (R-PA) Barry Goldwater would also have objected. "Most Americans have no real understanding of the operation of the international money lenders... The accounts of the Federal Reserve System have never been audited. It operates outside the control of Congress and... manipulates the credit of the United States."Sen. Barry Goldwater (R-AZ) Most Americans would object if they knew. The Federal Reserve is the largest single creditor of the United States Government, and they are also the people who decide how much the average persons car payments are going to be, what their house payments are going to be, and whether they have a job or not. The three people who passed the Federal Reserve Act in 1913, knew exactly what they were doing when they set up this private bank, modelled on the Bank of England and the fact that THE BANK OF ENGLAND had been operating independently unopposed since 1694 must have given them a great deal of confidence. WHERE THERE'S WAR, THERE'S MONEY War uses up more materials more quickly than most anything else on earth. In war expensive equipment doesn't wear out slowly, it gets blown up. (It's interesting to note that during the 119 year period from the founding of the Bank of England to Napoleon's defeat at Waterloo, England had been at war for 56 years, while the rest of the time preparing for it. In the process the money changers had been getting rich.) So there it was, the newly formed Federal Reserve poised to produce any money the U.S. Government might need from thin air with each dollar standing to make a healthy interest. Nine days after its formation the Federal Reserve founders were wishing each other a Happy New Year. What good fortune might 1914 bring?
War uses up more materials,
more quickly than most anything else on earth
THE HISTORY OF MONEY PART 2
The 19th century became known as the age of the Rothschild's when it was estimated they controlled half of the world's wealth. While their wealth continues to increase today, they have managed to blend into the background, giving an impression that their power has waned. They only apply the Rothschild name to a small fraction of the companies they actually control. Some authors claim that the Rothschild's had not only taken over the Bank of England but they had also in 1816 backed a new privately owned Central Bank in America called The Second Bank of The United States, causing huge problems to the American president. ANDREW JACKSON (1828 - 1836) When the American congress voted to renew the charter of The Second Bank of The United States, Jackson responded by using his veto to prevent the renewal bill from passing. His response gives us an interesting insight. "It is not our own citizens only who are to receive the bounty of our government. More than eight millions of the stock of this bank are held by foreigners... is there no danger to our liberty and independence in a bank that in its nature has so little to bind it to our country?... Controlling our currency, receiving our public moneys, and holding thousands of our citizens in dependence... would be more formidable and dangerous than a military power of the enemy. If government would confine itself to equal protection, and, as Heaven does its rains, shower its favour alike on the high and the low, the rich and the poor, it would be an unqualified blessing. In the act before me there seems to be a wide and unnecessary departure from these just principles."Andrew Jackson 1 In 1832 Jackson ordered the withdrawal of government deposits from the Second bank and instead had them put into safe banks. The Second Banks head, Nicholas Biddle was quite candid about the power and intention of the bank when he openly threatened to cause a depression if the bank was not re-chartered, we quote. "Nothing but widespread suffering will produce any effect on Congress... Our only safety is in pursuing a steady course of firm restriction - and I have no doubt that such a course will ultimately lead to restoration of the currency and the re-charter of the bank." Nicholas Biddle 1836 By calling in existing loans and refusing to issue new loans he did cause a massive depression, but in 1836 when the charter ran out, the Second Bank ceased to function. It was then he made these two famous statements: "The Bank is trying to kill me - but I will kill it!" and later "If the American people only understood the rank injustice of our money and banking system - there would be a revolution before morning..."Andrew Jackson When asked what he felt was the greatest achievement of his career Andrew Jackson replied without hesitation "I killed the bank!" However we will see this was not the end of private financial influence passing itself off as official when we look at...1. Andrew Jackson, Veto of the Bank Bill, to the Senate, (1832) ABRAHAM LINCOLN AND THE CIVIL WAR (1861 - 1865) With the Central Bank killed off, fractional reserve banking moved like a virus through numerous state chartered banks instead causing the instability this form of economics thrives on. When people lose their homes someone else wins them for a fraction of their worth. Depression is good news to the lender; but war causes even more debt and dependency than anything else, so if the money changers couldn't have their Central Bank with a license to print money, a war it would have to be. We can see from this quote of the then chancellor of Germany that slavery was not the only cause for the American Civil War. "The division of the United States into federations of equal force was decided long before the Civil War by the high financial powers of Europe. These bankers were afraid that the US, if they remained as one block, and as one nation, would attain economic and financial independence, which would upset their financial domination over the world."Otto von Bismark chancellor of Germany 1876 On the 12th of April 1861 this economic war began. Predictably Lincoln, needing money to finance his war effort, went with his secretary of the treasury to New York to apply for the necessary loans. The money changers wishing the Union to fail offered loans at 24% to 36%. Lincoln declined the offer. An old friend of Lincoln's, Colonel Dick Taylor of Chicago was put in charge of solving the problem of how to finance the war. His solution is recorded as this. "Just get Congress to pass a bill authorising the printing of full legal tender treasury notes... and pay your soldiers with them and go ahead and win your war with them also."Colonel Dick Taylor When Lincoln asked if the people of America would accept the notes Taylor said. "The people or anyone else will not have any choice in the matter, if you make them full legal tender. They will have the full sanction of the government and be just as good as any money; as Congress is given that express right by the Constitution."Colonel Dick Taylor 1 Lincoln agreed to try this solution and printed 450 million dollars worth of the new bills using green ink on the back to distinguish them from other notes. "The government should create, issue and circulate all the currency and credit needed to satisfy the spending power of the government and the buying power of consumers..... The privilege of creating and issuing money is not only the supreme prerogative of Government, but it is the Government's greatest creative opportunity. By the adoption of these principles, the long-felt want for a uniform medium will be satisfied. The taxpayers will be saved immense sums of interest, discounts and exchanges. The financing of all public enterprises, the maintenance of stable government and ordered progress, and the conduct of the Treasury will become matters of practical administration. The people can and will be furnished with a currency as safe as their own government. Money will cease to be the master and become the servant of humanity. Democracy will rise superior to the money power." Abraham Lincoln 2 From this we see that the solution worked so well Lincoln was seriously considering adopting this emergency measure as a permanent policy. This would have been great for everyone except the money changers who quickly realised how dangerous this policy would be for them. They wasted no time in expressing their view in the London Times. Oddly enough, while the article seems to have been designed to discourage this creative financial policy, in its put down we're clearly able to see the policies goodness. "If this mischievous financial policy, which has its origin in North America, shall become endurated down to a fixture, then that Government will furnish its own money without cost. It will pay off debts and be without debt. It will have all the money necessary to carry on its commerce. It will become prosperous without precedent in the history of the world. The brains, and wealth of all countries will go to North America. That country must be destroyed or it will destroy every monarchy on the globe." Hazard Circular - London Times 1865 From this extract its plan to see that it is the advantage provided by the adopting of this policy which poses a threat to those not using it. 1863, nearly there, Lincoln needed just a bit more money to win the war, and seeing him in this vulnerable state, and knowing that the president could not get the congressional authority to issue more greenbacks, the money changers proposed the passing of the National Bank Act. The act went through. From this point on the entire US money supply would be created out of debt by bankers buying US government bonds and issuing them from reserves for bank notes. The greenbacks continued to be in circulation until 1994, their numbers were not increased but in fact decreased. "In numerous years following the war, the Federal Government ran a heavy surplus. It could not (however) pay off its debt, retire its securities, because to do so meant there would be no bonds to back the national bank notes. To pay off the debt was to destroy the money supply."John Kenneth Galbrath The American economy has been based on government debt since 1864 and it is locked into this system. Talk of paying off the debt without first reforming the banking system is just talk and a complete impossibility. That same year Lincoln had a pleasant surprise. Turns out the Tsar of Russia, Alexander II, was well aware of the money changers scam. The Tsar was refusing to allow them to set up a central bank in Russia. If Lincoln could limit the power of the money changers and win the war, the bankers would not be able to split America and hand it back to Britain and France as planned. The Tsar knew that this handing back would come at a cost which would eventually need to be paid back by attacking Russia, it being clearly in the money changers sights. The Tsar declared that if France or Britain gave help to the South, Russia would consider this an act of war. Britain and France would instead wait in vain to have the wealth of the colonies returned to them, and while they waited Lincoln won the civil war. With an election coming up the next year, Lincoln himself would wait for renewed public support before reversing the National Bank Act he had been pressured into approving during the war. Lincoln's opposition to the central banks financial control and a proposed return to the gold standard is well documented. He would certainly have killed off the national banks monopoly had he not been killed himself only 41 days after being re-elected. The money changers were pressing for a gold standard because gold was scarce and easier to have a monopoly over. Much of this was already waiting in their hands and each gold merchant was well aware that what they really had could be easily made to seem like much much more. Silver would only widen the field and lower the share so they pressed for... 1. Lincoln By Emil Ludwig 1930, containing a letter from Lincoln, also reprinted in Glory to God and the Sucker Democracy A Manuscript Collection of the Letters of Charles H. Lanphier compiled by Charles C. Patton.2. Abraham Lincoln. Senate document 23, Page 91. 1865. THE RETURN OF THE GOLD STANDARD (1866 - 1881) "Right after the Civil War there was considerable talk about reviving Lincoln's brief experiment with the Constitutional monetary system. Had not the European money-trust intervened, it would have no doubt become an established institution." W.Cleon Skousen. Even after his death, the idea that America might print its own debt free money set off warning bells throughout the entire European banking community. On April 12th in 1866, the American congress passed the Contraction Act, allowing the treasury to call in and retire some of Lincoln's greenbacks, With only the banks standing to gain from this, it's not hard to work out the source of this action. To give the American public the false impression that they would be better off under the gold standard, the money changers used the control they had to cause economic instability and panic the people. This was fairly easy to do by calling in existing loans and refusing to issue new ones, a tried and proven method of causing depression. They would then spread the word through the media they largely controlled that the lack of a single gold standard was the cause of the hardship which ensued, while all this time using the Contraction Act to lower the amount of money in circulation. It went from $1.8 billion in circulation in 1866 allowing $50.46 per person,to $1.3 billion in 1867 allowing $44.00 per person,to $0.6 billion in 1876 making only $14.60 per person and downto $0.4 billion only ten years later leaving only $6.67 per person and a continually growing population. Most people believe the economists when they tell us that recessions and depressions are part of the natural flow, but in truth the money supply is controlled by a small minority who have always done so and will continue to do so if we let them. By 1872 the American public was beginning to feel the squeeze, so the Bank of England, scheming in the back rooms, sent Ernest Seyd, with lots of money to bribe congress into demonetising silver. Ernest drafted the legislation himself, which came into law with the passing of the Coinage Act, effectively stopping the minting of silver that year. Here's what he said about his trip, obviously pleased with himself. "I went to America in the winter of 1872-73, authorised to secure, if I could, the passage of a bill demonetising silver. It was in the interest of those I represented - the governors of the Bank of England - to have it done. By 1873, gold coins were the only form of coin money." Ernest Seyd Or as explained by Senator Daniel of Virginia "In 1872 silver being demonetized in Germany, England, and Holland, a capital of 100,000 pounds ($500,000.00) was raised, Ernest Seyd was sent to this country with this fund as agent for foreign bond holders to effect the same object (demonetization of silver)". 1 Within three years, with 30% of the work force unemployed, the American people began to harken back to the days of silver backed money and the greenbacks. The US Silver Commission was set up to study the problem and responded with telling history: "The disaster of the Dark Ages was caused by decreasing money and falling prices... Without money, civilisation could not have had a beginning, and with a diminishing supply, it must languish and unless relieved, finally perish. At the Christian era the metallic money of the Roman Empire amounted to $1,800,million. By the end of the fifteenth century it had shrunk to less than $200,million. History records no other such disastrous transition as that from the Roman Empire to the Dark Ages..."United States Silver Commission While they obviously could see the problems being caused by the restricted money supply, this declaration did little to help the problem, and in 1877 riots broke out all over the country. The bank's response was to do nothing except to campaign against the idea that greenbacks should be reissued. The American Bankers Association secretary James Buel expressed the bankers attitude well in a letter to fellow members of the association. He wrote: "It is advisable to do all in your power to sustain such prominent daily and weekly newspapers, especially the Agricultural and Religious Press, as will oppose the greenback issue of paper money and that you will also withhold patronage from all applicants who are not willing to oppose the government issue of money. To repeal the Act creating bank notes, or to restore to circulation the government issue of money will be to provide the people with money and will therefore seriously affect our individual profits as bankers and lenders. See your congressman at once and engage him to support our interest that we may control legislation."James Buel American Bankers Association 2 What this statement exposes is the difference in mentality between your average person and a banker. With a banker 'less really is more' and every need an opportunity to exploit. James Garfield became President in 1881 with a firm grasp of where the problem lay. "Whosoever controls the volume of money in any country is absolute master of all industry and commerce... And when you realise that the entire system is very easily controlled, one way or another, by a few powerful men at the top, you will not have to be told how periods of inflation and depression originate." James Garfield 1881 Within weeks of releasing this statement President Garfield was assassinated. The cry from the streets was to...1. Senator Daniel of Virginia, May 22, 1890, from a speech in Congress, to be found in the Congressional Record, page 5128, quoting from the Bankers Magazine of August, 18732. from a circular issued by authority of the Associated Bankers of New York, Philadelphia, and Boston signed by one James Buel, secretary, sent out from 247 Broadway, New York in 1877, to the bankers in all of the States FREE SILVER (1891 - 1912) Fleecing of the flock is the term the money changers use for the process of booms and depressions which make it possible for them to repossess property at a fraction of its worth. In 1891 a major fleece was being planned. "On Sept 1st, 1894, we will not renew our loans under any consideration. On Sept 1st we will demand our money. We will foreclose and become mortgagees in possession. We can take two-thirds of the farms west of the Mississippi, and thousands of them east of the Mississippi as well, at our own price... Then the farmers will become tenants as in England..."1891 American Bankers Association as printed in the Congressional Record of April 29, 1913 The continued gold standard made this possible. William Jennings Bryan was the Democratic candidate for president in 1896, campaigning to bring silver back as a money standard. (free Silver) "We will answer their demand for a gold standard by saying to them: You shall not press down upon the brow of labour this crown of thorns, you shall not crucify mankind upon a cross of gold."William Jennings Bryan Of course the money changers supported his opposition on the Republican side so long as he wanted the gold standard maintained. The factory bosses were somehow convinced to tell their work force that business would close down if Bryan was elected, and everyone would lose their jobs. The Republicans won by a small margin. Bryan tried again in 1900 and in 1908 but lost both times. He became secretary of state under Wilson in 1912 but became disenchanted and resigned in 1915 under suspicious circumstances connected with the sinking of the Lusitania which drove America into the First World War. J.P.MORGAN AND THE CRASH OF 1907 If you want to work out the cause of the crash of 1907, checking who benefited is where you might like to look first. With the stock market slump causing most of the over extended banks to falter, in steps J.P. Morgan offering to save the day. People will do strange things when in a panic, and this might explain why Morgan was authorised to print $200 million from nothing, which he then used to prop things up. Some of the troubled banks with less than 1% in reserve had no choice. It was accept this solution or go under. Even if they had worked out that their problems had been caused by the same people now offering the solution, there is not a lot they could have done about it. J.P.Morgan was hailed a hero. "All this trouble could be averted if we appointed a committee of six or seven men like J.P.Morgan to handle the affairs of our country."Woodrow Wilson But not everyone was fooled. "Those not favourable to the money trust could be squeezed out of business and the people frightened into demanding changes in the banking and currency laws which the Money Trust would frame."Rep. Charles A. Lindbergh (R-MN) Apart from making a small number rich at the expense of the many, in this case the instability also served the second purpose of encouraging the public to believe that they would be better off living under a Central Bank and a Gold Standard. Desperate people have little time for logic. LINCOLN WATCHES In Washington the statue of Lincoln sitting in his chair is facing a building called the Federal Reserve Headquarters. This institution would not be there if Lincoln's monetary policy had been adopted by the USA. It is not Federal and it has doubtful reserves. The name is an open deception designed to give this private bank the appearance that it is operating in the public's interest, when in fact it is run solely to gain private profit for its select stock holders. It came into being as the result of one of the slickest moves in financial history. On 23rd December 1913 the house of representatives had past the Federal Reserve Act, but it was still having difficulty getting it out of the senate. Most members of congress had gone home for the holidays, but unfortunately the senate had not adjourned sene die (without day) so they were technically still in session. There were only three members still present. On a unanimous consent voice vote the 1913 Federal Reserve Act was passed. No objection was made, possibly because there was no one there to object. Charles Lindbergh would have objected. "The financial system has been turned over to... the federal reserve board. That board administers the finance system by authority of... a purely profiteering group. The system is private, conducted for the sole purpose of obtaining the greatest possible profits from the use of other peoples money."Rep Charles A, Lindbergh (R-MN) Louis T. McFadden would have objected. "We have in this country one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever known. I refer to the Federal Reserve Board... This evil institution has impoverished... the people of the United States... and has practically bankrupted our Government. It has done this through... the corrupt practice of the moneyed vultures who control it."Rep. Louis T, McFadden (R-PA) Barry Goldwater would also have objected. "Most Americans have no real understanding of the operation of the international money lenders... The accounts of the Federal Reserve System have never been audited. It operates outside the control of Congress and... manipulates the credit of the United States."Sen. Barry Goldwater (R-AZ) Most Americans would object if they knew. The Federal Reserve is the largest single creditor of the United States Government, and they are also the people who decide how much the average persons car payments are going to be, what their house payments are going to be, and whether they have a job or not. The three people who passed the Federal Reserve Act in 1913, knew exactly what they were doing when they set up this private bank, modelled on the Bank of England and the fact that THE BANK OF ENGLAND had been operating independently unopposed since 1694 must have given them a great deal of confidence. WHERE THERE'S WAR, THERE'S MONEY War uses up more materials more quickly than most anything else on earth. In war expensive equipment doesn't wear out slowly, it gets blown up. (It's interesting to note that during the 119 year period from the founding of the Bank of England to Napoleon's defeat at Waterloo, England had been at war for 56 years, while the rest of the time preparing for it. In the process the money changers had been getting rich.) So there it was, the newly formed Federal Reserve poised to produce any money the U.S. Government might need from thin air with each dollar standing to make a healthy interest. Nine days after its formation the Federal Reserve founders were wishing each other a Happy New Year. What good fortune might 1914 bring?
History of Money--Part I XAT
XAT3
THE HISTORY OF MONEY PART 1
Let's Go FORWARD
Tell someone you are going to a convention of accountants and you might get a few yawns, yet money and how it works is probably one of the most interesting things on earth. It is fascinating and almost magical how money appeared on our planet. Unlike most developments we enjoy, which can be traced back to a source, civilisation or inventor, money appeared in places then unconnected all over the world in a remarkably similar way.
Consider the American Indians using Wampum, West Africans trading in decorative metallic objects called Manillas and the Fijians economy based on whales teeth, some of which are still legal tender; add to that shells, amber, ivory, decorative feathers, cattle including oxen & pigs, a large number of stones including jade and quartz which have all been used for trade across the world, and we get a taste of the variety of accepted currency.
There is something charming and childlike imagining primitive societies, our ancestors, using all these colourful forms of money. As long as everyone concerned can agree on a value, this is a sensible thing for a community to do. After all, the person who has what you need might not need what you have to trade. Money solves that problem neatly. Real value with each exchange, and everyone gaining from the convenience. The idea is really inspired which might explain why so many diverse minds came up with it. BUT ALL IS NOT WELL
"History records that the money changers have used every form of abuse, intrigue, deceit, and violent means possible to maintain their control over governments by controlling money and its issuance." President James Madison. Money, money, money, it's always just been there, right? Wrong.Obviously it's issued by the government to make it easy for us to exchange things. Wrong again!
Truth is most people don't realise that the issuing of money is essentially a private business, and that the privilege of issuing money has been a major bone of contention throughout history. Wars have been fought and depressions have been caused in the battle over who issues the money; however the majority of us are not aware of this, and this is largely due to the fact that the winning side became and increasingly continues to be a vital and respected member of our global society, having an influence over large aspects of our lives including our education, our media and our governments.
While we might feel powerless in trying to stop the manipulation of money for private profit at our expense, it is easy to forget that we collectively give money its value. We have been taught to believe printed pieces of paper have special value, and because we know others believe this too, we are willing to work all our lives to get what we are convinced others will want.
An honest look at history will show us how our innocent trust has been misused. Let's start our exploration of money with:JESUS FLIPS (many coins) 33 A.D. Jesus was so upset by the sight of the money changers in the temple, he waded in and started to tip over the tables and drive them out with a whip, this being the one and only time we ever hear of him using force during his entire ministry. So what caused the ultimate pacifist to become so aggressive? For a long time the Jews had been called upon to pay their temple tax with a special coin called the half shekelshekel. It was a measured half ounce of pure silver with no image of a pagan emperor on it. It was to them the only coin acceptable to God. But because there was only a limited number of these coins in circulation, the money changers were in a buyers market and like with anything else in short supply, they were able to raise the price to what the market would bear.
They made huge profits with their monopoly on these coins and turned this time of devotion into a mockery for profit. Jesus saw this as stealing from the people and proclaimed the whole setup to be. "A den of thieves". 1 Once money is accepted as a form of exchange, those who produce, loan out and manipulate the quantity of money are obviously in a very strong position. They are the "Money Changers".1. King James NT, Mt 21:13, Mr 11:17, Lu 19:46 MEDIEVAL ENGLAND (1000 - 1100 A.D.)
Here we find goldsmith's offering to keep other people's gold and silver safe in their vaults, and in return people walking away with a receipt for what they have left there. These paper receipts soon became popular for trade, as they were less heavy to carry around than gold and silver coins. After a while, the goldsmith's must have noticed that only a small percentage of their depositor's ever came in to demand their gold at any one time. So cleverly the goldsmith's made out some receipts for gold which didn't even exist, and then they loaned it out to earn interest. A nod and a wink amongst themselves, they incorporated this practice into the banking system. They even gave it a name to make it seem more acceptable, christening the practice 'Fractional Reserve Banking' which translates to mean, lending out many times more money than you have assets on deposit.
Today banks are allowed to loan out at least ten times the amount they actually are holding, so while you wonder how they get rich charging you 11% interest, it's not 11% a year they make on that amount but actually 110%.
THE TALLY STICKS (1100 - 1854) King Henry the First produced sticks of polished wood, with notches cut along one edge to signify the denominations. The stick was then split full length so each piece still had a record of the notches. The King kept one half for proof against counterfeiting, and then spent the other half into the market place where it would continue to circulate as money. Because only Tally Sticks were accepted by Henry for payment of taxes, there was a built in demand for them, which gave people confidence to accept these as money. He could have used anything really, so long as the people agreed it had value, and his willingness to accept these sticks as legal tender made it easy for the people to agree. Money is only as valuable as peoples faith in it, and without that faith even today's money is just paper. The tally stick system worked really well for 726 years. It was the most successful form of currency in recent history and the British Empire was actually built under the Tally Stick system, but how is it that most of us are not aware of its existence? Perhaps the fact that in 1694 the Bank of England at its formation attacked the Tally Stick System gives us a clue as to why most of us have never heard of them. They realised it was money outside the power of the money changers, (the very thing King Henry had intended). What better way to eliminate the vital faith people had in this rival currency than to pretend it simply never existed and not discuss it. That seems to be what happened when the first shareholder's in the Bank of England bought their original shares with notched pieces of wood and retired the system. You heard correctly, they bought shares. The Bank of England was set up as a privately owned bank through investors buying shares. Even the Banks resent nationalisation is not what it at first may appear, as its independent resources unceasingly multiply and dividends continue to be produced for its shareholder's. These investors, who's names were kept secret, were meant to invest one and a quarter million pounds, but only three quarters of a million was received when it was chartered in 1694. It then began to lend out many times more than it had in reserve, collecting interest on the lot. This is not something you could just impose on people without preparation. The money changers needed to created the climate to make the formation of this private concern seem acceptable.
Here's how they did it.
With King Henry VIII relaxing the Usury Laws in the 1500's, the money changers flooded the market with their gold and silver coins becoming richer by the minute. The English Revolution of 1642 was financed by the money changers backing Oliver Cromwell's successful attempt to purge the parliament and kill King Charles.
What followed was 50 years of costly wars. Costly to those fighting them and profitable to those financing them. So profitable that it allowed the money changers to take over a square mile of property still known as the City of London, which remains one of the three main financial centres in the world today. The 50 years of war left England in financial ruin. The government officials went begging for loans from guess who, and the deal proposed resulted in a government sanctioned, privately owned bank which could produce money from nothing, essentially legally counterfeiting a national currency for private gain.
Now the politicians had a source from which to borrow all the money they wanted to borrow, and the debt created was secured against public taxes. You would think someone would have seen through this, and realised they could produce their own money and owe no interest, but instead the Bank of England has been used as a model and now nearly every nation has a Central Bank with fractional reserve banking at its core. These central banks have the power to take over a nations economy and become that nations real governing force. What we have here is a scam of mammoth proportions covering what is actually a hidden tax, being collected by private concerns. The country sells bonds to the bank in return for money it cannot raise in taxes. The bonds are paid for by money produced from thin air. The government pays interest on the money it borrowed by borrowing more money in the same way. There is no way this debt can ever be paid, it has and will continue to increase. If the government did find a way to pay off the debt, the result would be that there would be no bonds to back the currency, so to pay the debt would be to kill the currency. With its formation the Bank of England soon flooded Britain with money. With no quality control and no insistence on value for money, prices doubled with money being thrown in every direction. One company was even offering to drain the Red Sea to find Egyptian gold lost when the sea closed in on their pursuit of Moses. By1698 the national debt expanded from £1,250,000 to £16,000,000 and up went the taxes the debt was secured on. As hard as it might be to believe, in times of economic upheaval, wealth is rarely destroyed and instead is often only transferred. And who benefits the most when money is scarce? You may have guessed. It's those controlling what everyone else wants, the money changer's. When the majority of people are suffering through economic depression, you can be sure that a minority of people are continuing to get rich. Even today the Bank of England expresses its determination to prevent the ups and downs of booms and depressions, yet there have been nothing but ups and downs since its formation with the British pound rarely being stable. One thing however has been stable and that is the growing fortune of: THE ROTHSCHILDS (1743) A goldsmith named Amshall Moses Bower opened a counting house in Frankfurt Germany in 1743. He placed a Roman eagle on a red shield over the door prompting people to call his shop the Red Shield Firm pronounced in German as "Rothschild". His son later changed his name to Rothschild when he inherited the business. Loaning money to individuals was all well and good but he soon found it much more profitable loaning money to governments and Kings. It always involved much bigger amounts, always secured from public taxes. Once he got the hang of things he set his sights on the world by training his five sons in the art of money creation, before sending them out to the major financial centres of the world to create and dominate the central banking systems. J.P. Morgan was thought by many to be the richest man in the world during the second world war, but upon his death it was discovered he was merely a lieutenant within the Rothschild empire owning only 19% of the J.P. Morgan Companies. "There is but one power in Europe and that is Rothschild."19th century French commentator 1 We will explore a little more about the richest family a little later, after we've had a look at:1. Niall Ferguson, THE HOUSE OF ROTHSCHILD, Money's Prophets, 1798-1848 THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION (1764 - 1781) By the mid 1700's Britain was at its height of power, but was also heavily in debt. Since the creation of the Bank of England, they had suffered four costly wars and the total debt now stood at £140,000,000, (which in those days was a lot of money). In order to make their interest payments to the bank, the British government set about a programme to try to raise revenues from their American colonies, largely through an extensive programme of taxation. There was a shortage of material for minting coins in the colonies, so they began to print their own paper money, which they called Colonial Script. This provided a very successful means of exchange and also gave the colonies a sense of identity. Colonial Script was money provided to help the exchange of goods. It was debt free paper money not backed by gold or silver. During a visit to Britain in 1763, The Bank of England asked Benjamin Franklin how he would account for the new found prosperity in the colonies. Franklin replied. "That is simple. In the colonies we issue our own money. It is called Colonial Script. We issue it in proper proportion to the demands of trade and industry to make the products pass easily from the producers to the consumers. In this manner, creating for ourselves our own paper money, we control its purchasing power, and we have no interest to pay to no one."Benjamin Franklin 1 America had learned that the people's confidence in the currency was all they needed, and they could be free of borrowing debts. That would mean being free of the Bank of England. In Response the world's most powerful independent bank used its influence on the British parliament to press for the passing of the Currency Act of 1764. This act made it illegal for the colonies to print their own money, and forced them to pay all future taxes to Britain in silver or gold. Here is what Franklin said after that. "In one year, the conditions were so reversed that the era of prosperity ended, and a depression set in, to such an extent that the streets of the Colonies were filled with unemployed."Benjamin Franklin "The colonies would gladly have borne the little tax on tea and other matters had it not been that England took away from the colonies their money, which created unemployment and dissatisfaction. The inability of the colonists to get power to issue their own money permanently out of the hands of George III and the international bankers was the PRIME reason for the Revolutionary War."Benjamin Franklin's autobiography By the time the war began on 19th April 1775 much of the gold and silver had been taken by British taxation. They were left with no other choice but to print money to finance the war. What is interesting here is that Colonial Script was actually working so well, it became a threat to the established economic system of the time. The idea of issuing money as Franklin put it "in proper proportion to the demands of trade and industry" and not charging any interest, was not causing any problems or inflation. This unfortunately was alien to the Bank of England which only issued money for the sake of making a profit for its shareholder's.1. Congressman Charles G. Binderup of Nebraska, Unrobing the Ghosts of Wall Street THE BANK OF NORTH AMERICA (1781-1785) If you can't beat them, join them, might well have been his argument when arms dealer, Robert Morris suggested he be allowed to set up a Bank of England style central bank in the USA in 1781. Desperate for money, the $400,000 he proposed to deposit, to allow him to loan out many times that through fractional reserve banking, must have looked really attractive to the impoverished American Government. Already spending the money they would be loaned, no one made a fuss when Robert Morris couldn't raise the deposit, and instead suggested he might use some gold, which had been loaned to America from France. Once in, he simply used fractional reserve banking, and with the banks growing fortune he loaned to himself, and his friends the money to buy up all the remaining shares. The bank then began to loan out money multiplied by this new amount to eager politicians, who were probably too drunk with the new 'power cash' to notice or care how it was done. The scam lasted five years until in 1785, with the value of American money dropping like a lead balloon. The banks charter didn't get renewed. The shareholder's walking off with the interest did not go unnoticed by the governor. "The rich will strive to establish their dominion and enslave the rest. They always did. They always will... They will have the same effect here as elsewhere, if we do not, by (the power of) government, keep them in their proper spheres."Governor Morris 11. THE CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION OF 1787, 7/2 FIRST BANK OF THE UNITED STATES (1791-1811) It worked once, it will work again. It's been six years. There are a lot of new hungry politicians. Let's give it a try. And so there it was, in 1791, the First Bank of the United States (BUS). Not only deceptively named to sound official, but also to take attention away from the real first bank which had been shut down. Its initials however gave a clear indication that Americans were once again being taken for a ride. And true to its British model, the name of the investors was never revealed. Having gotten away with it a second time, some of them probably wished Amshall Rothschild had picked a different time to make his pronouncement from his private central bank in Frankfurt. "Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws." Mayer Amschel Rothschild, 1790 Not to worry, no one was listening, the American government borrowed 8.2 million dollars from the bank in the first 5 years and prices rose by 72%. This time round the money changer's had learned their lesson, they had guaranteed a twenty year charter. The president, who could see an ever increasing debt, with no chance of ever paying back, had this to say. "I wish it were possible to obtain a single amendment to our Constitution - taking from the federal government their power of borrowing."Thomas Jefferson, 1798 While the independent press, who had not been bought off yet, called the scam "a great swindle, a vulture, a viper, and a cobra." As with the real first bank, the government had been the only depositor to put up any real money, with the remainder being raised from loans the investors made to each other, using the magic of fractional reserve banking. When time came for renewal of the charter, the bankers were warning of bad times ahead if they didn't get what they wanted. The charter was not renewed. Five month later Britain had attacked America and started the war of 1812. Meanwhile a short time earlier, an independent Rothschild business, the Bank of France, was being looked upon with suspicion by none other than: NAPOLEON (1803 - 1825) He didn't trust the bank saying: "When a government is dependent upon bankers for money, they and not the leaders of the government control the situation, since the hand that gives is above the hand that takes... Money has no motherland; financiers are without patriotism and without decency; their sole object is gain."Napoleon Bonaparte, 1815 For both sides of a war to be loaned money from the same privately owned Central Bank is not unusual. Nothing generates debt like war. A Nation will borrow any amount to win. So naturally if the loser is kept going to the last straw in a vain hope of winning, then the more resources will be used up by the winning side before their victory is obtained more resources used, more loans taken out, more money made by the bankers; and even more amazing, the loans are usually given on condition that the victor pays the debts left by the loser. In 1803, instead of borrowing from the bank, Napoleon sold territory west of the Mississippi to the 3rd President of the United States, Thomas Jefferson for 3 million dollars in gold; a deal known as the Louisiana Purchase. Three million dollars richer, Napoleon quickly gathered together an army and set about conquering much of Europe. Each place he went to, Napoleon found his opposition being financed by the Bank of England, making huge profits as Prussia, Austria and finally Russia all went heavily into debt trying to stop him.
Four years later, with the main French army in Russia, Nathan Rothschild took charge of a bold plan to smuggle a shipment of gold through France to finance an attack from Spain by the Duke of Wellington. Wellington's attack from the south and other defeats eventually forced Napoleon into exile. However in 1815 he escaped from his banishment in Elba, an Island off the coast of Italy, and returned to Paris.
By March of that year Napoleon had equipped an army with the help of borrowed money from the Eubard Banking House of Paris. With 74,000 French troops led by Napoleon, sizing up to meet 67,000 British and other European Troops 200 miles NE of Paris on June 18th 1815, it was a difficult one to call.
Back in London, the real potential winner, Nathan Rothschild, was poised to strike in a bold plan to take control of the British stock market, the bond market, and possibly even the Bank of England. Nathan, knowing that information is power, stationed his trusted agent named Rothworth near the battle field. As soon as the battle was over Rothworth quickly returned to London, delivering the news to Rothschild 24 hours ahead of Wellington's courier. A victory by Napoleon would have devastated Britain's financial system. Nathan stationed himself in his usual place next to an ancient pillar in the stock market. This powerful man was not without observers as he hung his head, and began openly to sell huge numbers of British Government Bonds. Reading this to mean that Napoleon must have won, everyone started to sell their British Bonds as well. The bottom fell out of the market until you couldn't hardly give them away.
Meanwhile Rothschild began to secretly buy up all the hugely devalued bonds at a fraction of what they were worth a few hours before.
In this way Nathan Rothschild captured more, in one afternoon, than the combined forces of Napoleon and Wellington had captured in their entire lifetime.
THE HISTORY OF MONEY PART 1
Let's Go FORWARD
Tell someone you are going to a convention of accountants and you might get a few yawns, yet money and how it works is probably one of the most interesting things on earth. It is fascinating and almost magical how money appeared on our planet. Unlike most developments we enjoy, which can be traced back to a source, civilisation or inventor, money appeared in places then unconnected all over the world in a remarkably similar way.
Consider the American Indians using Wampum, West Africans trading in decorative metallic objects called Manillas and the Fijians economy based on whales teeth, some of which are still legal tender; add to that shells, amber, ivory, decorative feathers, cattle including oxen & pigs, a large number of stones including jade and quartz which have all been used for trade across the world, and we get a taste of the variety of accepted currency.
There is something charming and childlike imagining primitive societies, our ancestors, using all these colourful forms of money. As long as everyone concerned can agree on a value, this is a sensible thing for a community to do. After all, the person who has what you need might not need what you have to trade. Money solves that problem neatly. Real value with each exchange, and everyone gaining from the convenience. The idea is really inspired which might explain why so many diverse minds came up with it. BUT ALL IS NOT WELL
"History records that the money changers have used every form of abuse, intrigue, deceit, and violent means possible to maintain their control over governments by controlling money and its issuance." President James Madison. Money, money, money, it's always just been there, right? Wrong.Obviously it's issued by the government to make it easy for us to exchange things. Wrong again!
Truth is most people don't realise that the issuing of money is essentially a private business, and that the privilege of issuing money has been a major bone of contention throughout history. Wars have been fought and depressions have been caused in the battle over who issues the money; however the majority of us are not aware of this, and this is largely due to the fact that the winning side became and increasingly continues to be a vital and respected member of our global society, having an influence over large aspects of our lives including our education, our media and our governments.
While we might feel powerless in trying to stop the manipulation of money for private profit at our expense, it is easy to forget that we collectively give money its value. We have been taught to believe printed pieces of paper have special value, and because we know others believe this too, we are willing to work all our lives to get what we are convinced others will want.
An honest look at history will show us how our innocent trust has been misused. Let's start our exploration of money with:JESUS FLIPS (many coins) 33 A.D. Jesus was so upset by the sight of the money changers in the temple, he waded in and started to tip over the tables and drive them out with a whip, this being the one and only time we ever hear of him using force during his entire ministry. So what caused the ultimate pacifist to become so aggressive? For a long time the Jews had been called upon to pay their temple tax with a special coin called the half shekelshekel. It was a measured half ounce of pure silver with no image of a pagan emperor on it. It was to them the only coin acceptable to God. But because there was only a limited number of these coins in circulation, the money changers were in a buyers market and like with anything else in short supply, they were able to raise the price to what the market would bear.
They made huge profits with their monopoly on these coins and turned this time of devotion into a mockery for profit. Jesus saw this as stealing from the people and proclaimed the whole setup to be. "A den of thieves". 1 Once money is accepted as a form of exchange, those who produce, loan out and manipulate the quantity of money are obviously in a very strong position. They are the "Money Changers".1. King James NT, Mt 21:13, Mr 11:17, Lu 19:46 MEDIEVAL ENGLAND (1000 - 1100 A.D.)
Here we find goldsmith's offering to keep other people's gold and silver safe in their vaults, and in return people walking away with a receipt for what they have left there. These paper receipts soon became popular for trade, as they were less heavy to carry around than gold and silver coins. After a while, the goldsmith's must have noticed that only a small percentage of their depositor's ever came in to demand their gold at any one time. So cleverly the goldsmith's made out some receipts for gold which didn't even exist, and then they loaned it out to earn interest. A nod and a wink amongst themselves, they incorporated this practice into the banking system. They even gave it a name to make it seem more acceptable, christening the practice 'Fractional Reserve Banking' which translates to mean, lending out many times more money than you have assets on deposit.
Today banks are allowed to loan out at least ten times the amount they actually are holding, so while you wonder how they get rich charging you 11% interest, it's not 11% a year they make on that amount but actually 110%.
THE TALLY STICKS (1100 - 1854) King Henry the First produced sticks of polished wood, with notches cut along one edge to signify the denominations. The stick was then split full length so each piece still had a record of the notches. The King kept one half for proof against counterfeiting, and then spent the other half into the market place where it would continue to circulate as money. Because only Tally Sticks were accepted by Henry for payment of taxes, there was a built in demand for them, which gave people confidence to accept these as money. He could have used anything really, so long as the people agreed it had value, and his willingness to accept these sticks as legal tender made it easy for the people to agree. Money is only as valuable as peoples faith in it, and without that faith even today's money is just paper. The tally stick system worked really well for 726 years. It was the most successful form of currency in recent history and the British Empire was actually built under the Tally Stick system, but how is it that most of us are not aware of its existence? Perhaps the fact that in 1694 the Bank of England at its formation attacked the Tally Stick System gives us a clue as to why most of us have never heard of them. They realised it was money outside the power of the money changers, (the very thing King Henry had intended). What better way to eliminate the vital faith people had in this rival currency than to pretend it simply never existed and not discuss it. That seems to be what happened when the first shareholder's in the Bank of England bought their original shares with notched pieces of wood and retired the system. You heard correctly, they bought shares. The Bank of England was set up as a privately owned bank through investors buying shares. Even the Banks resent nationalisation is not what it at first may appear, as its independent resources unceasingly multiply and dividends continue to be produced for its shareholder's. These investors, who's names were kept secret, were meant to invest one and a quarter million pounds, but only three quarters of a million was received when it was chartered in 1694. It then began to lend out many times more than it had in reserve, collecting interest on the lot. This is not something you could just impose on people without preparation. The money changers needed to created the climate to make the formation of this private concern seem acceptable.
Here's how they did it.
With King Henry VIII relaxing the Usury Laws in the 1500's, the money changers flooded the market with their gold and silver coins becoming richer by the minute. The English Revolution of 1642 was financed by the money changers backing Oliver Cromwell's successful attempt to purge the parliament and kill King Charles.
What followed was 50 years of costly wars. Costly to those fighting them and profitable to those financing them. So profitable that it allowed the money changers to take over a square mile of property still known as the City of London, which remains one of the three main financial centres in the world today. The 50 years of war left England in financial ruin. The government officials went begging for loans from guess who, and the deal proposed resulted in a government sanctioned, privately owned bank which could produce money from nothing, essentially legally counterfeiting a national currency for private gain.
Now the politicians had a source from which to borrow all the money they wanted to borrow, and the debt created was secured against public taxes. You would think someone would have seen through this, and realised they could produce their own money and owe no interest, but instead the Bank of England has been used as a model and now nearly every nation has a Central Bank with fractional reserve banking at its core. These central banks have the power to take over a nations economy and become that nations real governing force. What we have here is a scam of mammoth proportions covering what is actually a hidden tax, being collected by private concerns. The country sells bonds to the bank in return for money it cannot raise in taxes. The bonds are paid for by money produced from thin air. The government pays interest on the money it borrowed by borrowing more money in the same way. There is no way this debt can ever be paid, it has and will continue to increase. If the government did find a way to pay off the debt, the result would be that there would be no bonds to back the currency, so to pay the debt would be to kill the currency. With its formation the Bank of England soon flooded Britain with money. With no quality control and no insistence on value for money, prices doubled with money being thrown in every direction. One company was even offering to drain the Red Sea to find Egyptian gold lost when the sea closed in on their pursuit of Moses. By1698 the national debt expanded from £1,250,000 to £16,000,000 and up went the taxes the debt was secured on. As hard as it might be to believe, in times of economic upheaval, wealth is rarely destroyed and instead is often only transferred. And who benefits the most when money is scarce? You may have guessed. It's those controlling what everyone else wants, the money changer's. When the majority of people are suffering through economic depression, you can be sure that a minority of people are continuing to get rich. Even today the Bank of England expresses its determination to prevent the ups and downs of booms and depressions, yet there have been nothing but ups and downs since its formation with the British pound rarely being stable. One thing however has been stable and that is the growing fortune of: THE ROTHSCHILDS (1743) A goldsmith named Amshall Moses Bower opened a counting house in Frankfurt Germany in 1743. He placed a Roman eagle on a red shield over the door prompting people to call his shop the Red Shield Firm pronounced in German as "Rothschild". His son later changed his name to Rothschild when he inherited the business. Loaning money to individuals was all well and good but he soon found it much more profitable loaning money to governments and Kings. It always involved much bigger amounts, always secured from public taxes. Once he got the hang of things he set his sights on the world by training his five sons in the art of money creation, before sending them out to the major financial centres of the world to create and dominate the central banking systems. J.P. Morgan was thought by many to be the richest man in the world during the second world war, but upon his death it was discovered he was merely a lieutenant within the Rothschild empire owning only 19% of the J.P. Morgan Companies. "There is but one power in Europe and that is Rothschild."19th century French commentator 1 We will explore a little more about the richest family a little later, after we've had a look at:1. Niall Ferguson, THE HOUSE OF ROTHSCHILD, Money's Prophets, 1798-1848 THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION (1764 - 1781) By the mid 1700's Britain was at its height of power, but was also heavily in debt. Since the creation of the Bank of England, they had suffered four costly wars and the total debt now stood at £140,000,000, (which in those days was a lot of money). In order to make their interest payments to the bank, the British government set about a programme to try to raise revenues from their American colonies, largely through an extensive programme of taxation. There was a shortage of material for minting coins in the colonies, so they began to print their own paper money, which they called Colonial Script. This provided a very successful means of exchange and also gave the colonies a sense of identity. Colonial Script was money provided to help the exchange of goods. It was debt free paper money not backed by gold or silver. During a visit to Britain in 1763, The Bank of England asked Benjamin Franklin how he would account for the new found prosperity in the colonies. Franklin replied. "That is simple. In the colonies we issue our own money. It is called Colonial Script. We issue it in proper proportion to the demands of trade and industry to make the products pass easily from the producers to the consumers. In this manner, creating for ourselves our own paper money, we control its purchasing power, and we have no interest to pay to no one."Benjamin Franklin 1 America had learned that the people's confidence in the currency was all they needed, and they could be free of borrowing debts. That would mean being free of the Bank of England. In Response the world's most powerful independent bank used its influence on the British parliament to press for the passing of the Currency Act of 1764. This act made it illegal for the colonies to print their own money, and forced them to pay all future taxes to Britain in silver or gold. Here is what Franklin said after that. "In one year, the conditions were so reversed that the era of prosperity ended, and a depression set in, to such an extent that the streets of the Colonies were filled with unemployed."Benjamin Franklin "The colonies would gladly have borne the little tax on tea and other matters had it not been that England took away from the colonies their money, which created unemployment and dissatisfaction. The inability of the colonists to get power to issue their own money permanently out of the hands of George III and the international bankers was the PRIME reason for the Revolutionary War."Benjamin Franklin's autobiography By the time the war began on 19th April 1775 much of the gold and silver had been taken by British taxation. They were left with no other choice but to print money to finance the war. What is interesting here is that Colonial Script was actually working so well, it became a threat to the established economic system of the time. The idea of issuing money as Franklin put it "in proper proportion to the demands of trade and industry" and not charging any interest, was not causing any problems or inflation. This unfortunately was alien to the Bank of England which only issued money for the sake of making a profit for its shareholder's.1. Congressman Charles G. Binderup of Nebraska, Unrobing the Ghosts of Wall Street THE BANK OF NORTH AMERICA (1781-1785) If you can't beat them, join them, might well have been his argument when arms dealer, Robert Morris suggested he be allowed to set up a Bank of England style central bank in the USA in 1781. Desperate for money, the $400,000 he proposed to deposit, to allow him to loan out many times that through fractional reserve banking, must have looked really attractive to the impoverished American Government. Already spending the money they would be loaned, no one made a fuss when Robert Morris couldn't raise the deposit, and instead suggested he might use some gold, which had been loaned to America from France. Once in, he simply used fractional reserve banking, and with the banks growing fortune he loaned to himself, and his friends the money to buy up all the remaining shares. The bank then began to loan out money multiplied by this new amount to eager politicians, who were probably too drunk with the new 'power cash' to notice or care how it was done. The scam lasted five years until in 1785, with the value of American money dropping like a lead balloon. The banks charter didn't get renewed. The shareholder's walking off with the interest did not go unnoticed by the governor. "The rich will strive to establish their dominion and enslave the rest. They always did. They always will... They will have the same effect here as elsewhere, if we do not, by (the power of) government, keep them in their proper spheres."Governor Morris 11. THE CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION OF 1787, 7/2 FIRST BANK OF THE UNITED STATES (1791-1811) It worked once, it will work again. It's been six years. There are a lot of new hungry politicians. Let's give it a try. And so there it was, in 1791, the First Bank of the United States (BUS). Not only deceptively named to sound official, but also to take attention away from the real first bank which had been shut down. Its initials however gave a clear indication that Americans were once again being taken for a ride. And true to its British model, the name of the investors was never revealed. Having gotten away with it a second time, some of them probably wished Amshall Rothschild had picked a different time to make his pronouncement from his private central bank in Frankfurt. "Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws." Mayer Amschel Rothschild, 1790 Not to worry, no one was listening, the American government borrowed 8.2 million dollars from the bank in the first 5 years and prices rose by 72%. This time round the money changer's had learned their lesson, they had guaranteed a twenty year charter. The president, who could see an ever increasing debt, with no chance of ever paying back, had this to say. "I wish it were possible to obtain a single amendment to our Constitution - taking from the federal government their power of borrowing."Thomas Jefferson, 1798 While the independent press, who had not been bought off yet, called the scam "a great swindle, a vulture, a viper, and a cobra." As with the real first bank, the government had been the only depositor to put up any real money, with the remainder being raised from loans the investors made to each other, using the magic of fractional reserve banking. When time came for renewal of the charter, the bankers were warning of bad times ahead if they didn't get what they wanted. The charter was not renewed. Five month later Britain had attacked America and started the war of 1812. Meanwhile a short time earlier, an independent Rothschild business, the Bank of France, was being looked upon with suspicion by none other than: NAPOLEON (1803 - 1825) He didn't trust the bank saying: "When a government is dependent upon bankers for money, they and not the leaders of the government control the situation, since the hand that gives is above the hand that takes... Money has no motherland; financiers are without patriotism and without decency; their sole object is gain."Napoleon Bonaparte, 1815 For both sides of a war to be loaned money from the same privately owned Central Bank is not unusual. Nothing generates debt like war. A Nation will borrow any amount to win. So naturally if the loser is kept going to the last straw in a vain hope of winning, then the more resources will be used up by the winning side before their victory is obtained more resources used, more loans taken out, more money made by the bankers; and even more amazing, the loans are usually given on condition that the victor pays the debts left by the loser. In 1803, instead of borrowing from the bank, Napoleon sold territory west of the Mississippi to the 3rd President of the United States, Thomas Jefferson for 3 million dollars in gold; a deal known as the Louisiana Purchase. Three million dollars richer, Napoleon quickly gathered together an army and set about conquering much of Europe. Each place he went to, Napoleon found his opposition being financed by the Bank of England, making huge profits as Prussia, Austria and finally Russia all went heavily into debt trying to stop him.
Four years later, with the main French army in Russia, Nathan Rothschild took charge of a bold plan to smuggle a shipment of gold through France to finance an attack from Spain by the Duke of Wellington. Wellington's attack from the south and other defeats eventually forced Napoleon into exile. However in 1815 he escaped from his banishment in Elba, an Island off the coast of Italy, and returned to Paris.
By March of that year Napoleon had equipped an army with the help of borrowed money from the Eubard Banking House of Paris. With 74,000 French troops led by Napoleon, sizing up to meet 67,000 British and other European Troops 200 miles NE of Paris on June 18th 1815, it was a difficult one to call.
Back in London, the real potential winner, Nathan Rothschild, was poised to strike in a bold plan to take control of the British stock market, the bond market, and possibly even the Bank of England. Nathan, knowing that information is power, stationed his trusted agent named Rothworth near the battle field. As soon as the battle was over Rothworth quickly returned to London, delivering the news to Rothschild 24 hours ahead of Wellington's courier. A victory by Napoleon would have devastated Britain's financial system. Nathan stationed himself in his usual place next to an ancient pillar in the stock market. This powerful man was not without observers as he hung his head, and began openly to sell huge numbers of British Government Bonds. Reading this to mean that Napoleon must have won, everyone started to sell their British Bonds as well. The bottom fell out of the market until you couldn't hardly give them away.
Meanwhile Rothschild began to secretly buy up all the hugely devalued bonds at a fraction of what they were worth a few hours before.
In this way Nathan Rothschild captured more, in one afternoon, than the combined forces of Napoleon and Wellington had captured in their entire lifetime.
domingo 25 de mayo de 2008
Ready, Aim, Foreign Policy
How the Pentagon’s role
in foreign policy is growing,
and why Congress—
and the American public—
should be worried
By George Withers, Adam Isacson, Lisa Haugaard, Joy Olson, and Joel Fyke
Latin America Working Group Education Fund
A joint publication from the Center for International Policy,
the Latin America Working Group Education Fund,
and the Washington Office on Latin America
March 2008
As public debate focuses on the war in Iraq, a disturbing transformation of U.S. foreign policy decision-making is quietly underway. The Defense Department’s leadership of foreign military aid and training programs is increasing. The State Department, which once had sole authority to direct and monitor such programs, is ceding control. Moreover, changes to the U.S. military’s geographic command structure could grant the military a greater role in shaping, and becoming the face of, U.S. foreign policy where it counts—on the ground.
These seemingly arcane changes will diminish congressional, public and even diplomatic control over a substantial lever and symbol of foreign policy. They will undercut human rights values in our relations with the rest of the world, and increase the trend toward a projection of U.S. global power based primarily on military might.
The Defense Department has been gradually increasing its control over military training and equipping programs for the last two decades, spanning Democratic and Republican administrations. Several recent developments, however, indicated that this trend towards a greater Defense Department role in foreign policy is accelerating. First, the Bush Administration endeavored to expand a pilot program, known as "Section 1206," into a permanent, large-scale, global Defense Department military aid fund with few strings attached.1 Second, the State Department, rather than contesting this challenge to its authority, called for a restructuring of foreign aid that would happily cede its management of military aid programs to the Defense Department and reduce congressional oversight. Third, the U.S. military offered plans to restructure geographic commands to give them a greater role in coordinating U.S. civilian agencies’ activities.
The current campaign to expand the Defense Department’s role is couched as an attempt to protect us from the threat of terrorism. But we know that where domestic policy is concerned, the valid fear of terrorist threats must not cause us to abandon all protections to our basic civil liberties. Similarly, the fear of terrorism should not lead us to abandon the protections ensuring that our foreign policy is more than just a narrowly defined vision of national security. It must also incorporate our national values of democracy and respect for human rights.
Our organizations focus on Latin America, so our examples are from that region, where some of the Defense Department’s military aid programs were pioneered. But this trend affects U.S. foreign policy worldwide.2
These proposed shifts are far from a "done deal." Congress and the next administration can decide to reverse this trend. This report includes specific policy recommendations to reassert the guiding role of the State Department, Congress and the public over this important aspect of foreign policy. Unless we wish to see our military become even more prominently the face of U.S. foreign policy abroad, now is the time to act.2
Ready, Aim, Foreign Policy
Executive Summary
The Defense Department’s leadership of foreign military aid and training programs is increasing. The State Department, which once had sole authority to direct and monitor such programs, is ceding control. Moreover, changes to the U.S. military’s geographic command structure could grant the military a greater role in shaping, and becoming the face of, U.S. foreign policy where it counts—on the ground.
These changes may seem arcane. Yet they have the potential to change the face of the U.S. presence in the world by diminishing congressional, public and even diplomatic control over a substantial lever and symbol of foreign policy. They will undercut human rights values in our relations with the rest of the world and increase the trend toward a projection of U.S. global power based primarily on military might. Several recent developments indicated that this trend towards a greater Defense Deaprtment role in foreign policy is accelerating:
n The Bush Administration endeavored to expand a pilot program, known as "Section 1206," into a permanent, large-scale, global Defense Department military aid fund with few strings attached.
n The State Department, rather than contesting this shift away from its authority, called for a restructuring of foreign aid that would happily cede its management of military aid programs to the Defense Department and reduce congressional oversight.
n The U.S. military offered plans to restructure geographic commands to give them a greater role in coordinating U.S. civilian agencies’ activities. The U.S. Southern Command, for example, issued a new "Command Strategy 2016" envisioning a role for itself in coordinating other U.S. agencies, including non-military ones, operating in the region.
Congress and the next administration have the power to reverse this trend. The following policy recommendations would help reassert the guiding role of the State Department, Congress and the public over this important aspect of foreign policy. Unless we wish to see our military become even more prominently the face of U.S. foreign policy abroad, now is the time to act.
Policy Recommendations
1. The next administration should reassert the State Department’s control over foreign military training and assistance programs in its communications with the Congress, in interagency discussions and, most importantly, in the budget it presents for the State and Defense Departments.
2. Congress should reject this year the reauthorization of the Section 1206 pilot program and the Defense Department’s $800 million request for FY09 in additional funds for "Building Global Partnerships."
3. Congress should reassert the foreign operations and foreign affairs committees’ control over the training and equipping of foreign militaries by shifting these programs back into the foreign operations bills, not the defense bills. Until all such programs are removed from
The Defense Department’s Growing Military Aid Role 3
The Defense Department’s Growing Military Aid Role
Why, one might ask, shouldn’t the military budget be the source of U.S. military aid overseas? The short answer is that equipping and training the world’s armies is a major foreign policy decision.
For example,
n The choice to train and equip foreign militaries is perceived as a U.S. endorsement of those militaries.
n The relative balance of economic and military aid to a country affects perceptions about how the United States chooses to project its power.
n Strengthening a military can affect the balance of power within a geographic region, and within a country.
n The association of the United States with a particular military, especially one engaged in human rights violations, affects the image of our country.
Instead of the regional and diplomatic considerations which concern the State Department, the Defense Department’s assigned mission requires it to adopt a military focus on potential national security threats. Military training and aid decisions, as a significant part of foreign policy, should be governed by the agency in charge of foreign policy and diplomacy—the State Department. And they should be overseen by the congressional committees whose jurisdiction is foreign affairs.
Today, the opposite is occurring. The Defense Department’s $600-billion budget is a growing source of funding for U.S. assistance to the world’s militaries. Between 1999 and 2006, the Pentagon’s budget was the source of nearly $2 billion in military and police aid to Latin America and the Caribbean (30 percent of the $6.4 billion military and police aid total during those years). During that same period, the defense budget directly funded the training of 77,313 military and police personnel from the Western Hemisphere (65 percent of 119,837 total trainees).
the defense bill, Congress should insist upon seeing budget requests for foreign military training and equipping from the Defense and State Departments documented together, by country of destination, in one congressional presentation, before approving funding, and should attach all human rights conditions currently on foreign operations legislation to the defense bills.
4. Congress should challenge the Southern Command’s assumption that it can make dramatic changes in its mission, structure and focus without any change in legislative authority. Congress and the State Department should ensure that the Southern Command’s "Command Strategy 2016" does not result in the military playing a leading role in interagency activities. The ambassador must remain in charge of the country team and preside over coordination of U.S. policy implementation.
5. Congress and the State Department should conduct a careful review of the need for greater efficiencies and stronger leadership in the foreign military assistance programs at the State Department. In this review, greater transparency, accountability and human rights protections should be considered as advantages rather than as obstacles to be overcome.
The association of the United States with a military engaged in human rights violations affects the image of our country.
4 Ready, Aim, Foreign Policy
The rise and fall of the Foreign Assistance Act
The growing Defense Department role in training foreign militaries undercuts the basic framework for U.S. foreign aid programs established in 1961. At that time, U.S. foreign aid was growing as the Cold War intensified—but it was growing in a piecemeal way, with little coordination, poor accountability, and a lack of congruence with U.S. foreign policy goals. "No objective supporter of foreign aid can be satisfied with the existing program—actually a multiplicity of programs," said the new president, John F. Kennedy. "Bureaucratically fragmented, awkward and slow, its administration is diffused over a haphazard and irrational structure covering at least four departments and several other agencies."
The fix came with the September 1961 passage of the Foreign Assistance Act (FAA), which created a legal framework to put all foreign aid programs under the same umbrella. The FAA put the State Department in charge of all aid programs, both military and economic. A companion law governing arms transfers, the Arms Export Control Act (AECA), was added in 1968; between the two, these laws make up most of Title 22 of the U.S. Code.
These legal changes increased civilian diplomats’ control over arms transfers and training programs for the world’s militaries. Legislatively, all foreign aid came to be funded through one annual budget bill, the appropriation for foreign operations. Oversight of all aid became the responsibility of the congressional foreign relations committees and foreign operations appropriations subcommittees.
Over the years, as human rights became a more important concern in U.S. foreign policy, amendments to the Foreign Assistance Act have sought to keep aid from going to militaries that grossly abuse their own citizens. Other amendments banned aid to police forces, to countries "decertified" for failing to cooperate in the drug war, or to countries whose governments came to power through military coups. Still other amendments have required detailed reporting to Congress and the public about foreign aid. The resulting transparency allowed citizens—including the authors of this report—to have at least a general idea of how much aid every country received and what it provided. It also gave citizens some of the knowledge they needed to advocate for limits on arms and training to dictatorial regimes or abusive armies.
This arrangement had its critics, though, especially as Congress layered more conditions and reporting requirements on military aid through the FAA, the AECA and the annual foreign aid appropriation bill. State Department officials routinely complained of the law’s provisions tying their hands and robbing them of flexibility. Many conservatives and so-called foreign policy "realists" complained that human-rights protections in the FAA made it difficult to build relationships with strategic allies who happened to be dictators. Public reporting revealed some inconvenient truths about who was receiving lethal aid. A general skepticism about foreign aid made it difficult to create new programs or increase funding within the annual foreign operations appropriations bill, which was always small (around 3 percent of discretionary spending in the federal budget).
Pressures built to find ways to aid the world’s militaries without dealing with the foreign aid budget bill’s "impractical" conditions, "burdensome" reporting, and stingy proportions. The Defense Department’s massive budget became an attractive alternative.
New Defense-budget military aid programs
The first major effort to move military aid programs out of the Foreign Assistance Act and into the defense bill occurred as the drug war intensified fifteen years ago. In 1989, Congress designated the Defense Department as the "lead agency" for detection and monitoring of illegal drugs coming from overseas. This subsequently allowed the Pentagon to use its operating funds for activities like anti-drug maritime patrols and flights, building radar sites and carrying out surveillance. It was not clear
New Defense-Budget Military Aid Programs 5
at first, however, whether it also meant that the Defense Department could use its funds to help "partner" militaries and police forces fight drug trafficking themselves.
The U.S. Congress quickly responded in the affirmative, creating the first big defense-budget military aid program in forty years. Section 1004 of the FY1991 National Defense Authorization Act allows defense funds to pay for training, equipment upgrades, construction, intelligence and a few other types of non-lethal assistance to both militaries and police forces. This account is the second-largest source of military funding for Latin America, providing an average of nearly a quarter-billion dollars per year since 2000. Section 1004 is the biggest single source of military-training funds in Latin America, having paid for 48 percent of U.S. trainees since 1999.
Congress envisioned Section 1004 as a temporary authority set to expire in 1995. Nonetheless, it has been extended—with absolutely no legislative debate or opposition—to 1999, 2002, 2006, and now until 2011. During some years, Congress asked the Defense Department to provide reports indicating how much Section 1004 aid went to each recipient country, and what types of aid were funded. Yet even when Congress took the trouble to request this report, it has been difficult for the public to obtain.
In 1996, Congress created another temporary defense budget account, Section 1031 of the 1997 Defense Authorization law, to provide $8 million in non-lethal anti-drug aid to Mexico’s military. Though it expired in 1998, the Bush Administration made an unsuccessful attempt to revive it in 2006 as a non-country-specific counter-drug program.
In 1997, Congress added to the defense budget another anti-drug program that is still around today. Section 1033 of the FY 1998 Defense Authorization law, also known as the "Riverine Program," allowed the Pentagon to use up to $20 million per year to provide Colombia and Peru with boats and other non-lethal equipment to fight drug trafficking on rivers. Public reporting and evaluation of "Section 1033" has been nearly non-existent, yet the program has steadily grown in size and scope. Set to expire in 2002, the program was extended to 2006 and then to 2008, and made into a more general-purpose program with the removal of the word "riverine." Its amount was doubled to $40 million in 2004, and raised to $60 million in 2007. Eighteen countries worldwide are now eligible to receive this aid, including nine from the Western Hemisphere.3
Congressional Oversight: Why the Committee Matters
State Department-funded military aid and training programs are overseen by the House Foreign Affairs Committee, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and the foreign operations subcommittees of the appropriations committees. Many of these committees’ members have a strong interest in international affairs. In addition, since foreign aid is unpopular in some quarters, these committees usually pay strict attention to how these funds are spent. Military aid and training programs are an important part of the roughly $35 billion international affairs budget that they review. For these reasons, these committees’ oversight is relatively strong.
Congressional oversight of foreign military assistance in the defense bill, on the other hand, is minimal: aid totaling less than a billion dollars worldwide hardly demands the attention of the few dozen Armed Services Committee staffers who must oversee wars in the Middle East and a half trillion-dollar budget. Members of these committees focus on questions such as, "Is the U.S. military in a state of readiness?" or "Are U.S. forces overstretched?" rather than broad questions of foreign policy, human rights or democracy in specific countries. Moreover, since much of the defense budget creates employment in their own districts, committee members feel far less incentive to question every dollar that is spent. Seeking to add scrutiny and reporting like that found in the FAA to the defense budget legislation would require a committee member to pick a fight with the Pentagon on what, to many of his or her colleagues, might appear to be a marginal issue.
6 Ready, Aim, Foreign Policy
Why Does It Matter Whether Defense or State Controls Military Aid Programs?
The question of whether military aid and training programs should be funded by the Defense Department or the State Department may seem, at first glance, to be a subject more suited to civics textbooks than public debate. Yet the outcome of this debate will have a crucial bearing on how U.S. power is exercised and projected around the world. Let’s take a look at some examples from Latin America.
n In 2006-2007, the congressional foreign operations subcommittees, which govern only State Department-funded military aid, learned about killings of civilians and other human rights violations by the Colombian army, which receives a annual military aid package. Responding to the subcommittees’ concerns, which invoked conditions in the foreign aid law, the State Department was forced to withhold temporarily $110 million worth of aid and training. More importantly, the State Department had to ask the Colombian government to take steps to curb killings of civilians by the army and to increase so-far glacial progress in investigating and prosecuting members of the armed forces credibly alleged to have committed crimes such as torture, murder, or collaborating with brutal illegal paramilitary forces. Only 25% of State Department- funded aid was subject to these conditions, so the overall aid program was not strongly affected, but human rights concerns played a more prominent role in the U.S.-Colombian government dialogue. On the other hand, all military aid through the Defense Department continued to flow during this time period, and no visible sign of any concern about human rights abuses emerged from the Armed Services Committees or Defense Appropriations subcommittees, which govern the aid flowing through the Defense Department. Had most military aid and training flowed through the defense bill, the U.S. government’s voice on human rights would have dropped to a whisper.4
n In 2007, the administration asked Congress to consider another massive aid package to Latin America—the $550 million "Merida Initiative" to combat drug trafficking in Mexico and Central America—through the foreign operations budget governed by the State Department. Once approved, this massive package is likely to continue for many years and become a major element of U.S. policy towards the region. While Defense Department staffers showed up at administration briefings for Congress on this issue, the Defense Department’s role, and the aid it might provide to the Mexican and Central American militaries, remains unclear. The Defense Department does not provide a country-by-country breakdown of its training and aid programs for foreign militaries in its budget requests to Congress. Congress is being asked to approve a major shift in foreign policy without really knowing what kinds of military training and equipment for the Mexican and Central American militaries might accompany the package in the defense bills.
n As Defense Department military training for Latin America grows, it becomes difficult for policymakers to view the big picture of U.S. assistance to the region and the impact this aid balance has on the United States’ role and image in Latin America. When added to the increases in military and police aid provided through the usual State Department channels for the Andean Initiative and the proposed Merida Initiative, the U.S. footprint in the region is heavily military. The administration does not present Congress with both the State and Defense foreign aid budgets together, and the Congress does not ask for such a presentation. But the changes on the ground may be evident to Latin American governments and publics.
New Defense-Budget Military Aid Programs 7
In 1998, Congress added the first human rights condition on defense-budget military aid: a version of the "Leahy Law" (named after Vermont Democratic Senator Patrick Leahy) prohibiting aid to foreign military units that commit gross human rights violations with impunity. This version of the Leahy Law, however, is weaker than that found in the regular foreign operations appropriations bill: it allows the Secretary of Defense to waive the conditions entirely, and allows aid to flow freely as long as the recipient government takes undefined "corrective steps."
In 2002, a new Counter-Terror Fellowship Program (CTFP) appeared in the annual Defense Appropriations law. Initially created to provide non-lethal training and education in counter-terrorism doctrine and techniques, the CTFP was added to permanent law—and authorized to provide lethal training—in 2004. The program closely resembles training programs that already exist in the Foreign Assistance Act, particularly International Military Education and Training (IMET), but is not subject to the same conditions and reporting requirements. With 3,262 trainees from Latin America and the Caribbean between 2003 and 2006, the CTFP is now the fourth-largest funder of military and police training in the region.
In 2005, Congress gave the Defense Department its broadest, farthest-reaching military-aid authority to date. Section 1206 of the FY 2006 Defense Authorization law, extended and expanded in the 2007 law, authorized the Defense Department to provide up to $300 million per year in equipment, supplies and training —both lethal and non-lethal—to foreign militaries. The purpose of this aid is broadly defined: to carry out counter-terrorist operations or to participate in such operations alongside U.S. personnel. As a result, it closely resembles Foreign Military Financing (FMF), the principal military-aid program in the Foreign Assistance Act. Some $40.3 million in 1206 funding went to Latin American militaries in 2006 and 2007 (the Bahamas, the Dominican Republic, Honduras, Jamaica, Mexico, Nicaragua and Panama)
.
Starting such a program outside the FAA framework was, and continues to be, controversial. Then-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld requested the authority to spend $750 million per year, and strong-armed the State Department into offering its assent, but resistance from some legislators (notably Indiana Republican Senator Richard Lugar) reduced the amount to $300 million. Congress added some legislative protections, mandating that countries cannot receive 1206 aid if any other section of U.S. law would prohibit it, and requiring the administration to notify Congress of decisions to provide the aid.
n Since the early years of the Bush Administration, the Defense Department has sought to implement a mostly naval aid initiative in Central America and the Caribbean, which it called "Operation Enduring Friendship." This idea received only lukewarm support from congressional appropriators, who after several years designated it only a few million dollars of Foreign Military Financing (FMF). Today, however, "Operation Enduring Friendship" is up and running thanks to Section 1206 authorities in the Defense budget.
n In early 1999, "Section 1004" funds in the Defense budget funded the creation of a new 900-man counternarcotics battalion in the Colombian Army. After nearly a decade of almost exclusively police anti-narcotics aid, this turn to the military represented a significant policy change. However, the congressional foreign aid committees were unaware of the shift until early 2000, when the "Plan Colombia" aid package requested funds to expand the already-existing 900-man battalion into a 2,000-man brigade.
8 Ready, Aim, Foreign Policy
The program is to expire at the end of 2008, but the Bush Administration continues to try to renew and expand it. In the Department of Defense’s request for Fiscal Year 2009, under "New Initiatives," there is a request for $800 million under the heading "Building Global Partnership." Of that, $500 million is for "Global Train and Equip" (the continuation of Section 1206), $200 million is for Security and Stabilization Assistance and $100 million is for a "Combatant Commanders Initiative Fund," similar to the existing Commanders Emergency Response Program, to be used in "non-permissive" environments.
The State Department Bows Out
Far from trying to impede this erosion of its authority over foreign aid, the State Department under Secretary Condoleezza Rice has endorsed the Defense Department’s escalating involvement. In 2007 the State Deaprtment officially gave its blessing to a radical transformation of the structures governing military training and aid programs that, if implemented, would greatly diminish congressional oversight and increase the Defense Department’s foreign policy role.
This came in the form of the report required by Congress known as the "Section 1206 (f) report." While this hardly sounds earthshaking, the report represents a major signal to Congress of the State Department’s enthusiastic approval for this trend.
When the House and Senate Armed Services committees authorized the $300 million Section 1206 "train and equip" pilot program in the FY2006 National Defense Authorization Act, they included the following caveat in the accompanying report language:
Latin America and Caribbean Military and Police Trainees by Budget Account, 1999-2006
Defense Budget Programs
State Budget Programs
Program
Trainees
Program
Trainees
Section 1004 Counter-Drug Assistance
58,067
International Military Education and Training
24,999
Programs listed as "Misc DOS/DOD Non-Security Assistance"
6,342
International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement
6,897
Programs listed as "Non-Security Assistance, Unified Command"
6,060
Foreign Military Financing
4,897
Counter-Terrorism Fellowship Program
3,262
Foreign Military Sales
4,320
Center for Hemispheric Defense Studies
2,836
DOT / U.S. Coast Guard Activities
875
Professional Military Exchanges
268
Emergency Drawdowns
421
Exchange Training
199
Enhanced International Peacekeeping Capabilities
85
Service Academies
177
MAP (now unused)
30
Aviation Leadership Program
90
TOTAL
42,524
Africa Center for Strategic Studies
8
Asia-Pacific Center
4
TOTAL
77,313
The State Department Bows Out 9
The conferees note that under current law, foreign military training programs are conducted exclusively under the authority of the Secretary of State. The conferees believe it is important that any changes in statutory authorities for foreign military assistance do not have unintended consequences for the effective coordination of U.S. foreign policy writ large, nor should they detract from the Department of Defense’s focus on its core responsibilities, particularly the warfighting tasks for which it is uniquely suited.
The bill required a report by the President on the "strengths and weaknesses" of the Foreign Assistance Act and the Arms Export Control Act as they relate to the authorities for training and equipping foreign military forces. It invited the President to suggest legislative changes to those acts and organizational and procedural changes that should be made in the Departments of State and Defense to make the delivery of foreign assistance more effective. The conferees warned the administration that the report was to be an important factor in any further legislative consideration of the 1206 pilot program.
The 1206 program was later extended from two years to three years, and in subsequent authorization cycles, the Defense Department sent requests for broad expansions in amount and in how they could use this funding. While the 1206 pilot program was extended on an annual basis, the Armed Services Committees sternly reminded the administration that they were still waiting for this report.
The report, finally published in July 2007 by the State Department’s Bureau of Political-Military Affairs, came to a surprising conclusion. Instead of defending its jurisdiction over foreign military training and equipping statutes, the State Department enthusiastically supported the transfer of some authorities to—or their supplementation by—the Defense Department.
While the report notes the strengths of existing authorities in the Foreign Assistance Act and the
State Surrenders: The 1206 (f) Report
Sections of the 1206 (f) report read like the Defense Department’s wishlist. While paying lip service to congressional prerogatives for oversight, it expresses a desire to cast off, like sweaters on a warm spring day, many of the more effective congressional oversight tools. The report states that current legislation governing training and equipping foreign militaries:
has not kept up with the current U.S. strategic need. This weakens the U.S. ability to enable partners to take on the task of defeating terrorist threats, promoting international security, and advancing U.S. interests, thereby increasing the strain on U.S. forces and endangering our servicemen and women. The ability to flexibly adapt to new strategic challenges has been affected by additional legislation that too often has as its sole purpose to impose restrictions and limitations. The complex mix of legislation, mainly sanctions legislation that restricts foreign assistance outside of the basic FAA and AECA authorities, impose unhelpful constraints on the President’s flexibility; many of these sanctions should be repealed. Annual appropriations also contain yearly congressional earmarks that limit our ability to put funding towards critical priorities, emerging threats, or new opportunities. In this era, we need, at a minimum, to preserve flexibility in order to help us deal with a rapidly changing strategic and tactical environment and an adaptive set of enemies. To maximize flexibility and efficiency, the period of availability of single-year security-related appropriations funds for foreign assistance could usefully be expanded to multi-year periods—as is employed for non-security assistance accounts.
10 Ready, Aim, Foreign Policy
Arms Export Control Act, it argues that many of the restrictions in these acts (such as human rights conditions) should be eliminated and that parallel efforts in the Department of Defense should be increased. It specifically endorses eighteen foreign aid authorities already given to the Department of Defense, which it describes as supplemental to the FAA and AECA.
The report criticizes "legislation that too often has as its sole purpose to impose restrictions and limitations," especially sanctions legislation,
Special Operations Troops:
Without the Ambassador’s Consent
The New York Times reported on March 8, 2006, that the Defense Department had been sending Special Operations troops known as "Military Liaison Elements" (MLEs) to different parts of the world, including South America. According to the article, these small units had been operating for at least the previous two years, with the assignment to "gather intelligence on terrorists in unstable parts of the world and to prepare for potential missions to disrupt, capture or kill them." The article also stated that these units had been operating independently of the U.S. embassy and—at least in the past—reported neither to the U.S. embassy’s Military Group nor to its ambassador, but instead to the "regional combatant commander," the U.S. military official in charge of the geographic region. Apparently, these units were controlled only by the Special Operations Command or the combatant commander and had been operating outside of the State Department’s foreign policy apparatus.
The issue came to light when two U.S. special forces personnel were accosted by a robber in Paraguay in 2004. They killed the robber in self-defense, but the U.S. ambassador did not even know they were in the country—nor was he aware of their mission—until well after the incident, according to press reports.
The Washington Post reported on April 23, 2006 that Special Operations Command "has dispatched small teams of Army Green Berets and other Special Operations troops to U.S. embassies in about 20 countries in the Middle East, Asia, Africa and Latin America, where they do operational planning and intelligence gathering to enhance the ability to conduct military operations where the United States is not at war." It went on to say that "the Pentagon gained the leeway to inform—rather than gain the approval of—the U.S. ambassador before conducting military operations in a foreign country, according to several administration officials."
Subsequent press reports revealed that the ambassador to Jordan from 2001 to 2004 had complained about a message from the Pentagon he discovered in late 2003 describing a military intelligence team being sent to Amman and explicitly directing the U.S. defense attaché not to notify the U.S. ambassador or the C.I.A. station chief in Jordan of the Pentagon team’s presence. The C.I.A. has also made clear its reservations about the military taking on their mission.
The MLE program raises a number of concerns about the erosion of the State Department’s role in foreign policymaking, with particular regard to the application of military force, which is without a doubt the most sensitive and powerful foreign policy tool an administration has at its disposal. In a December 2006 report, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee warns that confusion over who is in charge—State, CIA or the military—is a hindrance, not a help, in the "war on terror."
The Military Steps In: "Command Strategy 2016" 11
which it says should be repealed. It takes this position even though, as legislative history demonstrates, such sanctions are in place to protect the people in countries whose governments have demonstrated their willingness to abuse basic human rights.
The report calls for expanding the availability of single-year appropriations funds (for security-related assistance) for use in multi-year periods, to maximize flexibility and efficiency. This would greatly reduce congressional influence and oversight over those funds, as committees would be able to change funding levels, specific programs and conditions on funding only once every several years, rather than annually.
Disturbingly, the State Department argues for the authority to expand military training and equipment to foreign security forces outside the foreign nations’ ministries of defense, including to civilian bodies like police or legal paramilitary militias. It calls for a repeal of the ban on assistance to civilian law-enforcement units, codified in section 660 of the Foreign Assistance Act. This would allow U.S. military personnel to train police forces, which is highly problematic, given the much stricter rules on use of force that police, as opposed to soldiers at war, must follow. This recommendation would end a nearly thirty-five year old ban on most U.S. aid to police forces, without addressing the strong human rights concerns that caused Congress to institute that ban in the first place.
The report also enthusiastically endorses the new large-scale 1206 training and equipping fund under the Defense Department. It calls for more than doubling the authorized spending level from $300 million annually to $750 million, and for making the Section 1206 pilot program permanent law.
It endorses expanding the role of the U.S. military in development aid and humanitarian assistance through the Commander’s Emergency Response Program (CERP), which allows military commanders to build infrastructure such as schools and roads. Such projects have traditionally been the responsibility of the State Department or the U.S. Agency for International Development.
Finally, the report calls for expanding the Foreign Assistance Act’s "section 506 drawdown authorities," which allow transfers of Department of Defense supplies of weapons, parts, equipment or training without prior congressional approval.
The 1206(f) report to Congress is a blueprint for legislative action which, if implemented, would greatly diminish congressional oversight and the State Department’s role in deciding crucial questions about military aid and training programs to countries around the globe.
Once the Defense Department’s authority to train and equip foreign militaries is firmly established, there will be no incentive to keep the State Department involved. Why fund any programs through the State Department, and invite congressional scrutiny, when the same programs can be funneled more easily through the defense bills, to which few are paying attention? These changes would further set in stone the foreign policy decision-making role of the Defense Department.
The Military Steps In: The U.S. Southern Command’s "Command Strategy 2016"
As the State Department put out the welcome mat for greater Defense Department control over foreign policy, some military commands were preparing new mission statements or structures that would grant the military a stronger role in on-the-ground foreign policy decisions. While we will detail here the new U.S. Southern Command "command strategy," the mission and structure proposed for Africom, the new command for Africa, also raises some of the same concerns.
In March 2007, the United States Southern Command, whose area of responsibility includes Latin America (minus Mexico) and the Caribbean, issued its outline for the mission it sees for itself by the year 2016. Command Strategy 2016 can be found on its web site at http://www.southcom.mil/AppsSC/files/0ui0i1177092386.pdf
The Combatant Command sees many threats to security and stability in the region. These are not primarily military threats—indeed the 12 Ready, Aim, Foreign Policy Southern Command does not foresee a "force on force" scenario where countries of the region pose a military threat to each other. Command Strategy 2016 represents a commendable direction, in some ways. It describes accurately many of the challenges facing the countries of the Latin American region. It recognizes poverty and inequality as central problems, along with corruption and crime.
Significantly, although it is a document prepared by the military, it shows a keen understanding that many of these challenges, in their specifics, are not military in nature and do not lend themselves to military solutions. The document commendably asserts that the best U.S. approach to such problems in the region needs to go beyond a military strategy, and instead should be the product of a multi-agency, combined effort.
However, Command Strategy 2016 goes on to propose a radical solution: that the U.S. Southern Command become the central actor in addressing regional problems. The command would transform itself from the traditional military organization it is now—whose responsibility it is to "conduct military operations and promote security cooperation to achieve U.S. strategic objectives"—into a "Joint Interagency Security Command … in support of security, stability and prosperity in the Americas." Considering the scope of its new mission and its own analysis of the challenges facing the region, one could envision Southcom involved in matters ranging from long-term economic development to trade to public security.
As a retooled "Joint Interagency Security Command," the Southern Command could assume the task of coordinating all relevant U.S. agencies, including non-military agencies, operating in the region; it would "provide enabling capabilities to focus and integrate interagency-wide efforts to address the full range of regional challenges." The command would "aggressively engage interagency partner decision-makers and integrate personnel from these agencies on a full time basis into the USSOUTHCOM staff while providing similar liaisons to our partners’ staffs." As Southcom Commander Admiral James Stavridis vividly described this vision: "It’s not because we’re trying to take over at Southcom—it’s because we want to be like a big Velcro cube that these other agencies can hook to so we can collectively do what needs to be done in this region."5
These changes have the potential to make the Southern Command the central actor in the coordination and execution of U.S. foreign policy in Latin America.
The sheer number of U.S. military personnel engaged on Latin America, and the resources that the Southern Command has available, make them the elephant in the room. They will dominate what they coordinate. While not Latin America-specific, a comparison of State vs. Defense personnel provides insight. The State Department employs about 6,000 Foreign Service officers, while USAID employs about 2,000 staff. The U.S. armed forces number about 1.68 million uniformed military members. According to one source, there are substantially more people employed as musicians in military bands than in the entire foreign service.6
Conclusion 13
Command Strategy 2016 envisions the U.S. Southern Command’s transformation as a model which other commands would follow as part of the Unified Command Plan. Thus, all Combatant Commands would eventually become Joint Interagency Security Commands and de facto coordinators of civilian federal agency activities in their areas of responsibility.
Under the current foreign embassy model, the U.S. ambassador is the leader of the "Country Team." All U.S. agencies, including the Defense Department, have a seat at the table. The ambassador is the chief of mission and is in charge of coordinating all agencies’ activities in the relevant country. At the regional level, the same logic applies. Legislation dating back to 1789 gives the State Department primacy over all other departments, including Defense, in foreign policy matters. The State Department’s diplomatic corps is responsible for understanding and addressing all aspects of U.S. relations with the region, including but not limited to the security environment. Southcom’s new role could compete with the ambassador in coordinating in-country work, usurping State’s role.
These changes are not just theoretical. In December 2006, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee noted the increasing role of U.S. defense agencies in leading foreign policy on the ground, and issued a stern warning in a document entitled Embassies as Command Posts in the Anti-Terror Campaign (S. Prt. 109-52):
It has traditionally been the military’s mission to take direct action against U.S. adversaries while the civilian agencies’ mission has been to pursue non-coercive measures through diplomacy, international information programming, and foreign and economic assistance. As a result of inadequate funding for civilian programs, however, U.S. defense agencies are increasingly being granted authority and funding to fill perceived gaps. Such bleeding of civilian responsibilities overseas from civilian to military agencies risks weakening the Secretary of State’s primacy in setting the agenda for U.S. relations with foreign countries and the Secretary of Defense’s focus on war fighting.
While greater interagency cooperation is a laudable goal, the State Department, not the military, should be the lead agency in coordinating activities to attain foreign policy objectives. To construct a parallel foreign policy decision-making bureaucracy would be confusing at best. To construct it under the aegis of the Department of Defense would be to take yet another step away from the necessary regime of diplomacy. As Senator Richard Lugar expressed it in a November 2007 Senate Foreign Relations Committee report, "U.S. foreign policy must continue to be led, and be seen to be led, by the diplomats rather than the generals or it will create its own resistance."
A final disturbing aspect of Command Strategy 2016 is the question of police training. The U.S. banned all training of foreign police in the 1970s due to human rights violations committed by U.S. trained forces. There are now limited exceptions to this ban for training managed by State. An earlier draft of the strategy proposed amending the Foreign Assistance Act to give the Defense Department the authority to train foreign police. The draft proposed, "Upon modification of the Foreign Assistance Act and Arms Export Control Act, [to] leverage military support to law enforcement by developing a broad-based program to help train Latin American countries in the area of internal security with a focus on human rights and democracy." An amended FAA would give the Defense Department the authority to decide which foreign police departments should be trained—currently the responsibility of the State Department—and the authority to perform the training. While the Southern Command, commendably, dropped that goal from later drafts of its Command Strategy, it was endorsed in the State Department’s July 2007 1206 (f) report to Congress.
Conclusion
This drift of authority from the State Department to the Defense Department over military training and aid programs, as well as the proposed changes in the geographic military commands, will have a tremendous impact on how the United States relates to Latin America and the 14 Ready, Aim, Foreign Policy world.
Yet these changes are taking place while Congress, which has the power to stop or slow them, has sat rather passively on the sidelines.
Senator Lugar, who has been during this period chair and ranking minority-party member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, has been one of the few voices of reason. His staff produced two important studies of this phenomenon, Embassies as Command Posts in the Anti-Terror Campaign (December 12, 2006) and Embassies Grapple to Guide Foreign Aid (November 16, 2007). Both reports (which are available online) required extensive field research, and document problems in this slide of responsibility from State to Defense. Senator Lugar also requested a report from the General Accounting Office on the provision of defense-budget assistance under section 1206, recognizing this new account for the major shift in policy that it represents.
Yet this potentially seismic shift of authorities has been so easy in part because it is the Armed Services Committees who have the final say over approving new defense-budget military training programs—thus expanding their authorities—and not the foreign affairs-related committees like Senator Lugar’s, whose authority and jurisdiction are being weakened. If this drift is to end, then, it is essential that the foreign affairs committees stand up for themselves and reassert their jurisdiction. Future administrations must present budgets to the Congress that place military aid and training under the appropriate agencies’ authorities, rather than seek to fund them through the Pentagon budget simply because its size makes it easier to do so.
It is not enough for members of Congress or opinionmakers who care about foreign aid and foreign policy to lamely lament, "The defense bill is where the money is." It is not enough for congressional oversight committees merely to demand reports about a trend that they feel powerless to stop. It is irresponsible for the State Department to hand off to the Pentagon a major piece of its foreign policy work. It is not acceptable to say "State is broken," and shift programs to the Defense Department; if State is broken, it should be fixed.
U.S. military assistance—a risky foreign policy tool in the developing world, even at the best of times—is increasingly provided in response to narrow defense priorities, while our diplomats and our congressional overseers, who are charged with guarding our larger national interest, are cut out of the picture.
The Defense Department should not be given the right to manage military aid as it sees fit, with few safeguards and minimal legislative oversight. Back in 1961, the Foreign Assistance Act and its State Department-managed architecture were put in place for a reason: to ensure that military aid was subordinate to the nation’s foreign policy. It is important to recall that reason before allowing the Defense Department’s military-aid programs to expand and proliferate.
Policy Recommendations
1. The next administration should reassert the State Department’s control over foreign military training and assistance programs in its communication with the Congress, in interagency discussions and, most importantly, in the budget it presents for the State and Defense Departments.
2. Congress should reject the reauthorization of the Section 1206 pilot program this year.
3. Congress should reject the Defense Department’s $800 million in additional funds for Building Global Partnerships under "New Initiatives" in the FY2009 budget request.
4. Congress should reassert the foreign operations and foreign affairs committees’ control over the training and equipping of foreign militaries by shifting these programs back into the foreign operations bills, not the defense bills. Until all such programs are removed from the defense bill:
A. Congress should insist upon seeing budget requests for foreign military training and equipping from the Defense and State Departments
Policy Recommendations 15
documented together, by country of destination, in one congressional presentation, before approving funding.
B. Congress should add important human rights conditions currently attached to the foreign operations bill to Defense Department counternarcotics programs. In Latin America, this should include the conditions applied to Colombia and Guatemala.
C. In considering the Merida Initiative, the foreign operations and foreign relations committees should insist that Defense Department plans for training and equipping Mexican and Central American militaries be fully disclosed prior to considering any funding for this major new aid package.
5. Congress should challenge the Southern Command’s assumption that it can make dramatic changes in its mission, structure and focus without any change in legislative authority. Congress and the State Department should ensure that the Southern Command’s Command Strategy 2016 does not result in the military playing a leading role in interagency activities. The ambassador must remain in charge of the country team and preside over coordination of U.S. policy implementation. The status of "Chief of Mission" must be returned to the U.S. ambassadors heading our embassies overseas.
6. The U.S. military personnel operating in foreign countries, including the Special Forces troops known as Military Liaison Elements, should operate under the ambassador’s authority, not independent of it.
7. The existing ban on police assistance (Section 660 of the Foreign Assistance Act) should remain in place until Congress carefully studies how it can help governments improve citizen security without unintended consequences like increased human rights violations.
8. Congress and the State Department should conduct a careful review of the need for greater efficiencies and stronger leadership in the foreign military assistance programs at the State Department. In this review, greater transparency, accountability and human rights protections should be considered advantages rather than obstacles to be overcome.
Endnotes
1 Section 1206 refers to the section of the FY06 National Defense Authorization Act.
2 Because many of these defense-budget military training programs were pioneered in Latin America, our Latin-America focused organizations were among the first to warn about their expansion. Now that this has become a more global problem, a number of important and useful reports have been recently released (see Sources).
3 The nine Western Hemisphere recipients of Section 1033 aid are: Belize (added in 2007), Bolivia (2004), Colombia (1998), the Dominican Republic (2008), Ecuador (2004), Guatemala (2007), Mexico (2008), Panama (2007), and Peru (1998 and 2004).
4 Individuals make a difference in the quality of this human rights dialogue. Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor Jonathan Farrar followed human rights concerns closely and raised human rights issues persistently with the Colombian government. Admiral Stavridis, head of the Southern Command, pledged to raise the issue of allegations of extrajudicial executions with his counterparts in the Colombian military. But the pressure of the human rights conditions, monitored by active foreign operations subcommittee members like Senator Leahy, helped make clear to the Colombian government the importance of human rights improvements for the continuation of U.S. military aid.
5 Adm. James Stavridis, USN Commander United States Southern Command Military Strategy Forum 2008 & Smart Power Speaker Series Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), January 16, 2008.
6 David J. Kilcullen, New Paradigms for 21st Century Conflict, May 2007 http://usinfo.state.gov/journals/itps/0507/ijpe/kilcullen.htm
Sources
Senate Foreign Relations Committee, "Embassies as Command Posts in the Anti-Terror Campaign," December 15, 2006 (http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=109_cong_senate_committee_prints&docid=f:31324.pdf)
Government Accountability Office memo, "Section 1206 Security Assistance Program—Findings on Criteria, Coordination, and Implementation," February 28, 2007(http://www.gao.gov/docsearch/abstract.php?rptno=GAO-07-416R)
Corine Hegland, "Pentagon, State struggle to define nation-building roles," National Journal, April 30, 2007http://www.govexec.com/story_page cfm?articleid=36760&sid=21)
Nathaniel Heller and Tom Stites, Center for Public Integrity,"Collateral Damage," May 22, 2007(http://www.publicintegrity.org/militaryaid/report.aspx?aid=872)
State Department Report to Congress: Section 1206(f) of the 2006 National Defense Authorization Act, July 3, 2007(http://www.state.gov/t/pm/rls/rpt/spec/90867.htm)
16 Ready, Aim, Foreign Policy
Walter Pincus, "Taking Defense’s Hand Out of State’s Pocket," The Washington Post, July 9, 2007(http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/08/AR2007070801066.html)
U.S. Southern Command, "Command Strategy 2016," August 2007(http://www.southcom.mil/AppsSC/files/0UI0I1177092386.pdf)
Hans Binnendijk, "At War But Not War-Ready," The Washington Post, November 3, 2007(http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/02/AR2007110201725.html)
Center for Global Development, "The Pentagon and Global Development: Making Sense of the DoD’s Expanding Role," November 12, 2007(http://www.cgdev.org/content/general/detail/14815)
Senate Foreign Relations Committee Minority Staff, S. Prt. 110-33, "Embassies Grapple to Guide Foreign Aid," November 16, 2007(http://lugar.senate.gov/record.cfm?id=287807)
Lieutenant General John F. Sattler, Joint Staff Director for Strategic Plans & Policy, "The View from the Joint Staff," PowerPoint presentation dated 2007(http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2007solic/sattler.pdf)
Thomas W. O’Connell, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low Intensity Conflict, "Defense Perspectives: The War on Terrorism," PowerPoint Presentation dated 2007(http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2006solic/oconnell.pdf)
For more information about military aid to Latin America, including a database of all U.S. assistance to the region, see the CIP/LAWGEF/WOLAwebsite: http://www.justf.org
This publication was supported by grants from Foundation Open Society Institute (Zug) and the Ford Foundation
© 2008 by Washington Office on Latin America, Center for International Policy, and Latin America Working Group Education Fund
Center for International Policy
1717 Massachusetts Ave NW, Suite 801
Washington, DC 20036
202.232.3317
www.ciponline.org
Washington Office on Latin America
1630 Connecticut Ave NW, Suite 200
Washington, DC 20009
202.797.2171www.wola.org
Latin Working Group Education Fund
424 C Street NE
Washington, DC 20002
202.546.7010
www.lawg.org
How the Pentagon’s role
in foreign policy is growing,
and why Congress—
and the American public—
should be worried
By George Withers, Adam Isacson, Lisa Haugaard, Joy Olson, and Joel Fyke
Latin America Working Group Education Fund
A joint publication from the Center for International Policy,
the Latin America Working Group Education Fund,
and the Washington Office on Latin America
March 2008
As public debate focuses on the war in Iraq, a disturbing transformation of U.S. foreign policy decision-making is quietly underway. The Defense Department’s leadership of foreign military aid and training programs is increasing. The State Department, which once had sole authority to direct and monitor such programs, is ceding control. Moreover, changes to the U.S. military’s geographic command structure could grant the military a greater role in shaping, and becoming the face of, U.S. foreign policy where it counts—on the ground.
These seemingly arcane changes will diminish congressional, public and even diplomatic control over a substantial lever and symbol of foreign policy. They will undercut human rights values in our relations with the rest of the world, and increase the trend toward a projection of U.S. global power based primarily on military might.
The Defense Department has been gradually increasing its control over military training and equipping programs for the last two decades, spanning Democratic and Republican administrations. Several recent developments, however, indicated that this trend towards a greater Defense Department role in foreign policy is accelerating. First, the Bush Administration endeavored to expand a pilot program, known as "Section 1206," into a permanent, large-scale, global Defense Department military aid fund with few strings attached.1 Second, the State Department, rather than contesting this challenge to its authority, called for a restructuring of foreign aid that would happily cede its management of military aid programs to the Defense Department and reduce congressional oversight. Third, the U.S. military offered plans to restructure geographic commands to give them a greater role in coordinating U.S. civilian agencies’ activities.
The current campaign to expand the Defense Department’s role is couched as an attempt to protect us from the threat of terrorism. But we know that where domestic policy is concerned, the valid fear of terrorist threats must not cause us to abandon all protections to our basic civil liberties. Similarly, the fear of terrorism should not lead us to abandon the protections ensuring that our foreign policy is more than just a narrowly defined vision of national security. It must also incorporate our national values of democracy and respect for human rights.
Our organizations focus on Latin America, so our examples are from that region, where some of the Defense Department’s military aid programs were pioneered. But this trend affects U.S. foreign policy worldwide.2
These proposed shifts are far from a "done deal." Congress and the next administration can decide to reverse this trend. This report includes specific policy recommendations to reassert the guiding role of the State Department, Congress and the public over this important aspect of foreign policy. Unless we wish to see our military become even more prominently the face of U.S. foreign policy abroad, now is the time to act.2
Ready, Aim, Foreign Policy
Executive Summary
The Defense Department’s leadership of foreign military aid and training programs is increasing. The State Department, which once had sole authority to direct and monitor such programs, is ceding control. Moreover, changes to the U.S. military’s geographic command structure could grant the military a greater role in shaping, and becoming the face of, U.S. foreign policy where it counts—on the ground.
These changes may seem arcane. Yet they have the potential to change the face of the U.S. presence in the world by diminishing congressional, public and even diplomatic control over a substantial lever and symbol of foreign policy. They will undercut human rights values in our relations with the rest of the world and increase the trend toward a projection of U.S. global power based primarily on military might. Several recent developments indicated that this trend towards a greater Defense Deaprtment role in foreign policy is accelerating:
n The Bush Administration endeavored to expand a pilot program, known as "Section 1206," into a permanent, large-scale, global Defense Department military aid fund with few strings attached.
n The State Department, rather than contesting this shift away from its authority, called for a restructuring of foreign aid that would happily cede its management of military aid programs to the Defense Department and reduce congressional oversight.
n The U.S. military offered plans to restructure geographic commands to give them a greater role in coordinating U.S. civilian agencies’ activities. The U.S. Southern Command, for example, issued a new "Command Strategy 2016" envisioning a role for itself in coordinating other U.S. agencies, including non-military ones, operating in the region.
Congress and the next administration have the power to reverse this trend. The following policy recommendations would help reassert the guiding role of the State Department, Congress and the public over this important aspect of foreign policy. Unless we wish to see our military become even more prominently the face of U.S. foreign policy abroad, now is the time to act.
Policy Recommendations
1. The next administration should reassert the State Department’s control over foreign military training and assistance programs in its communications with the Congress, in interagency discussions and, most importantly, in the budget it presents for the State and Defense Departments.
2. Congress should reject this year the reauthorization of the Section 1206 pilot program and the Defense Department’s $800 million request for FY09 in additional funds for "Building Global Partnerships."
3. Congress should reassert the foreign operations and foreign affairs committees’ control over the training and equipping of foreign militaries by shifting these programs back into the foreign operations bills, not the defense bills. Until all such programs are removed from
The Defense Department’s Growing Military Aid Role 3
The Defense Department’s Growing Military Aid Role
Why, one might ask, shouldn’t the military budget be the source of U.S. military aid overseas? The short answer is that equipping and training the world’s armies is a major foreign policy decision.
For example,
n The choice to train and equip foreign militaries is perceived as a U.S. endorsement of those militaries.
n The relative balance of economic and military aid to a country affects perceptions about how the United States chooses to project its power.
n Strengthening a military can affect the balance of power within a geographic region, and within a country.
n The association of the United States with a particular military, especially one engaged in human rights violations, affects the image of our country.
Instead of the regional and diplomatic considerations which concern the State Department, the Defense Department’s assigned mission requires it to adopt a military focus on potential national security threats. Military training and aid decisions, as a significant part of foreign policy, should be governed by the agency in charge of foreign policy and diplomacy—the State Department. And they should be overseen by the congressional committees whose jurisdiction is foreign affairs.
Today, the opposite is occurring. The Defense Department’s $600-billion budget is a growing source of funding for U.S. assistance to the world’s militaries. Between 1999 and 2006, the Pentagon’s budget was the source of nearly $2 billion in military and police aid to Latin America and the Caribbean (30 percent of the $6.4 billion military and police aid total during those years). During that same period, the defense budget directly funded the training of 77,313 military and police personnel from the Western Hemisphere (65 percent of 119,837 total trainees).
the defense bill, Congress should insist upon seeing budget requests for foreign military training and equipping from the Defense and State Departments documented together, by country of destination, in one congressional presentation, before approving funding, and should attach all human rights conditions currently on foreign operations legislation to the defense bills.
4. Congress should challenge the Southern Command’s assumption that it can make dramatic changes in its mission, structure and focus without any change in legislative authority. Congress and the State Department should ensure that the Southern Command’s "Command Strategy 2016" does not result in the military playing a leading role in interagency activities. The ambassador must remain in charge of the country team and preside over coordination of U.S. policy implementation.
5. Congress and the State Department should conduct a careful review of the need for greater efficiencies and stronger leadership in the foreign military assistance programs at the State Department. In this review, greater transparency, accountability and human rights protections should be considered as advantages rather than as obstacles to be overcome.
The association of the United States with a military engaged in human rights violations affects the image of our country.
4 Ready, Aim, Foreign Policy
The rise and fall of the Foreign Assistance Act
The growing Defense Department role in training foreign militaries undercuts the basic framework for U.S. foreign aid programs established in 1961. At that time, U.S. foreign aid was growing as the Cold War intensified—but it was growing in a piecemeal way, with little coordination, poor accountability, and a lack of congruence with U.S. foreign policy goals. "No objective supporter of foreign aid can be satisfied with the existing program—actually a multiplicity of programs," said the new president, John F. Kennedy. "Bureaucratically fragmented, awkward and slow, its administration is diffused over a haphazard and irrational structure covering at least four departments and several other agencies."
The fix came with the September 1961 passage of the Foreign Assistance Act (FAA), which created a legal framework to put all foreign aid programs under the same umbrella. The FAA put the State Department in charge of all aid programs, both military and economic. A companion law governing arms transfers, the Arms Export Control Act (AECA), was added in 1968; between the two, these laws make up most of Title 22 of the U.S. Code.
These legal changes increased civilian diplomats’ control over arms transfers and training programs for the world’s militaries. Legislatively, all foreign aid came to be funded through one annual budget bill, the appropriation for foreign operations. Oversight of all aid became the responsibility of the congressional foreign relations committees and foreign operations appropriations subcommittees.
Over the years, as human rights became a more important concern in U.S. foreign policy, amendments to the Foreign Assistance Act have sought to keep aid from going to militaries that grossly abuse their own citizens. Other amendments banned aid to police forces, to countries "decertified" for failing to cooperate in the drug war, or to countries whose governments came to power through military coups. Still other amendments have required detailed reporting to Congress and the public about foreign aid. The resulting transparency allowed citizens—including the authors of this report—to have at least a general idea of how much aid every country received and what it provided. It also gave citizens some of the knowledge they needed to advocate for limits on arms and training to dictatorial regimes or abusive armies.
This arrangement had its critics, though, especially as Congress layered more conditions and reporting requirements on military aid through the FAA, the AECA and the annual foreign aid appropriation bill. State Department officials routinely complained of the law’s provisions tying their hands and robbing them of flexibility. Many conservatives and so-called foreign policy "realists" complained that human-rights protections in the FAA made it difficult to build relationships with strategic allies who happened to be dictators. Public reporting revealed some inconvenient truths about who was receiving lethal aid. A general skepticism about foreign aid made it difficult to create new programs or increase funding within the annual foreign operations appropriations bill, which was always small (around 3 percent of discretionary spending in the federal budget).
Pressures built to find ways to aid the world’s militaries without dealing with the foreign aid budget bill’s "impractical" conditions, "burdensome" reporting, and stingy proportions. The Defense Department’s massive budget became an attractive alternative.
New Defense-budget military aid programs
The first major effort to move military aid programs out of the Foreign Assistance Act and into the defense bill occurred as the drug war intensified fifteen years ago. In 1989, Congress designated the Defense Department as the "lead agency" for detection and monitoring of illegal drugs coming from overseas. This subsequently allowed the Pentagon to use its operating funds for activities like anti-drug maritime patrols and flights, building radar sites and carrying out surveillance. It was not clear
New Defense-Budget Military Aid Programs 5
at first, however, whether it also meant that the Defense Department could use its funds to help "partner" militaries and police forces fight drug trafficking themselves.
The U.S. Congress quickly responded in the affirmative, creating the first big defense-budget military aid program in forty years. Section 1004 of the FY1991 National Defense Authorization Act allows defense funds to pay for training, equipment upgrades, construction, intelligence and a few other types of non-lethal assistance to both militaries and police forces. This account is the second-largest source of military funding for Latin America, providing an average of nearly a quarter-billion dollars per year since 2000. Section 1004 is the biggest single source of military-training funds in Latin America, having paid for 48 percent of U.S. trainees since 1999.
Congress envisioned Section 1004 as a temporary authority set to expire in 1995. Nonetheless, it has been extended—with absolutely no legislative debate or opposition—to 1999, 2002, 2006, and now until 2011. During some years, Congress asked the Defense Department to provide reports indicating how much Section 1004 aid went to each recipient country, and what types of aid were funded. Yet even when Congress took the trouble to request this report, it has been difficult for the public to obtain.
In 1996, Congress created another temporary defense budget account, Section 1031 of the 1997 Defense Authorization law, to provide $8 million in non-lethal anti-drug aid to Mexico’s military. Though it expired in 1998, the Bush Administration made an unsuccessful attempt to revive it in 2006 as a non-country-specific counter-drug program.
In 1997, Congress added to the defense budget another anti-drug program that is still around today. Section 1033 of the FY 1998 Defense Authorization law, also known as the "Riverine Program," allowed the Pentagon to use up to $20 million per year to provide Colombia and Peru with boats and other non-lethal equipment to fight drug trafficking on rivers. Public reporting and evaluation of "Section 1033" has been nearly non-existent, yet the program has steadily grown in size and scope. Set to expire in 2002, the program was extended to 2006 and then to 2008, and made into a more general-purpose program with the removal of the word "riverine." Its amount was doubled to $40 million in 2004, and raised to $60 million in 2007. Eighteen countries worldwide are now eligible to receive this aid, including nine from the Western Hemisphere.3
Congressional Oversight: Why the Committee Matters
State Department-funded military aid and training programs are overseen by the House Foreign Affairs Committee, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and the foreign operations subcommittees of the appropriations committees. Many of these committees’ members have a strong interest in international affairs. In addition, since foreign aid is unpopular in some quarters, these committees usually pay strict attention to how these funds are spent. Military aid and training programs are an important part of the roughly $35 billion international affairs budget that they review. For these reasons, these committees’ oversight is relatively strong.
Congressional oversight of foreign military assistance in the defense bill, on the other hand, is minimal: aid totaling less than a billion dollars worldwide hardly demands the attention of the few dozen Armed Services Committee staffers who must oversee wars in the Middle East and a half trillion-dollar budget. Members of these committees focus on questions such as, "Is the U.S. military in a state of readiness?" or "Are U.S. forces overstretched?" rather than broad questions of foreign policy, human rights or democracy in specific countries. Moreover, since much of the defense budget creates employment in their own districts, committee members feel far less incentive to question every dollar that is spent. Seeking to add scrutiny and reporting like that found in the FAA to the defense budget legislation would require a committee member to pick a fight with the Pentagon on what, to many of his or her colleagues, might appear to be a marginal issue.
6 Ready, Aim, Foreign Policy
Why Does It Matter Whether Defense or State Controls Military Aid Programs?
The question of whether military aid and training programs should be funded by the Defense Department or the State Department may seem, at first glance, to be a subject more suited to civics textbooks than public debate. Yet the outcome of this debate will have a crucial bearing on how U.S. power is exercised and projected around the world. Let’s take a look at some examples from Latin America.
n In 2006-2007, the congressional foreign operations subcommittees, which govern only State Department-funded military aid, learned about killings of civilians and other human rights violations by the Colombian army, which receives a annual military aid package. Responding to the subcommittees’ concerns, which invoked conditions in the foreign aid law, the State Department was forced to withhold temporarily $110 million worth of aid and training. More importantly, the State Department had to ask the Colombian government to take steps to curb killings of civilians by the army and to increase so-far glacial progress in investigating and prosecuting members of the armed forces credibly alleged to have committed crimes such as torture, murder, or collaborating with brutal illegal paramilitary forces. Only 25% of State Department- funded aid was subject to these conditions, so the overall aid program was not strongly affected, but human rights concerns played a more prominent role in the U.S.-Colombian government dialogue. On the other hand, all military aid through the Defense Department continued to flow during this time period, and no visible sign of any concern about human rights abuses emerged from the Armed Services Committees or Defense Appropriations subcommittees, which govern the aid flowing through the Defense Department. Had most military aid and training flowed through the defense bill, the U.S. government’s voice on human rights would have dropped to a whisper.4
n In 2007, the administration asked Congress to consider another massive aid package to Latin America—the $550 million "Merida Initiative" to combat drug trafficking in Mexico and Central America—through the foreign operations budget governed by the State Department. Once approved, this massive package is likely to continue for many years and become a major element of U.S. policy towards the region. While Defense Department staffers showed up at administration briefings for Congress on this issue, the Defense Department’s role, and the aid it might provide to the Mexican and Central American militaries, remains unclear. The Defense Department does not provide a country-by-country breakdown of its training and aid programs for foreign militaries in its budget requests to Congress. Congress is being asked to approve a major shift in foreign policy without really knowing what kinds of military training and equipment for the Mexican and Central American militaries might accompany the package in the defense bills.
n As Defense Department military training for Latin America grows, it becomes difficult for policymakers to view the big picture of U.S. assistance to the region and the impact this aid balance has on the United States’ role and image in Latin America. When added to the increases in military and police aid provided through the usual State Department channels for the Andean Initiative and the proposed Merida Initiative, the U.S. footprint in the region is heavily military. The administration does not present Congress with both the State and Defense foreign aid budgets together, and the Congress does not ask for such a presentation. But the changes on the ground may be evident to Latin American governments and publics.
New Defense-Budget Military Aid Programs 7
In 1998, Congress added the first human rights condition on defense-budget military aid: a version of the "Leahy Law" (named after Vermont Democratic Senator Patrick Leahy) prohibiting aid to foreign military units that commit gross human rights violations with impunity. This version of the Leahy Law, however, is weaker than that found in the regular foreign operations appropriations bill: it allows the Secretary of Defense to waive the conditions entirely, and allows aid to flow freely as long as the recipient government takes undefined "corrective steps."
In 2002, a new Counter-Terror Fellowship Program (CTFP) appeared in the annual Defense Appropriations law. Initially created to provide non-lethal training and education in counter-terrorism doctrine and techniques, the CTFP was added to permanent law—and authorized to provide lethal training—in 2004. The program closely resembles training programs that already exist in the Foreign Assistance Act, particularly International Military Education and Training (IMET), but is not subject to the same conditions and reporting requirements. With 3,262 trainees from Latin America and the Caribbean between 2003 and 2006, the CTFP is now the fourth-largest funder of military and police training in the region.
In 2005, Congress gave the Defense Department its broadest, farthest-reaching military-aid authority to date. Section 1206 of the FY 2006 Defense Authorization law, extended and expanded in the 2007 law, authorized the Defense Department to provide up to $300 million per year in equipment, supplies and training —both lethal and non-lethal—to foreign militaries. The purpose of this aid is broadly defined: to carry out counter-terrorist operations or to participate in such operations alongside U.S. personnel. As a result, it closely resembles Foreign Military Financing (FMF), the principal military-aid program in the Foreign Assistance Act. Some $40.3 million in 1206 funding went to Latin American militaries in 2006 and 2007 (the Bahamas, the Dominican Republic, Honduras, Jamaica, Mexico, Nicaragua and Panama)
.
Starting such a program outside the FAA framework was, and continues to be, controversial. Then-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld requested the authority to spend $750 million per year, and strong-armed the State Department into offering its assent, but resistance from some legislators (notably Indiana Republican Senator Richard Lugar) reduced the amount to $300 million. Congress added some legislative protections, mandating that countries cannot receive 1206 aid if any other section of U.S. law would prohibit it, and requiring the administration to notify Congress of decisions to provide the aid.
n Since the early years of the Bush Administration, the Defense Department has sought to implement a mostly naval aid initiative in Central America and the Caribbean, which it called "Operation Enduring Friendship." This idea received only lukewarm support from congressional appropriators, who after several years designated it only a few million dollars of Foreign Military Financing (FMF). Today, however, "Operation Enduring Friendship" is up and running thanks to Section 1206 authorities in the Defense budget.
n In early 1999, "Section 1004" funds in the Defense budget funded the creation of a new 900-man counternarcotics battalion in the Colombian Army. After nearly a decade of almost exclusively police anti-narcotics aid, this turn to the military represented a significant policy change. However, the congressional foreign aid committees were unaware of the shift until early 2000, when the "Plan Colombia" aid package requested funds to expand the already-existing 900-man battalion into a 2,000-man brigade.
8 Ready, Aim, Foreign Policy
The program is to expire at the end of 2008, but the Bush Administration continues to try to renew and expand it. In the Department of Defense’s request for Fiscal Year 2009, under "New Initiatives," there is a request for $800 million under the heading "Building Global Partnership." Of that, $500 million is for "Global Train and Equip" (the continuation of Section 1206), $200 million is for Security and Stabilization Assistance and $100 million is for a "Combatant Commanders Initiative Fund," similar to the existing Commanders Emergency Response Program, to be used in "non-permissive" environments.
The State Department Bows Out
Far from trying to impede this erosion of its authority over foreign aid, the State Department under Secretary Condoleezza Rice has endorsed the Defense Department’s escalating involvement. In 2007 the State Deaprtment officially gave its blessing to a radical transformation of the structures governing military training and aid programs that, if implemented, would greatly diminish congressional oversight and increase the Defense Department’s foreign policy role.
This came in the form of the report required by Congress known as the "Section 1206 (f) report." While this hardly sounds earthshaking, the report represents a major signal to Congress of the State Department’s enthusiastic approval for this trend.
When the House and Senate Armed Services committees authorized the $300 million Section 1206 "train and equip" pilot program in the FY2006 National Defense Authorization Act, they included the following caveat in the accompanying report language:
Latin America and Caribbean Military and Police Trainees by Budget Account, 1999-2006
Defense Budget Programs
State Budget Programs
Program
Trainees
Program
Trainees
Section 1004 Counter-Drug Assistance
58,067
International Military Education and Training
24,999
Programs listed as "Misc DOS/DOD Non-Security Assistance"
6,342
International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement
6,897
Programs listed as "Non-Security Assistance, Unified Command"
6,060
Foreign Military Financing
4,897
Counter-Terrorism Fellowship Program
3,262
Foreign Military Sales
4,320
Center for Hemispheric Defense Studies
2,836
DOT / U.S. Coast Guard Activities
875
Professional Military Exchanges
268
Emergency Drawdowns
421
Exchange Training
199
Enhanced International Peacekeeping Capabilities
85
Service Academies
177
MAP (now unused)
30
Aviation Leadership Program
90
TOTAL
42,524
Africa Center for Strategic Studies
8
Asia-Pacific Center
4
TOTAL
77,313
The State Department Bows Out 9
The conferees note that under current law, foreign military training programs are conducted exclusively under the authority of the Secretary of State. The conferees believe it is important that any changes in statutory authorities for foreign military assistance do not have unintended consequences for the effective coordination of U.S. foreign policy writ large, nor should they detract from the Department of Defense’s focus on its core responsibilities, particularly the warfighting tasks for which it is uniquely suited.
The bill required a report by the President on the "strengths and weaknesses" of the Foreign Assistance Act and the Arms Export Control Act as they relate to the authorities for training and equipping foreign military forces. It invited the President to suggest legislative changes to those acts and organizational and procedural changes that should be made in the Departments of State and Defense to make the delivery of foreign assistance more effective. The conferees warned the administration that the report was to be an important factor in any further legislative consideration of the 1206 pilot program.
The 1206 program was later extended from two years to three years, and in subsequent authorization cycles, the Defense Department sent requests for broad expansions in amount and in how they could use this funding. While the 1206 pilot program was extended on an annual basis, the Armed Services Committees sternly reminded the administration that they were still waiting for this report.
The report, finally published in July 2007 by the State Department’s Bureau of Political-Military Affairs, came to a surprising conclusion. Instead of defending its jurisdiction over foreign military training and equipping statutes, the State Department enthusiastically supported the transfer of some authorities to—or their supplementation by—the Defense Department.
While the report notes the strengths of existing authorities in the Foreign Assistance Act and the
State Surrenders: The 1206 (f) Report
Sections of the 1206 (f) report read like the Defense Department’s wishlist. While paying lip service to congressional prerogatives for oversight, it expresses a desire to cast off, like sweaters on a warm spring day, many of the more effective congressional oversight tools. The report states that current legislation governing training and equipping foreign militaries:
has not kept up with the current U.S. strategic need. This weakens the U.S. ability to enable partners to take on the task of defeating terrorist threats, promoting international security, and advancing U.S. interests, thereby increasing the strain on U.S. forces and endangering our servicemen and women. The ability to flexibly adapt to new strategic challenges has been affected by additional legislation that too often has as its sole purpose to impose restrictions and limitations. The complex mix of legislation, mainly sanctions legislation that restricts foreign assistance outside of the basic FAA and AECA authorities, impose unhelpful constraints on the President’s flexibility; many of these sanctions should be repealed. Annual appropriations also contain yearly congressional earmarks that limit our ability to put funding towards critical priorities, emerging threats, or new opportunities. In this era, we need, at a minimum, to preserve flexibility in order to help us deal with a rapidly changing strategic and tactical environment and an adaptive set of enemies. To maximize flexibility and efficiency, the period of availability of single-year security-related appropriations funds for foreign assistance could usefully be expanded to multi-year periods—as is employed for non-security assistance accounts.
10 Ready, Aim, Foreign Policy
Arms Export Control Act, it argues that many of the restrictions in these acts (such as human rights conditions) should be eliminated and that parallel efforts in the Department of Defense should be increased. It specifically endorses eighteen foreign aid authorities already given to the Department of Defense, which it describes as supplemental to the FAA and AECA.
The report criticizes "legislation that too often has as its sole purpose to impose restrictions and limitations," especially sanctions legislation,
Special Operations Troops:
Without the Ambassador’s Consent
The New York Times reported on March 8, 2006, that the Defense Department had been sending Special Operations troops known as "Military Liaison Elements" (MLEs) to different parts of the world, including South America. According to the article, these small units had been operating for at least the previous two years, with the assignment to "gather intelligence on terrorists in unstable parts of the world and to prepare for potential missions to disrupt, capture or kill them." The article also stated that these units had been operating independently of the U.S. embassy and—at least in the past—reported neither to the U.S. embassy’s Military Group nor to its ambassador, but instead to the "regional combatant commander," the U.S. military official in charge of the geographic region. Apparently, these units were controlled only by the Special Operations Command or the combatant commander and had been operating outside of the State Department’s foreign policy apparatus.
The issue came to light when two U.S. special forces personnel were accosted by a robber in Paraguay in 2004. They killed the robber in self-defense, but the U.S. ambassador did not even know they were in the country—nor was he aware of their mission—until well after the incident, according to press reports.
The Washington Post reported on April 23, 2006 that Special Operations Command "has dispatched small teams of Army Green Berets and other Special Operations troops to U.S. embassies in about 20 countries in the Middle East, Asia, Africa and Latin America, where they do operational planning and intelligence gathering to enhance the ability to conduct military operations where the United States is not at war." It went on to say that "the Pentagon gained the leeway to inform—rather than gain the approval of—the U.S. ambassador before conducting military operations in a foreign country, according to several administration officials."
Subsequent press reports revealed that the ambassador to Jordan from 2001 to 2004 had complained about a message from the Pentagon he discovered in late 2003 describing a military intelligence team being sent to Amman and explicitly directing the U.S. defense attaché not to notify the U.S. ambassador or the C.I.A. station chief in Jordan of the Pentagon team’s presence. The C.I.A. has also made clear its reservations about the military taking on their mission.
The MLE program raises a number of concerns about the erosion of the State Department’s role in foreign policymaking, with particular regard to the application of military force, which is without a doubt the most sensitive and powerful foreign policy tool an administration has at its disposal. In a December 2006 report, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee warns that confusion over who is in charge—State, CIA or the military—is a hindrance, not a help, in the "war on terror."
The Military Steps In: "Command Strategy 2016" 11
which it says should be repealed. It takes this position even though, as legislative history demonstrates, such sanctions are in place to protect the people in countries whose governments have demonstrated their willingness to abuse basic human rights.
The report calls for expanding the availability of single-year appropriations funds (for security-related assistance) for use in multi-year periods, to maximize flexibility and efficiency. This would greatly reduce congressional influence and oversight over those funds, as committees would be able to change funding levels, specific programs and conditions on funding only once every several years, rather than annually.
Disturbingly, the State Department argues for the authority to expand military training and equipment to foreign security forces outside the foreign nations’ ministries of defense, including to civilian bodies like police or legal paramilitary militias. It calls for a repeal of the ban on assistance to civilian law-enforcement units, codified in section 660 of the Foreign Assistance Act. This would allow U.S. military personnel to train police forces, which is highly problematic, given the much stricter rules on use of force that police, as opposed to soldiers at war, must follow. This recommendation would end a nearly thirty-five year old ban on most U.S. aid to police forces, without addressing the strong human rights concerns that caused Congress to institute that ban in the first place.
The report also enthusiastically endorses the new large-scale 1206 training and equipping fund under the Defense Department. It calls for more than doubling the authorized spending level from $300 million annually to $750 million, and for making the Section 1206 pilot program permanent law.
It endorses expanding the role of the U.S. military in development aid and humanitarian assistance through the Commander’s Emergency Response Program (CERP), which allows military commanders to build infrastructure such as schools and roads. Such projects have traditionally been the responsibility of the State Department or the U.S. Agency for International Development.
Finally, the report calls for expanding the Foreign Assistance Act’s "section 506 drawdown authorities," which allow transfers of Department of Defense supplies of weapons, parts, equipment or training without prior congressional approval.
The 1206(f) report to Congress is a blueprint for legislative action which, if implemented, would greatly diminish congressional oversight and the State Department’s role in deciding crucial questions about military aid and training programs to countries around the globe.
Once the Defense Department’s authority to train and equip foreign militaries is firmly established, there will be no incentive to keep the State Department involved. Why fund any programs through the State Department, and invite congressional scrutiny, when the same programs can be funneled more easily through the defense bills, to which few are paying attention? These changes would further set in stone the foreign policy decision-making role of the Defense Department.
The Military Steps In: The U.S. Southern Command’s "Command Strategy 2016"
As the State Department put out the welcome mat for greater Defense Department control over foreign policy, some military commands were preparing new mission statements or structures that would grant the military a stronger role in on-the-ground foreign policy decisions. While we will detail here the new U.S. Southern Command "command strategy," the mission and structure proposed for Africom, the new command for Africa, also raises some of the same concerns.
In March 2007, the United States Southern Command, whose area of responsibility includes Latin America (minus Mexico) and the Caribbean, issued its outline for the mission it sees for itself by the year 2016. Command Strategy 2016 can be found on its web site at http://www.southcom.mil/AppsSC/files/0ui0i1177092386.pdf
The Combatant Command sees many threats to security and stability in the region. These are not primarily military threats—indeed the 12 Ready, Aim, Foreign Policy Southern Command does not foresee a "force on force" scenario where countries of the region pose a military threat to each other. Command Strategy 2016 represents a commendable direction, in some ways. It describes accurately many of the challenges facing the countries of the Latin American region. It recognizes poverty and inequality as central problems, along with corruption and crime.
Significantly, although it is a document prepared by the military, it shows a keen understanding that many of these challenges, in their specifics, are not military in nature and do not lend themselves to military solutions. The document commendably asserts that the best U.S. approach to such problems in the region needs to go beyond a military strategy, and instead should be the product of a multi-agency, combined effort.
However, Command Strategy 2016 goes on to propose a radical solution: that the U.S. Southern Command become the central actor in addressing regional problems. The command would transform itself from the traditional military organization it is now—whose responsibility it is to "conduct military operations and promote security cooperation to achieve U.S. strategic objectives"—into a "Joint Interagency Security Command … in support of security, stability and prosperity in the Americas." Considering the scope of its new mission and its own analysis of the challenges facing the region, one could envision Southcom involved in matters ranging from long-term economic development to trade to public security.
As a retooled "Joint Interagency Security Command," the Southern Command could assume the task of coordinating all relevant U.S. agencies, including non-military agencies, operating in the region; it would "provide enabling capabilities to focus and integrate interagency-wide efforts to address the full range of regional challenges." The command would "aggressively engage interagency partner decision-makers and integrate personnel from these agencies on a full time basis into the USSOUTHCOM staff while providing similar liaisons to our partners’ staffs." As Southcom Commander Admiral James Stavridis vividly described this vision: "It’s not because we’re trying to take over at Southcom—it’s because we want to be like a big Velcro cube that these other agencies can hook to so we can collectively do what needs to be done in this region."5
These changes have the potential to make the Southern Command the central actor in the coordination and execution of U.S. foreign policy in Latin America.
The sheer number of U.S. military personnel engaged on Latin America, and the resources that the Southern Command has available, make them the elephant in the room. They will dominate what they coordinate. While not Latin America-specific, a comparison of State vs. Defense personnel provides insight. The State Department employs about 6,000 Foreign Service officers, while USAID employs about 2,000 staff. The U.S. armed forces number about 1.68 million uniformed military members. According to one source, there are substantially more people employed as musicians in military bands than in the entire foreign service.6
Conclusion 13
Command Strategy 2016 envisions the U.S. Southern Command’s transformation as a model which other commands would follow as part of the Unified Command Plan. Thus, all Combatant Commands would eventually become Joint Interagency Security Commands and de facto coordinators of civilian federal agency activities in their areas of responsibility.
Under the current foreign embassy model, the U.S. ambassador is the leader of the "Country Team." All U.S. agencies, including the Defense Department, have a seat at the table. The ambassador is the chief of mission and is in charge of coordinating all agencies’ activities in the relevant country. At the regional level, the same logic applies. Legislation dating back to 1789 gives the State Department primacy over all other departments, including Defense, in foreign policy matters. The State Department’s diplomatic corps is responsible for understanding and addressing all aspects of U.S. relations with the region, including but not limited to the security environment. Southcom’s new role could compete with the ambassador in coordinating in-country work, usurping State’s role.
These changes are not just theoretical. In December 2006, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee noted the increasing role of U.S. defense agencies in leading foreign policy on the ground, and issued a stern warning in a document entitled Embassies as Command Posts in the Anti-Terror Campaign (S. Prt. 109-52):
It has traditionally been the military’s mission to take direct action against U.S. adversaries while the civilian agencies’ mission has been to pursue non-coercive measures through diplomacy, international information programming, and foreign and economic assistance. As a result of inadequate funding for civilian programs, however, U.S. defense agencies are increasingly being granted authority and funding to fill perceived gaps. Such bleeding of civilian responsibilities overseas from civilian to military agencies risks weakening the Secretary of State’s primacy in setting the agenda for U.S. relations with foreign countries and the Secretary of Defense’s focus on war fighting.
While greater interagency cooperation is a laudable goal, the State Department, not the military, should be the lead agency in coordinating activities to attain foreign policy objectives. To construct a parallel foreign policy decision-making bureaucracy would be confusing at best. To construct it under the aegis of the Department of Defense would be to take yet another step away from the necessary regime of diplomacy. As Senator Richard Lugar expressed it in a November 2007 Senate Foreign Relations Committee report, "U.S. foreign policy must continue to be led, and be seen to be led, by the diplomats rather than the generals or it will create its own resistance."
A final disturbing aspect of Command Strategy 2016 is the question of police training. The U.S. banned all training of foreign police in the 1970s due to human rights violations committed by U.S. trained forces. There are now limited exceptions to this ban for training managed by State. An earlier draft of the strategy proposed amending the Foreign Assistance Act to give the Defense Department the authority to train foreign police. The draft proposed, "Upon modification of the Foreign Assistance Act and Arms Export Control Act, [to] leverage military support to law enforcement by developing a broad-based program to help train Latin American countries in the area of internal security with a focus on human rights and democracy." An amended FAA would give the Defense Department the authority to decide which foreign police departments should be trained—currently the responsibility of the State Department—and the authority to perform the training. While the Southern Command, commendably, dropped that goal from later drafts of its Command Strategy, it was endorsed in the State Department’s July 2007 1206 (f) report to Congress.
Conclusion
This drift of authority from the State Department to the Defense Department over military training and aid programs, as well as the proposed changes in the geographic military commands, will have a tremendous impact on how the United States relates to Latin America and the 14 Ready, Aim, Foreign Policy world.
Yet these changes are taking place while Congress, which has the power to stop or slow them, has sat rather passively on the sidelines.
Senator Lugar, who has been during this period chair and ranking minority-party member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, has been one of the few voices of reason. His staff produced two important studies of this phenomenon, Embassies as Command Posts in the Anti-Terror Campaign (December 12, 2006) and Embassies Grapple to Guide Foreign Aid (November 16, 2007). Both reports (which are available online) required extensive field research, and document problems in this slide of responsibility from State to Defense. Senator Lugar also requested a report from the General Accounting Office on the provision of defense-budget assistance under section 1206, recognizing this new account for the major shift in policy that it represents.
Yet this potentially seismic shift of authorities has been so easy in part because it is the Armed Services Committees who have the final say over approving new defense-budget military training programs—thus expanding their authorities—and not the foreign affairs-related committees like Senator Lugar’s, whose authority and jurisdiction are being weakened. If this drift is to end, then, it is essential that the foreign affairs committees stand up for themselves and reassert their jurisdiction. Future administrations must present budgets to the Congress that place military aid and training under the appropriate agencies’ authorities, rather than seek to fund them through the Pentagon budget simply because its size makes it easier to do so.
It is not enough for members of Congress or opinionmakers who care about foreign aid and foreign policy to lamely lament, "The defense bill is where the money is." It is not enough for congressional oversight committees merely to demand reports about a trend that they feel powerless to stop. It is irresponsible for the State Department to hand off to the Pentagon a major piece of its foreign policy work. It is not acceptable to say "State is broken," and shift programs to the Defense Department; if State is broken, it should be fixed.
U.S. military assistance—a risky foreign policy tool in the developing world, even at the best of times—is increasingly provided in response to narrow defense priorities, while our diplomats and our congressional overseers, who are charged with guarding our larger national interest, are cut out of the picture.
The Defense Department should not be given the right to manage military aid as it sees fit, with few safeguards and minimal legislative oversight. Back in 1961, the Foreign Assistance Act and its State Department-managed architecture were put in place for a reason: to ensure that military aid was subordinate to the nation’s foreign policy. It is important to recall that reason before allowing the Defense Department’s military-aid programs to expand and proliferate.
Policy Recommendations
1. The next administration should reassert the State Department’s control over foreign military training and assistance programs in its communication with the Congress, in interagency discussions and, most importantly, in the budget it presents for the State and Defense Departments.
2. Congress should reject the reauthorization of the Section 1206 pilot program this year.
3. Congress should reject the Defense Department’s $800 million in additional funds for Building Global Partnerships under "New Initiatives" in the FY2009 budget request.
4. Congress should reassert the foreign operations and foreign affairs committees’ control over the training and equipping of foreign militaries by shifting these programs back into the foreign operations bills, not the defense bills. Until all such programs are removed from the defense bill:
A. Congress should insist upon seeing budget requests for foreign military training and equipping from the Defense and State Departments
Policy Recommendations 15
documented together, by country of destination, in one congressional presentation, before approving funding.
B. Congress should add important human rights conditions currently attached to the foreign operations bill to Defense Department counternarcotics programs. In Latin America, this should include the conditions applied to Colombia and Guatemala.
C. In considering the Merida Initiative, the foreign operations and foreign relations committees should insist that Defense Department plans for training and equipping Mexican and Central American militaries be fully disclosed prior to considering any funding for this major new aid package.
5. Congress should challenge the Southern Command’s assumption that it can make dramatic changes in its mission, structure and focus without any change in legislative authority. Congress and the State Department should ensure that the Southern Command’s Command Strategy 2016 does not result in the military playing a leading role in interagency activities. The ambassador must remain in charge of the country team and preside over coordination of U.S. policy implementation. The status of "Chief of Mission" must be returned to the U.S. ambassadors heading our embassies overseas.
6. The U.S. military personnel operating in foreign countries, including the Special Forces troops known as Military Liaison Elements, should operate under the ambassador’s authority, not independent of it.
7. The existing ban on police assistance (Section 660 of the Foreign Assistance Act) should remain in place until Congress carefully studies how it can help governments improve citizen security without unintended consequences like increased human rights violations.
8. Congress and the State Department should conduct a careful review of the need for greater efficiencies and stronger leadership in the foreign military assistance programs at the State Department. In this review, greater transparency, accountability and human rights protections should be considered advantages rather than obstacles to be overcome.
Endnotes
1 Section 1206 refers to the section of the FY06 National Defense Authorization Act.
2 Because many of these defense-budget military training programs were pioneered in Latin America, our Latin-America focused organizations were among the first to warn about their expansion. Now that this has become a more global problem, a number of important and useful reports have been recently released (see Sources).
3 The nine Western Hemisphere recipients of Section 1033 aid are: Belize (added in 2007), Bolivia (2004), Colombia (1998), the Dominican Republic (2008), Ecuador (2004), Guatemala (2007), Mexico (2008), Panama (2007), and Peru (1998 and 2004).
4 Individuals make a difference in the quality of this human rights dialogue. Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor Jonathan Farrar followed human rights concerns closely and raised human rights issues persistently with the Colombian government. Admiral Stavridis, head of the Southern Command, pledged to raise the issue of allegations of extrajudicial executions with his counterparts in the Colombian military. But the pressure of the human rights conditions, monitored by active foreign operations subcommittee members like Senator Leahy, helped make clear to the Colombian government the importance of human rights improvements for the continuation of U.S. military aid.
5 Adm. James Stavridis, USN Commander United States Southern Command Military Strategy Forum 2008 & Smart Power Speaker Series Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), January 16, 2008.
6 David J. Kilcullen, New Paradigms for 21st Century Conflict, May 2007 http://usinfo.state.gov/journals/itps/0507/ijpe/kilcullen.htm
Sources
Senate Foreign Relations Committee, "Embassies as Command Posts in the Anti-Terror Campaign," December 15, 2006 (http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=109_cong_senate_committee_prints&docid=f:31324.pdf)
Government Accountability Office memo, "Section 1206 Security Assistance Program—Findings on Criteria, Coordination, and Implementation," February 28, 2007(http://www.gao.gov/docsearch/abstract.php?rptno=GAO-07-416R)
Corine Hegland, "Pentagon, State struggle to define nation-building roles," National Journal, April 30, 2007http://www.govexec.com/story_page cfm?articleid=36760&sid=21)
Nathaniel Heller and Tom Stites, Center for Public Integrity,"Collateral Damage," May 22, 2007(http://www.publicintegrity.org/militaryaid/report.aspx?aid=872)
State Department Report to Congress: Section 1206(f) of the 2006 National Defense Authorization Act, July 3, 2007(http://www.state.gov/t/pm/rls/rpt/spec/90867.htm)
16 Ready, Aim, Foreign Policy
Walter Pincus, "Taking Defense’s Hand Out of State’s Pocket," The Washington Post, July 9, 2007(http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/08/AR2007070801066.html)
U.S. Southern Command, "Command Strategy 2016," August 2007(http://www.southcom.mil/AppsSC/files/0UI0I1177092386.pdf)
Hans Binnendijk, "At War But Not War-Ready," The Washington Post, November 3, 2007(http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/02/AR2007110201725.html)
Center for Global Development, "The Pentagon and Global Development: Making Sense of the DoD’s Expanding Role," November 12, 2007(http://www.cgdev.org/content/general/detail/14815)
Senate Foreign Relations Committee Minority Staff, S. Prt. 110-33, "Embassies Grapple to Guide Foreign Aid," November 16, 2007(http://lugar.senate.gov/record.cfm?id=287807)
Lieutenant General John F. Sattler, Joint Staff Director for Strategic Plans & Policy, "The View from the Joint Staff," PowerPoint presentation dated 2007(http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2007solic/sattler.pdf)
Thomas W. O’Connell, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low Intensity Conflict, "Defense Perspectives: The War on Terrorism," PowerPoint Presentation dated 2007(http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2006solic/oconnell.pdf)
For more information about military aid to Latin America, including a database of all U.S. assistance to the region, see the CIP/LAWGEF/WOLAwebsite: http://www.justf.org
This publication was supported by grants from Foundation Open Society Institute (Zug) and the Ford Foundation
© 2008 by Washington Office on Latin America, Center for International Policy, and Latin America Working Group Education Fund
Center for International Policy
1717 Massachusetts Ave NW, Suite 801
Washington, DC 20036
202.232.3317
www.ciponline.org
Washington Office on Latin America
1630 Connecticut Ave NW, Suite 200
Washington, DC 20009
202.797.2171www.wola.org
Latin Working Group Education Fund
424 C Street NE
Washington, DC 20002
202.546.7010
www.lawg.org
sábado 24 de mayo de 2008
Memorial Day Poem, 26 May 2008, Corozal American Cemetery 9:00 a.m.
Memorial Day Poem dedicated to those US active military, veterans and families of those in uniform who are trying everything possible to stop Iraq/Afghanistan and all corporate wars:
Memorial Day
26 May 2008
Corozal American Cemetery, Panama
…to honor active military and vets trying to stop Iraq/Afghanistan
and all corporate Wars.
SIT-REP
A PUB. of IRAQ VETERANS AGAINST the WAR http://ivaw.org/
http://thepowerhour.com/
http://www.gulfwarvets.com/
http://www.westpointgradsagainstthewar.org/
http://www.mfso.org/
http://www.veteransforpeace.org/
The death toll Iraq/Afghanistan that most people are oblivious to, that 4,000+ number, has doubled in the last two and a half years, right? WRONG! Dead wrong. There are some details that disqualify soldiers from the military body count. For example, most people who sustain grave
physical wounds, but die outside of Iraq, are not counted, but I think it’s also damage control on the part of the corporate military. Suicides, caused by post-traumatic stress disorder, are also excluded.
One of the soldiers in my battalion, 3/82 Field Artillery, died of 3rd degree burns over 100% of her body, as well as her lungs and mouth....A month shy of her 20th birth day, she was taken off of life support. Her epidermis was entirely gone and her body could not resist bacterial infection…
I noticed a poster board with the names of the fallen
for OIF 2006-2008. SPC Marisol Heredia: Missing!!!
IG notified. Marisol included on OIF 06-08 board. Txs,
SPC Marisol Heredia, 19 y.o. 3/82 Field Artillery, Iraq
R.I.P (1987-7 September 2007)
Remembered by Bryan Hannah, active duty
What accountability for other casualties of war? The amputees, paraplegics, quadriplegics, people with brain damage and hearing loss, personalities that are permanently changed for the worse, marriages ruined (divorces among officers have risen 300% and enlisted people have a 200% higher divorce rate than before 2003), and children who are messed up by separation from their parents. Is this war worth it? I mean, to the average person.
I know it's worth trillion$$ to Dick Cheney…
Our rights to liberty and justice for all are muscles which should never be allowed to atrophy. Don't be trodden upon by the military industrial machine.
Before I go too far off the deep end, I leave you with this. “War is hell.” http://www.hoodgi.blogspot.com/
++++++++Personal note: jfp leaflet composed in Panama,
from IVAW ISSUE # 5: web info. My Poem:
For your and my family, for our communities and a peaceful future for humanity; I stood up to the EVIL corporate usurpers of Old Glory; usurpers of our Revolutionary Declaration of Independence; usurpers of our Constitutional Liberties and Justice under the Bill of Rights; usurpers of our State and Federal, legislative, judicial, executive powers; usurpers of all our ruling institutions; usurpers of our Treasury, privitizers of our monetary-credit-currency system; usurpers and privitizers of our military might.
For decades I had to live and bear the consequences of standing up to corporate enslavement at home and abroad.
Today, when “the EVIL corporate USA” bares its FEMA camps; black ski masked, terrorizing militarized police; arbitrary check points; mass arrests; taser tortures; executions; disappearances: I am old, broken and hurting.
Now, I can use some help!!!
Buddy, “amigo,” friend, “vecino,” where are you?
You’re gone, nowhere to be found!
+++++++++ Basta Ya! USA…the 4th Reich
The Warriors Writers Project provides veterans writing and artistic tools workshops, for healing and community building by unburying experiences and connecting with others at our human level. Veterans express themselves in poems, writings, performances and exhibits that strengthen their voices, sense of ownership over their lives, their futures and our human future. Re-Making Sense $20 Buy: http://ivaw.org/ Contribute your expressions: warriorwriters@ivaw.org or editor@ivaw.org or editor@thepanamanews.com
SPC Marisol Heredia
RIP (1987-7 Sept 2007 Iraq)
3/82 Field Artillery
For your and my family,
for our communities and
a peaceful future for humanity;
I stood up to the EVIL corporate usurpers of Old Glory;
usurpers of our Revolutionary Declaration of Independence;
usurpers of our Constitutional Liberties and Justice under the Bill of Rights;
usurpers of our State and Federal governing powers, legislative, judicial and executive ;
usurpers of all our administrative and ruling institutions;
usurpers of our Treasury, privitizers of our monetary-credit system,privitizers of our currency;
usurpers and privitizers of our military might.
For decades I had to live and bear the consequences
of standing up to corporate enslavement at home and abroad.
Today, when “the corporate USA” bares its FEMA camps, black ski-masked terrorizing police, arbitrary check points, mass arrests, taser tortures, executions, disappearances:
I am old, broken and hurting.
Now, I can use some help!!!
Buddy, “amigo,” friend, “vecino,” where are you?
You’re gone, nowhere to be found!
+++++++++ Basta Ya! USA…the 4th Reich is here...15:07 25 May 2008
Memorial Day
26 May 2008
Corozal American Cemetery, Panama
…to honor active military and vets trying to stop Iraq/Afghanistan
and all corporate Wars.
SIT-REP
A PUB. of IRAQ VETERANS AGAINST the WAR http://ivaw.org/
http://thepowerhour.com/
http://www.gulfwarvets.com/
http://www.westpointgradsagainstthewar.org/
http://www.mfso.org/
http://www.veteransforpeace.org/
The death toll Iraq/Afghanistan that most people are oblivious to, that 4,000+ number, has doubled in the last two and a half years, right? WRONG! Dead wrong. There are some details that disqualify soldiers from the military body count. For example, most people who sustain grave
physical wounds, but die outside of Iraq, are not counted, but I think it’s also damage control on the part of the corporate military. Suicides, caused by post-traumatic stress disorder, are also excluded.
One of the soldiers in my battalion, 3/82 Field Artillery, died of 3rd degree burns over 100% of her body, as well as her lungs and mouth....A month shy of her 20th birth day, she was taken off of life support. Her epidermis was entirely gone and her body could not resist bacterial infection…
I noticed a poster board with the names of the fallen
for OIF 2006-2008. SPC Marisol Heredia: Missing!!!
IG notified. Marisol included on OIF 06-08 board. Txs,
SPC Marisol Heredia, 19 y.o. 3/82 Field Artillery, Iraq
R.I.P (1987-7 September 2007)
Remembered by Bryan Hannah, active duty
What accountability for other casualties of war? The amputees, paraplegics, quadriplegics, people with brain damage and hearing loss, personalities that are permanently changed for the worse, marriages ruined (divorces among officers have risen 300% and enlisted people have a 200% higher divorce rate than before 2003), and children who are messed up by separation from their parents. Is this war worth it? I mean, to the average person.
I know it's worth trillion$$ to Dick Cheney…
Our rights to liberty and justice for all are muscles which should never be allowed to atrophy. Don't be trodden upon by the military industrial machine.
Before I go too far off the deep end, I leave you with this. “War is hell.” http://www.hoodgi.blogspot.com/
++++++++Personal note: jfp leaflet composed in Panama,
from IVAW ISSUE # 5: web info. My Poem:
For your and my family, for our communities and a peaceful future for humanity; I stood up to the EVIL corporate usurpers of Old Glory; usurpers of our Revolutionary Declaration of Independence; usurpers of our Constitutional Liberties and Justice under the Bill of Rights; usurpers of our State and Federal, legislative, judicial, executive powers; usurpers of all our ruling institutions; usurpers of our Treasury, privitizers of our monetary-credit-currency system; usurpers and privitizers of our military might.
For decades I had to live and bear the consequences of standing up to corporate enslavement at home and abroad.
Today, when “the EVIL corporate USA” bares its FEMA camps; black ski masked, terrorizing militarized police; arbitrary check points; mass arrests; taser tortures; executions; disappearances: I am old, broken and hurting.
Now, I can use some help!!!
Buddy, “amigo,” friend, “vecino,” where are you?
You’re gone, nowhere to be found!
+++++++++ Basta Ya! USA…the 4th Reich
The Warriors Writers Project provides veterans writing and artistic tools workshops, for healing and community building by unburying experiences and connecting with others at our human level. Veterans express themselves in poems, writings, performances and exhibits that strengthen their voices, sense of ownership over their lives, their futures and our human future. Re-Making Sense $20 Buy: http://ivaw.org/ Contribute your expressions: warriorwriters@ivaw.org or editor@ivaw.org or editor@thepanamanews.com
SPC Marisol Heredia
RIP (1987-7 Sept 2007 Iraq)
3/82 Field Artillery
Remembered by: Bryan Hannah, active duty
Take USA back from corporate control
For your and my family,
for our communities and
a peaceful future for humanity;
I stood up to the EVIL corporate usurpers of Old Glory;
usurpers of our Revolutionary Declaration of Independence;
usurpers of our Constitutional Liberties and Justice under the Bill of Rights;
usurpers of our State and Federal governing powers, legislative, judicial and executive ;
usurpers of all our administrative and ruling institutions;
usurpers of our Treasury, privitizers of our monetary-credit system,
usurpers and privitizers of our military might.
For decades I had to live and bear the consequences
of standing up to corporate enslavement at home and abroad.
Today, when “the corporate USA” bares its FEMA camps, black ski-masked terrorizing police, arbitrary check points, mass arrests, taser tortures, executions, disappearances:
I am old, broken and hurting.
Now, I can use some help!!!
Buddy, “amigo,” friend, “vecino,” where are you?
You’re gone, nowhere to be found!
+++++++++ Basta Ya! USA…the 4th Reich is here...15:07 25 May 2008
jueves 22 de mayo de 2008
South Africa: la luta continua...
Umsebenzi Online, Volume 7, No. 8, 21 May 2008
Please forward Umsebenzi Online to your comrades and friends
Umsebenzi Online is a free, twice-monthly e-mail publication from the South African Communist party.
SACP <http://www.sacp.org.za/In
Back to Basics:
Rebuild organisation, defeat patronage and corruption, to defeat the scourge of xenophobia
Blade Nzimande, General Secretary
The current wave of xenophobic attacks must be strongly condemned by all South Africans. So has the SACP expressed its strongest condemnation of these attacks. Not only are these attacks barbaric and inhumane, but this is a hugely embarrassing spectacle for South Africans, both domestically and internationally.
This is especially so for those of us who have been such a huge beneficiary of international solidarity. Perhaps that is one of the aims of the clearly planned barbaric attacks on our African working class and poor brothers and sisters, to undermine the international prestige of South Africa and its peoples.
It is not enough merely to express our strongest possible condemnations; we need to take strong and visible action both in the short and medium term. One of the immediate short-term measures must be strong law enforcement as well as preventative legal measures in order to urgently contain the situation.
However, safety and security measures on their own are not adequate.
Our organisations, especially alliance and progressive community formations, need to urgently engage communities in affected areas and beyond in order to isolate and deal with those behind these barbaric actions. Indeed, the SACP has instructed its provincial structures to do just that. Our senior leadership will join forces with provincial structures to ensure this engagement is effective.
We should treat these developments as a wakeup call for all our formations, including the state security structures.
These developments call for very serious self-reflection, criticism and self-criticism. How does it happen that none of our political or community structures knew about such serious plans to attack "foreigners"? How come the state intelligence structures were also caught unaware? Not only that, even after the eruptions in Alexandra, and the prior events in Tshwane and parts of the Western Cape, why were we not able to prevent these xenophobic acts, and then stop them spreading to Ekurhuleni and other parts of Johannesburg?
To answer these questions, we have to look at some of the underlying causes for xenophobia and its current violent expressions.
Intra-poor struggles:
The failures of structural adjustment programmes and predatory capitalism
As we have argued in previous editions, the Economic Structural Adjustment Programmes (ESAPs) imposed on virtually the whole of the Southern African region by the IMF since the 1980s, have been an unmitigated failure. Not only did they fail in their promise to improve the lives of the people of our country, but in many instances they even rolled back some of the positive gains that a lot of our countries had made since independence (including gains around access to food and basic services, education and health).
Since 1994, many of the displaced workers and peasants of our region, as well as professionals, have been migrating (legally and illegally) to a democratic South Africa, mostly as economic refugees seeking better opportunities for sustainable livelihoods.
Despite the many modest gains that our own democracy has made since the 1994 democratic breakthrough, our own self-imposed structural adjustment programme, GEAR, failed to make a dent in unemployment (unemployment actually increased dramatically between 1996 and 2006), and eroded the capacity to build a developmental state. It instead became welfarist, with now more than 12 million people relying on social grants of some sort.
The political and economic meltdown in Zimbabwe has put more pressure on South Africa to absorb even more economic refugees from that country, as well as from many other countries.
The net effect of the above developments has been that it has been the poor of South Africa who have had to absorb the poor from our region.
This has happened in two ways. Firstly, it is the poor communities in the informal settlements that have had to share their space and minimal resources with the poor from our region. The bourgeoisie and the middle classes have been shielded from the responsibility of carrying the burden of the failure of the ESAPs in our region and the crisis particularly in Zimbabwe, and they are literally shielded behind their high walls in the leafy suburbs. Elites from other countries in our region are also not bearing the brunt of this economic (and political) meltdown.
Secondly, there has been a rapid regionalisation of South Africa`s labour force, especially over the last 8 to 10 years, with an increasing transformation of the division of labour in some of the key sectors of our economy. South Africa's capitalist class has fully exploited the vulnerability of workers from the rest of our SADC region, more often at the direct expense of South African workers, by paying them slave wages and subjecting them to working conditions that are at variance with South Africa's labour market regime.
These realities have also not been helped - in fact, they may have been worsened - by the predatory rather than development role of South African private capital in our region. Many South African companies investing in the rest of the continent have fully exploited weak labour market regimes in the region to maximise their profits and are contributing very little to the broader developmental agenda in the region.
It is therefore not the poor from our Southern African region who are stealing the jobs and sustainable livelihoods of South Africa's workers and the poor, but the predatory practices of the capitalist class, both in South Africa and in the African continent.
The lesson from this is that any notion of an "African renaissance" not accompanied by radical economic policies to change the conditions of the workers and the poor, including challenging the predatory practices of capitalism in the continent, is nothing else but the new and modern opium for the people - a "feel-good" attitude, with no accompanying transformatory measures!
The political economy of our local state
The current violence is also a reflection of the contradictory reality of advances and setbacks in our own local government system. Since the 1994 democratic breakthrough, our government has indeed provided many crucial local services and transformed the undemocratic nature of local government that we inherited from apartheid.
However, these advances have been mediated, and threatened, by the simultaneous new patronage and corrupt practices that have not only engulfed local government, but also the national and provincial government levels.
Whilst most of our councillors are doing great work in their service to our communities, a significant section of our ANC councillors have become so corrupt that their behaviour seriously threatens to undo the many gains we have made since our 1994 democratic breakthrough. For instance, why are housing allocations done by councillors instead of being collectively approved by our municipal councils and management?
How come in some areas, councillors directly select people to be employed in municipal infrastructural projects? In many of our areas, such councillors are not accounting to the ward committees and municipal councils, and are thus not representing the interests of our people. They have become nothing more than "indunas" in their wards, with many of the ward committees being nothing but "induna-controlled committees". We have to confront the fact that many such practices take place in ANC-controlled wards. Some of our own councillors illegally take bribes and allocate `RDP houses` to undeserving people who are both South African and non-South African citizens! These corrupt practices create fertile ground for intra-community conflict and xenophobia, exploited by reactionary and anti-ANC local elites bent on achieving their own narrow political goals.
Our main criticism of the ANC prior to the ANC`s 52nd Polokwane Conference has been that it has been captured by what we have called the "1996 Class Project", which is an alliance between sections of domestic and global capital, emergent black sections of the (petty) bourgeoisie, mediated by sections of our own cadres occupying key positions within the state. One of the critical outcomes of this has been the demobilisation of the ANC branches and the "colonisation" of the ANC by state structures. This has turned the ANC into nothing more than an electoral party, divorced from the day-to-day struggles of the overwhelming majority of its members and various constituencies.
The current violence against "foreigners" is one particular expression of the weakening and "near-decay" of the structures of the ANC on the ground, and their inability to lead progressive community struggles and failure to detect reactionary plans against our African brothers and sisters.
These events do not only expose an ANC that is incapable of mobilising communities outside of election campaigns, but also a seriously weak SACP. The weakness of the SACP on the ground is a reflection of the combined effect of the extent to which the 1996 class project marginalised SACP and alliance structures in general and the extent to which a number of our SACP structures were actually co-opted by, and actively collaborated with, the 1996 class project dominant within the ANC and the state. This happened in a number of areas in the country.
All these features of the politics and economics of South Africa's locality have contributed significantly towards the weakening of our organisational structures.
Counter-revolution
It is clear that given the pattern, planning and timing of these violent attacks, there is a counter-revolutionary agenda, with an eye towards discrediting the ANC and influencing next year's national elections. This is a well-orchestrated campaign, exploiting the very real frustrations of the poor in our country.
It is indeed possible that these counter-revolutionary forces are exploiting what they see as "divisions" within the ANC and the relative uncertainty of this transitional period between the ANC's Polokwane Conference and the 2009 elections. It might also be a test of the strength, resilience and capacity of both the ANC and the state to withstand such pressure.
A fundamental question that we have to answer is to what extent we have succeeded in demobilising the counter-revolutionary forces of the 1980s into the early 1990s, and in changing the social conditions of our people that were exploited by these forces at the time? The current wave of violence has all the hallmarks of the violence of the early 1990s, particularly in Gauteng.
Like in the early 1990s, hostels seem to be the main platform from which the current violence is being planned and unleashed.
The urgency of dealing with this situation should also be informed by the fact that there is a real danger that this violence can quickly be transformed into ethnic violence amongst South Africans themselves.
It may therefore be appropriate to consider this violence not just as xenophobia, but as a counter-revolutionary offensive aimed at our movement and at undermining all we have achieved through our democracy.
What is to be done?
Immediate action is required by the security forces to clamp down hard on the violence, with a particular focus on arresting and punishing the perpetrators. It is also of utmost importance for our communities to co-operate with the police in apprehending the perpetrators.
Of particular importance is that out of this tragedy there is perhaps an opportunity to frankly and honestly assess the state of our organisations, identifying some of the decay that was beginning to creep in, and begin a serious process of rebuilding our branch structures throughout the country.
In rebuilding our organisations, it is important also to pose the question of what kind of community structures and organisations we want to foster in our communities. For instance, is the task to rebuild SANCO or to build strong street committees as the new revolutionary nucleus for community organisation, or both?
Whichever way we answer this question, it is important to focus on the building of street committees as a new opportunity to organise and mobilise our communities to fight crime and for these also to be the new revolutionary nuclei around which to pursue our developmental agenda in the locality.
It is also important that organisation of casual and other vulnerable workers is intensified. This must include a deliberate strategy to ensure that all workers from the region are organised into unions.
This will lay a stronger basis for fighting against those employers exploiting the vulnerability of those workers from the rest of our region, and will help to build working class solidarity in the workplace and beyond.
Asikhulume!!
lunes 19 de mayo de 2008
Flouride Damage, first lawsuits against A US A-Bomb Program
The Deepwater Documents:Lawsuit Against the US Bomb Program Over Fluoride Poisoning
In their award winning article, "Fluoride, Teeth, and the Atomic Bomb" journalists Chris Bryson and Joel Griffiths discussed how "the first lawsuits against the U.S. A-bomb program were not over radiation, but over fluoride damage." The lawsuits were filed by a group of farmers in southern New Jersey, whose peach orchards were destroyed, and whose animals were made sick, by heavy fluoride emissions from a nearby DuPont factory. The DuPont factory, located in Deepwater New Jersey, was doing contract work for the US Government, and was producing a vast amount of fluoride to keep up with the Government's increasing demand.
According to Bryson and Griffiths (1997):
"at the height of World War II ... a severe pollution incident occurred downwind of the E.I. du Pont du Nemours Company chemical factory in Deepwater, New Jersey. The factory was then producing millions of pounds of fluoride for the Manhattan project, the ultra-secret U.S. military program racing to produce the world's first atomic bomb.The farms downwind in Gloucester and Salem counties were famous for their high-quality produce -- their peaches went directly to the Waldorf Astoria Hotel in New York. Their tomatoes were bought up by Campbell's Soup. But in the summer of 1943, the farmers began to report that their crops were blighted, and that "something is burning up the peach crops around here." Poultry died after an all-night thunderstorm, they reported. Farm workers who ate the produce they had picked sometimes vomited all night and into the next day. "I remember our horses looked sick and were too stiff to work," these reporters were told by Mildred Giordano, who was a teenager at the time. Some cows were so crippled they could not stand up, and grazed by crawling on their bellies."
The Fluoride Action Network has reproduced below the declassified government documents concerning the Deepwater lawsuits cited by Bryson and Griffiths. Photocopies of the originals can be obtained from Ellen Connett, Editor, Waste Not, wastenot@northnet.org.
In this letter, the Director of the Manhattan Project, General Leslie Groves, explains the importance to the government of the Deepwater lawsuit. The letter is to Brian McMahon, the Chairman at the time of the Senate Special Committee on Atomic Energy. In the letter, Groves informs McMahon that the Department of Justice is "cooperating in the defense of these suits" and that the Department of Agriculture, the Chemical Warfare Service and a section of the Manhattan Project, was engaged in "extensive investigation to determine the cause or causes" of the peach orchard poisoning.
WAR DEPARTMENTP.O. BOX 2610WASHINGTON, D.C.
February 18, 1946
Senator Brian McMahon, ChairmanSpecial Committee on Atomic EnergyUnited States SenateWashington, D.C.
Dear Senator McMahon
I have your letter of 14 February 196 with inclosures received from Mr. Willard B. Kille of swedesboro, New Jersey. The matter discussed in Mr. Kille's letter and in the attached papers has been under investigation by this office for several months as a result of twelve suits filed against du Pont Company by owners of peach orchards in South Jersey. The plaintiffs allege that poisonous gases from the du Pont and other plants in the area caused almost total destruction of their 1944 peach crop and permanent injury to their peach trees. The damage sought aggregate approximately $400,000. The Government is interested in the outcome of the suits mentioned above since a nearby plant of the du Pont Company is engaged in manufacturing certain basic materials for use in the Manhattan Project. If the plaintiffs succeed in establishing that all or part of the damage alleged was caused by the du Pont plants operating for the Manhattan Project, the Government would be required under its contract to reimburse that company for the amount of such recovery properly attributable to such operations. The firm of Samuel P. Sadtler, consulting chemists of Philadelphia, whose report was inclosed with Mr. Kille's letter, has been retained by the plaintiffs and will presumably submit expert testimony during the trial on their behalf. The Department of Justice is cooperating in the defense of these suits. The Department of Agriculture, the Bureau of Standards, the Chemical Warfare Service and a group under Colonel Stafford Warren of this organization have been engaged in extensive investigations and experiments to determine the cause or causes behind the damage complained of. This work is not yet completed but it is hoped that the reports on these studies will be available in the very near future. I do not believe it would be of any value to your committee to have Mr. Kille appear before it. I was represented at the meeting mentioned by Mr. Kille which was held on February 1, 1946 at Woodbury, New Jersey. I am keeping in close personal touch with the matter from day to day in order that I may be personally certain that while the Government's interests are protected no advantage is taken of any injured farmer.
If there is any additional information which you may desire and which is available to me I shall, of course, be very glad to furnish it. The inclosure with your letter are returned herewith.
Sincerely yours,
L.R. GROVESMajor General, USA.
4 Incls.:1--Ltr dtd 2/6/46 toSen McMahon fr W.B. Kille2--Statement of W.B. Kille (cpy)3--Report of Fluorine byS.P. Sadtler & Son, Inc. (cpy)4--Ltr dtd 1/11/46 to CongWolverton fr W.B. Kille (cpy)
This memorandum from Colonel Cooper B. Rhodes, concerns a meeting of representatives from DuPont, the Department of Agriculture, the Manhattan Project, and the Chemical Warfare Service -- all of which were trying to obtain evidence which would be useful in protecting the interests of the Government.
2 May 1946
MEMORANDUM FOR THE FILES.
Subject: Peach Crop Cases (Kille et al vs. du Pont).
1. On 1 May 1946 the undersigned attended a meeting held in Penns Grove, New Jersey. In attendance at that meeting were representatives of several of the agencies which are making scientific investigations to obtain evidence which may be used to protect the interests of the Government at the trial of the suits brought by owners of peach orchards in Salem County, New Jersey. The purpose of this meeting was to permit those agencies to coordinate their activities and keep each other informed of their progress. The following individuals attended the meeting: Dr. M.A. McCall, Department of Agriculture Dr. B.B. Bayle, Department of Agriculture Mr. S.W. Griffin, Department of Agriculture Mr. W.D. Robinson, Department of Agriculture Major R. I. Fox, Chemical Warfare Service Mr. George B. Wilson, Chemical Warfare Service Lt. Roy E. Ballard, Chemical Warfare Service Dr. Harold C. Hodge, University of Rochester Mr. Marion Voss, University of Rochester Mr. Frank Smith, University of Rochester Dr. R.A. Dunphy, Kinetic Chemical Inc. (du Pont) Dr. R.J. Ackart, Medical Department, Chambers Works, du Pont Mr. J. Wilson [illegible], Kinetic Chemical, Inc Captain George L. Ryan, Area Engineer, Wilmington Area, MED Lt. Colonel C. H. Rhodes, Manhattan District
2. The meeting was held in the YMCA building at Penns Grove and began at 10:30 a.m. The discussion lasted for approximately three hours, and indicated that the investigation are proceeding satisfactorily, with one exception which is noted below. In the afternoon, visits were made to several of the testing stations being operated by the Chemical Warfare Service for the purpose of obtaining and analyzing air samples at various points in the affected area.
3. It was reported that considerable difficulty is being experienced in finding satisfactory procedure for making the atmospheric analyses. It has been found that the methods heretofore employed are not as accurate as is considered desirable. Further research in this field will be made by the Chemical Warfare Service in an effort to develop better procedures, provided that agency is successful in obtaining the services of an individual qualified to do the research.
4. Because of complaints to the effect that animals and humans have been injured by HF fumes in that area, although there are no pending suits involving such claims, the University of Rochester is conducting experiments to determine the toxic effect of fluorine and to develop accurate methods of analyzing blood to determine its fluorine content. This work is proceeding satisfactorily.
5. Dr. McCall reported that the Department of Agriculture will not be able to submit a report from definite conclusions can be drawn until the end of the coming summer when it will be complete and will continue to be collected during the season. Dr. McCall stated that he is still convinced that the evidence which will finally be collected will point to the fact that [illegible] fumes that may have emanated from the Chambers Works at Deepwater Point contributed only slightly, if at all, to the damage alleged to have been done to the peach orchards. He suggested, as a desirable field for additional research, that precipitation in that area be analyzed.
6. Scientists of the du Pont company are conducting experiments which generally parallel those being conducted by the Department of Agriculture.
7. It is believed that a similar meeting will be held about a month or six weeks hence.
Signed
Cooper B. RhodesLt. Colonel, Infantry
cc. General GrovesGeneral Nichols
In this letter, Lt. Colonel Cooper B. Rhodes, discusses a meeting held in Washington D.C. with Dr.W.H. White, who was the Chief of the Food Division at the FDA. The FDA at the time was planning on banning the sale of produce from the Deepwater area, because of the excessively high levels of fluoride found in the local fruit and vegetables.
At this meeting, a DuPont lawyer, Mr. Geuther, and a Captain from the Manhattan Project, Captain Davies, lobbied the FDA Chief not to enact the ban on the contaminated produce. DuPont lawyer, Mr. Geuther, stressed that the contrabanding of produce "would create a bad public relations situation" while Captain Davies "impressed upon Dr. White the substantial interest which the Government had in claims which might arise as a result of action which might be taken by the Food and Drug Administration."
The FDA never did take action to ban the sale of produce from the area.
File
13 February 1946
Lt. Col. Cooper B. Rhodes
Kille et al (12 separate cases) vs. E. I. du Pontde Nemours & Co., Inc. et al (Peach Crop Cases)
1. On 12 February 1946 Lt. Col. Cooper R. Rhodes and Captain John L. Davies, Jr. attended a conference in Washington, D.C., at the office of Dr. W.H. White, Chief of the Food Division of the Food and Drug Administration. This conference was requested by Mr. C.E. Geuther of E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., Inc. and was arranged by Captain Davies through Dr. M.A. McCall of the Department of Agriculture. A list of those who attended the conference is attached hereto.
2. At the opening of the conference Mr. Geuther stated the position of E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., Inc. with respect to threatened action by the Food and Drug Administration. He stated that in view of the pending suits filed by owners of peach orchards, any action by the Food and Drug Administration condemning or contrabanding vegetable produce grown in that part of New Jersey would have a serious effect on the du Pont Company and would create a bad public relations situation for that company. He stated that although the du Pont Company did not admit that the fluorine content of vegetables grown in that area was in any way attributable to activities or operations of the du Pont Company, that company was taking steps to eliminate entirely the present small amount of HF which is now being discharged into the atmosphere by the Chambers Works. Mr. Geuther offered to the Food and Drug Administration the services of du Pont Company scientists and offered to make available the results of investigations and experiments made by those scientists, and stated that it was the desire of the du Pont Company to cooperate with the Food and Drug Administration in an effort to ascertain the true facts with respect to the presence of fluorine in the vegetables produced in that area and the cause therefor.
3. Dr. White explained the position of the Food and Drug Administration. He stated that that agency was not primarily interested in ascertaining the cause or source of the fluoride found in the vegetables and that its investigation could go no further than the determination of the presence and amount of fluorine in the vegetables which might be shipped in interstate commerce. The job of his office, he stated, is to prevent the shipment of fruits and vegetables having excessive fluorine content.
4. Dr. C.O. Henke, of E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., Inc. and Dr. P.W. Zimmerman, of Boyce-Thompson Institute, reviewed the investigation and surveys which had been conducted, and those which are now in progress, by and for the du Pont company.
5. There followed a lengthy discussion among the scientists present concerning the toxic effects of fluorine in its various forms and methods of determining the presence and amount of fluorine in the atmosphere and in vegetable matter. There was also some discussion as to the amount of fluoride which could be allowed in fruits and vegetables without likelihood of injury to customers. No definite statement was made by officials of the Pure Food and Drug Administration as to the limit of tolerance which would be set by that agency for the fluorine content of produce from the area under consideration.
6. After the meeting adjourned Captain Davies informed Dr. White of the position of the Manhattan Engineer District with respect to this problem and stated that it is the desire of this office to cooperate with the Food and Drug Administration in determining the true facts and arriving at a proper decision. He impressed upon Dr. White the substantial interest which the Government had in claims which might arise as a result of action which might be taken by the Food and Drug Administration. During this conversation Dr. White disclosed the fact that the investigation made by the Food and Drug Administration was instituted as a result of information supplied by Mr. S.P. Sadtler, Jr. Cooper B. Rhodes
Incl.:List, 12 Feb 46
cc: Major General L.R. Groves, w/cy incl.Brig. General K.D. Nichols, w/cy incl.Colonel E.E. Kirkpatrick, w/cy incl.Area Engineer, Wilmington Area, w/cy incl.District Office Legal Section (Attn. Mr. E. Diamond), w/cy incl.
The following is the list of people who attended the above mentioned meeting with the FDA Food Division Chief, Dr. W.H. White.
CONFERENCE ON FLUORIDE RESIDUES
February 12, 1946
Carl Voegtlin, University of Rochester
Captain Fred A. Bryan, Manhattan Engineer District
Dr. H.E. Stokinger, Manhattan, Rochester Area
O.G. Fitsburgh (sp?), Pharmacology Division, Food & Drug Administration
Harold C. Hodge, University of Rochester School Med. & Dent.
B.J. Voss, Pharmacology Division, Food & Drug Administration
E.P. Lang, Pharmacology Division, Food & Drug Administration
P.W. Zimmerman, Consultant DuPont, BTL
R.A. Dunphy, DuPont Company
C.O. Henke, DuPont Company
Hugh K. Clark, DuPont Company
L.M. Beacham, Food Division, Food & Drug Administration
G. Woodward, Pharmacology Division, Food & Drug Administration
J.M. Coon, Pharmacology Division, Food & Drug Administration
Carl E. Genther, DuPont Company
W.B. White, Chief Food Division, Food and Drug Administration
Captain B.J. Mears, Med. Corps, Manhattan District
M.A. McCall, Plant Industry, Soils & Agr. Engineering, Dept. Agr.
S.W. Griffin, Plant Industry, Soils & Agr. Engineering, Dept. Agr.
H.J. Wichmann, Food Division, Food &Drug Administration
Lt. Col. Cooper B. Rhodes, Manhattan Engineer District
Captain J.L. Davies, Manhattan Engineer District
The following letter provides notes on the above-mentioned meeting with the FDA.
The University of RochesterSchool of Medicine and DentistryStrong Memorial HospitalRochester, New York
March 1, 1946
Colonel Stafford L. WarrenU.S. Engineer OfficeManhattan District exP.O. Box EOak Ridge, Tennessee
Dear Colonel Warren:
The following are noted from a memorandum from Dr. Herbert E. Stokinger concerning the meeting held in Dr. White's Office, Department of Agriculture Building, Division of Pure Food and Drugs, on 12 February 1946 at 1:00 P.M.
"Twenty-one persons were present including representatives of duPont's legal and chemical staffs, a representative of the Boyce Thompson Institute for plant research, a representative of the Departments of Pharmacology and Analytical Chemistry of the Pure Food and Drug Administration, and a number of representatives from the Manhattan District.
Mr. Geuther, a legal representative of dupont, stated the problem briefly. Certain samples of produce from soils in certain sections of New Jersey surrounding duPont's plant have been found to possess sufficiently high fluoride content to incur an embargo on future produced from the area, presumably next summer's crop. The purpose of the meeting, he stated, was to present facts relating to this possible soil contamination.
Suits have been filed against his company charging destruction of last year's (1944) peach crop as well as that of the fruit-bearing trees. Tests made over peach orchards of the air, conducted at periodic intervals through all sorts of weather conditions have revealed mere traces of the fluoride in the atmosphere in an area in the Pennsylvania hills. The factory has taken steps to control as completely as possible all hydrogen fluoride effluents. The maximum possible loss from the flues into the air is calculated to be no larger than 280 lbs. Per day, at a capacity of the plant out-put. DuPont dislikes the possible psychologic reaction to this situation and is anxious to take all possible steps to determine the source of the trouble. Mr. Geuther raised the question that the product limits of fluorine were too low.
Another duPont representative, Dr. Henckey, expanded on remarks made by Mr. Geuther. Production of hydrogen fluoride is a fifteen-year old process, but amounts have increased, perhaps doubled, in 1944 and 1945 over that in 1942 and 1943. On the other hand the plant claims better methods of handling. In addition, none of the personnel has suffered noticeable effects during the fifteen years, even with poorer methods of handling, in the past. Accordingly, the complaints of peach crop damage are surprising.
Question - Dr. White - 'How high are the hydrogen fluoride stacks?'Answer - 'Approximately 70 feet wooden stacks are used'.
Dr. Perone, New Jersey State Agriculture, said the orchards were approximately six miles from the plant separated by many small towns. The method of Willard and Winter was used for analysis of fluorine.
Boyce Thompson representative had carried out tests of absorption of fluoride compounds by water plants grown in fluoride-containing soil and concluded that plants could take up enough fluoride to damage leaves either by removing it from the soil or from the air. Also plants were able to expire fluorine into the air. He has shown that fluorine may be stored in leaves of certain plants, possibly selectively to the extent of 1000 ppm. Whether fluorine is essential to plants is unknown.
Dr. White - 'Analyses of food have been made countrywide. Extremely small amounts were found. Surprising that so much was found in the produce in this area.' Normally, tomatoes that have been analyzed - 0.6 to 0.9 ppm. Although complex, Dr. White pointed out that tea that possesses a high fluoride content is largely elutable. The Pure Food and Drug Administration intends to watch the tomato for child consumption. It is a rare exception to find fluoride in amounts greater than 2 ppm. These values have been found on produce taken from a Philadelphia area (near DuPont). Samples were taken from the open market. For example, unsprayed cabbage contained 0.5 ppm.
Capt. Davies - 'Analyses of region for fluoride checked those of DuPont, 0.003 - 0.004 ppm irrespective of wind direction.'
Pure Food and Drug representative questioned whether considerable amounts of fluoride may be un-ionized and thereby go undetected by the procedure of analysis used.
Answer - 'Freon can be breathed freely as well as others and is relatively non-toxic.'
Question - 'Will plants absorb freon and will it appear as fluoride?'Answer - 'Unknown.'
Dr. White - suggests considerable may happen to such organically free fluoride to change the nature to make fluoride absorbable by plants, for example, the effects of weathering, ultra-violet light, etc. Recent analyses of crops, he divulged, growing in the area under question showed the following: celery - 17 ppm; spinach - 7 ppm.
Question - by Dr. Bryan - soil content of fluoride.Answer - by Dr. McCall - 'Soil content differs according to the type, sandy soil low, clay soil higher. Decreased in amount with depth, for example, 107, 58, 38 ppm. 2 1/2 miles northeast of plant fluoride was 85 ppm. No values found in this region were excessive. The addition of fertilizers, superphosphates containing fluoride, only increased the fluoride content of soil from about 45 to 55 ppm.
DuPont representative - DuPont going to analyze plants and produce in the region for fluoride.
Question - 'Are present standards to be used for confiscating foods?'Answer - 'No. Chief factors are toxic potentialities of fluoride-containing foods.'
Pure Food and Drug pharmacologist said 3-4 ppm of fluoride in food is potentially harmful producing fluorosis. This factor is sufficient for condemnation of food irrespective of other signs of toxicity. The amount of daily serving of food, however, is a factor. For example, tomato juice with 30 ppm fluoride consumed daily by children is sufficient to give mottled enamel.
(Reference to fluoride survey of foods AOAC 28, 27)
Question - Dr. Hodge - 'Is cryolite used as a spray?'Answer - 'Perhaps used on apples but not now used extensively. Pyrethrum and rotenone used chiefly.' (DuPont representative)
Question - Dr. Hodge - 'Which plants and vegetables are analyzed?'Answer - 'Celery northwest of Philadelphia, tomato leaves, peach leaves.'
Question - Dr. Stokinger - 'How large a sample of air was used for the measurement of fluoride-content?'Answer - '35 cu.ft. (1 cu. meter)'.
Question - Dr. Hodge - 'Was no difficulty experienced in absolving the sample of air completely of fluorine?'.Answer - DuPont Representative - 'Some difficulty was experienced but sufficiently good recoveries were retained by the addition of sodium bicarbonate.'
It was calculated by Stokinger, assuming the correctness of the value 289 lbs hydrogen fluoride loss per day, in 3 years time, only 20 micrograms would be absorbed in one cubic foot of a 35-square-mile area, a value far too low to increase in any perceptible manner the fluoride content of produce from such soil. This rough calculation assumed also complete absorbability of the soil of the hydrogen fluoride in the air.
Signed H.E. Stokinger
Sincerely yours,
Andrew H. Dowdy, M.D.DirectorManhattan Department
The following is a letter from Harold Hodge, also discussing the FDA meeting. Hodge, a Manhattan Project scientist who would become one of the key scientific figures promoting the safety of fluoridation, played an active role in this lawsuit. Hodge was soon to head up Program F, the Government's secret fluoride research program, whose self-declared purpose was "to supply evidence useful in the litigation arising from an alleged loss of a fruit crop several years ago. Since excessive blood fluoride levels were reported in human residents of the same area, our principal effort has been devoted to describing the relationship of blood fluorides to toxic effects."
The University of RochesterSchool of Medicine and DentistryStrong Memorial HospitalRochester, New York
March 1, 1946
Colonel Stafford L. WarrenU.S. Engineer OfficeManhattan District exP.O. Box EOak Ridge, Tennessee
Dear Colonel Warren:
The following Remarks are noted from a memorandum from Dr. Harold C. Hodge concerning the meeting held in the Department of Agriculture Building, Washington, D.C. Tuesday afternoon, 12 February, attended by those on the appended list.
“A discussion was opened on the problems associated with the question of fluorine contamination of the atmosphere in a certain section of New Jersey. There seemed to be four distinct (although related) problems as follows:
A question of injury of the peach crop in 1944.
A report of extraordinary fluoride content of vegetables grown in this area.
A report of abnormally high fluoride content in the blood of human individuals residing in this area.
A report raising the questions of serious poisoning of horses and cattle in this area.
Supplementary Conference in Rochester. Colonel Rhodes and Captain Davies, Dr. Voegtlin, Dr. Stokinger, Dr. Spiegel, Dr. Smith, Sgt. Murphy and I discussed preliminary experiments and tests to shed light on the purported relationship of fluorine released as H.F. to the four problems stated above. The following suggestions were made:
1. Relative to the peach crop. Is it possible to demonstrate that the F content of air was insufficient to hurt peaches? We would be interested in going over Zimmerman's data to see how much data he has.
Dr. Stokinger suggested a calculation of the total available fluorine per square foot of ground area assuming that the known fluorine output was equally distributed.
2. The question seems to be what is the source of the fluorine in the vegetables.
a. The F content of the vegetables should be checked in several ways. First, samples of vegetables might be divided so that Dr. Dunphy, Dr. Wichman and our laboratory analyzed aliquots of the same vegetable sample. Each of the three laboratories should also conduct analyses in which small amounts of fluorine, say of the order of the total F content as determined by analysis, were added to the vegetable sample and recovery analyses made.
It might be well to carry out separate collections of vegetables for analyses by the Rochester laboratory.
b. The F content of surface soils in the area should be determined.
c. The Fluorine content of ground water, cistern water, and well water should be determined also. It is possible that the state water laboratory has data. Dr. Spiegel suggested that the standard pubic health methods of water collection should be used.
3. The problem of the abnormally high human blood fluoride levels.
a. Blood should be obtained from other humans living in this area and fluoride determinations run. Dr. Smith will begin a practice of analysis of blood samples to find what the limits and percentage recoveries are.
b. If urine samples can be obtained from persons living in this area we can fix with a fair degree of certainty the total fluoride exposure of these individuals. Since we are already doing fluoride analyses, the containers and procedures for collecting samples can be employed by customary procedures.
c. Rats, and later perhaps rabbits and a dog or two, can be exposed to various levels of HF starting at 20-30 mg/m3 to find what level of HF inhaled air will produce blood levels such as those reported for humans residing in the areas.
d. The fluoride blood levels can also be obtained following administration of sodium fluoride or calcium fluoride, or other compounds, by mouth or by vein.
Signed: Harold C. Hodge"
Sincerely yours,
Andrew Dowdy, M.D.DirectorManhattan Department
cc: Area Engineer Lt. Colonel Rhodes
The following is a request from the New Jersey farmers' lawyer, William Gotshalk, to obtain information from the Government on how much fluoride the Deepwater DuPont plant was handling. Such information was essential for the success of the farmers' lawsuit - particularly since the Government was relying on the highly dubious assertion that the destruction of the crops was caused by other sources of fluoride in the area, and not DuPont. As Harold Hodge was to state in a letter to Col. Stafford Warren, "we wished not to controvert data on the F content of plants, but to show doubt as to the origin of the F on the plants."
This being the case, a comparison of the levels of fluoride being handled by the DuPont facility versus the other sources cited by the government was essential in order to enable the farmers to cut through the Government's obfuscation.
The Government, however, refused to provide them with the data - based on the excuse that national security would be threatened were they to do so.
However, as internal documents from the Atomic Energy Commission have revealed, such claims of "protecting national security" were frequently used by the Government for reasons other than national security - namely, to ward off liability and prevent embarrassing information from reaching the public.
Pulitzer Prize winning author, Eileen Welsome, in her book The Plutonium Files, discusses the Government's tactic of using claims of national security to protect itself from lawsuits and bad PR. She cites as evidence the following internal memo from the AEC:
There are a number of papers which do not violate security, but do cause considerable concern to the Atomic Energy Commission Insurance Branch and may well compromise the public prestige and best interests of the Commission. Papers referring to levels of soil and water contamination surrounding Atomic Energy Commission installations, idle speculation on the future genetic effects of radiation and papers dealing with potential process hazards to employees are definitely prejudicial to the best interests of the government. Every such release is reflected in an increase in insurance claims, increased difficulty in labor relations and adverse public sentiment. Following consultation with the Atomic Energy Commission Insurance Branch, the following declassification criteria appears desirable. If specific locations or activities of the Atomic Energy Commission and/or its contractors are closely associated with statements and information which would invite or tend to encourage claims against the Atomic Energy Commission or its contractors, such portions of articles to be published should be reworded or deleted.
Now for the letter from Mr. William Gotshalk, the lawyer representing the New Jersey famers.
William GotshalkCounselor at LawCamden, New Jersey
September5, 1945
Maj. C.A. Taney, Jr.United States Engineer OfficeP.O. Box 42 - Station [???]
Dear Major Taney:I think your letter of September 1st completely misconstrues the nature of the information that I want. In the first place, I want no information from the government. I was interested in finding out quantitatively concerning the manufacture, use and disposition of hydrogen fluoride in the East and Blue Areas at Deep Water. The operators are the DuPonts and they expressed their willingness to give me this information, but stated that the government would not let them. I submitted a questionnaire not to be answered by the government, but to be answered by DuPonts by permission of the government. You have so far refused permission to have these questions answered. I have suspected that behind this is not the security of the United States Government because I could ask the same question of an alkylating plant without knowing it was alkylating gasoline. Your reply is merely "lawyer quibbling", which has taken the place of frankness...[illegible] The questions could have been answered long before the atomic bomb facts were made public because nothing except one or two questions had to do with a description of the process and these could have been omitted for security reasons. However, I did not too strenuously press this issue until after the termination of the war and the publication of certain facts concerning the atomic bomb, which by the way, is not made at Deep Water, although some processing in this....[illegible] To forbid us the information we seek is like refusing to give out the make of the typewriters used in the office because they write out letters about the atomic bomb. I repeat that I am not interested in the atomic bomb and never was. I am interested in knowing how much hydrogen fluoride was manufactured, how much was used and how much went out of the stacks of the DuPont Company. I want to make myself perfectly clear in this letter on that score. I feel that with this letter I have gone as far with you as I can. If the answer is still "No", before I do anything else, I will at least know that I have presented the problem to you and that your answer is "No", so that I may pursue the matter otherwise. Very truly yours, /s/ W.C. Gotshalk
The following is the response from Major Taney to Gotshalk's request. Taney denies Gotshalk the request, stating that, "I am not willing to permit or to willfully assist in the disclosure of any information, the release of which would in my opinion be injurious to the military security of the United States."
ARMY SERVICES FORCESUNITED STATES ENGINEER OFFICEMANHATTAN DISTRICTP.O. BOX 42STATION P
24 September 1945Mr. William C. Gotshalk431 Market StreetCamden, New JerseyRe: Claims Alleged by Peach Growers
Dear Mr. Gotashalk: I understand from your letter of 5 September 1945 that you desire to obtain the following information only: a. "I was interested in finding out quantitatively concerning the manufacture, use and disposition of hydrogen fluoride in the East and Blue Areas at Deep Water." b. "I am interested in knowing how much hydrogen fluoride was manufactured, how much was used and how much went out of the stacks of the DuPont Company." In the second paragraph of my letter of 1 September 1945, I stated that current security restrictions do not permit disclosure of the quantities of materials produced or used on the Manhattan project except to the extent covered by War Department releases. These restrictions are still in effect. The restrictions have been considered advantageous to the national interest from the standpoint of the nation's military security. I hope that you will agree with me that information as to the quantity of any material made or used for the purpose of making atomic bombs is a disclosure of military information. Any disclosure of such information as to any one material assists an alert enemy in arriving at a basis for estimating the number of bombs the government has made or is in a position to make. I am perfectly willing to permit the disclosure of any information which in my opinion does not conflict with the national security, but I am not willing to permit or to willfully assist in the disclosure of any information, the release of which would in my opinion be injurious to the military security of the United States. Very truly yours, G.A. TANEY, JR Major, Corps of Engineers
cc: Gen. L.R. GrovesCol. K.D. NicholsArea Eng., Wilmington AreaMr. C. E. Geuther, Legal Dept., du Pont
The following is a series of letters between the farmers' spokesman, Willard Kille, and General Groves. In the first letter, Kille informs Groves that he has been diagnosed as having suffered from "one or more acute attacks of fluorine intoxication" and asks Groves if the Government could inform him of an effective remedy.
Willard B. KilleTrucker and Market GardenerSwedesboro, N.J.
Feb 2, 1946
Major General R. GrovesWar DeptWashington D.C.
Dear Sir:
I am informed that you have knowledge of a satisfactory course for one to pursue who has been injured by fluorine, either from fumes or because of eating foods high in fluorine content.
I have been informed by Dr. Garfield Duncan that I have had one or more acute attacks of fluorine intoxication but do not as yet have chronic fluorine poisoning. Other folks here are having difficulty also as enclosed copy of blood samples will indicate. Any suggestions from you will be appreciated.
Yours truly, Willard B. Kille
Letter from Colonel. Rhodes to General Groves, advising him on how to respond to Kile's request.
25 February 1946
TO: Major General L.R. Groves
FROM: Lt. Col. Cooper B. Rhodes
SUBJECT: Alleged Injury from Fluorine - Willard B. Kille, Swedesboro, N.J.
1. Attached hereto is suggested answer to letter dated 2 February 1946 from Willard B. Kille, for your approval and signature. The letter from Mr. Kille is also attached.
2. The Medical Section has informed this office that it has no information concerning treatments of injuries from fluorine other than those generally known to the medical profession.
COOPER B. RHODES
2. Incls.:Ltr 2 Feb 46, Kille to Groves, w/incl.Ltr 27 Feb 46, Groves to Kille (for Gen. Groves' signature), in trip.
Groves response to Kille's request.
4 March 1946
Mr. Willard B. Kille,
Swedesboro, New Jersey.
Dear Mr. Kille:
I have delayed responding to your letter of 2 February 1946 in order that I might consult with members of the medical staff of this organization. I had hoped that I might be able to furnish the information which you requested, but I am now satisfied that this organization has no information concerning the treatment of fluorine poisoning which is not available to, and generally by, the medical profession.
However, to be sure that your physician is acquainted with all of the information on this subject, which is known to my medical officers, I shall have one of those officers visit Dr. Duncan within the next few days.
I have also received your letter transmitting a copy of the transcript of the proceedings of the meeting held on 1 February 1946, for which I thank you. Subsequently, I have received from you a copy of the transcript of the meeting held on 8 February 1946, for which I am likewise grateful. I am keeping in close personal touch with the efforts which you are making to eliminate the source or sources of damage to the crops in your area, and I am anxious that this organization shall be of assistance to you in that work. To that end, we shall do everything within our power which is consistent with requirements of military security and the protection of the interests of the government in the pending litigation with which you are familiar.
Very truly yours,
L.R. Groves, Major General, U.S.A.
Coopers to Rhodes: In this letter Colonel Rhodes suggests to Groves that he go ahead and meet with Kille. Cooper advises Rhodes that it would be "advantageous" to meet with Kille and assure Kile that DuPont was not the source of the fluoride that poisoned the crops.
7 March 1946
Subject: Proposed Conference with Mr. Willard B. Kille and Mr. A.J. Gorand
To: Major General Groves.
From: Lt. Colonel Rhodes.
1. From conversation which I have had with Mr. Kille, writer of the attached teletype, I know that the purpose of the proposed conference is to solicit your assurance that steps have been taken, or are being taken, to prevent contamination of the atmosphere by the du Pont plants which are operating for the Manhattan Project in the vicinity of Deepwater Point, New Jersey. Mr. Kille is still of the opinion that those plants are causing most of the trouble.
2. I recommend that I be authorized to inform Mr. Kille that you will confer with him, as requested, and that I be further authorized to make necessary arrangements for the conference, the same to be held in your office.
3. I believe it will be possible for you to give Mr. Kille the assurance which he desires and I believe that it would be advantageous to do so. I am advised by the Area Engineer, Wilmington, that steps have been taken to eliminate the venting of hydrogen fluoride. The written report on that subject from the Area Engineer is being obtained and will be available to you prior to the proposed conference. I shall arrange to have the report reviewed by the Security Branch in order that you may have the benefit of the advice of that office before disclosing any information to Mr. Kille.
4. A suggested reply to the teletype from Mr. Kille is attached for your signature if approved.
Groves to Kille : Groves letter to Kille, confirming their meeting.
9 March 1946
Mr. Willard B. KilleSwedesboro, New Jersey
Dear Mr. Kille,
This will acknowledge the receipt of your teletype of 5 March.
I shall be glad to confer with you and Mr. Gorand in my office at Washington at the earliest date that can be arranged. Lt. Colonel Rhodes of this office will contact you to make necessary arrangements.
Very truly yours,
L.R. GROVESMajor General, USA
Kille to Groves: In part no doubt because of Groves national stature and prestige, Kille was very excited and pleased to have met with the General. At this letter indicates, Kille was so impressed with the General that he left the meeting believing that the famers' "interests in this particular matter were being safe guarded by men of the highest type whose integrity they could not question."
Willard B. KilleTrucker and Market GardenerSwedesboro, N.J.
March 26, 1946
Maj. General L.R. GrovesWar Dept.Washington D.C.
Dear General Groves:
I am back in the [illegible] today after a very pleasant day in the Nation's Capitol. The time spent in your office was the highlight of the day [illegible]. it was an adventure in understanding. I wish again to thank you, General Nichols, Col. Rhodes and [illegible] for the courtesies shown Mr. Gorand and myself.
As a representative of the farmers in this section I am more than satisfied with the outcome of the meeting. The franknes, interest, concern and very evident desire to help [illegible] a very difficult situation was quite apparent... I came away with the feeling that [what we] have to fear the most from now on is misunderstanding itself.
Without an opportunity occasionally for direct contact we sometimes jump to conclusions too hastily and even question motives and intentions. I wish all of our farmers could have been present yesterday. I think if they had, they too would have come away with the feeling that their interests in this particular matter were being safe guarded by men of the highest type whose integrity they could not question. In my humble way it now becomes my duty and privilege to try and pass on to them the impression I received.
Again I thank you for arranging this meeting. I think it will result in much good.
Yours truly
Willard B. Kille
Groves response to Kille: In this letter Groves thanks Kille for his kind words, and repays the kind words with an outright lie. Groves tells Kille that "So far as we have been able to ascertain, activities of the Manhattan District have not been responsible for the damage which has been the source of the complaint, but we are making every effort to learn the true facts."
1 April 1946
Mr. Willard B. KilleSwedesboro, New Jersey.
Dear Mr. Kille:
Thank you for your kind letter of March 26th. I was glad to have the opportunity of discussing with you and Mr. A.G. Gorand your mutual problems with respect to certain crop damage which has been sustained by farmers in South Jersey and which you suspect may have been caused by atmosphere contaminated by hydrofluoric acid.
This letter, written at your request, will confirm the verbal assurances which I gave you to the effect that the two government plants which have been operated by E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company, Inc., at Deepwater Point, New Jersey, can not be the cause of any damage or annoyance in the future. Of the two government plants which du Pont has been operating, one has ceased operations, is being dismantled, and can not be considered as a possible source of future damage. In the other plant, the only remaining operation is one which would not contaminate the atmosphere with hydrofluoric acid. Our production program does not contemplate any change in our operations at Deepwater Point during the next year. If we should, in the future, have any operations will be taken to eliminate the possibility of HF discharge into the atmosphere.So far as we have been able to ascertain, activities of the Manhattan District have not been responsible for the damage which has been the source of the complaint, but we are making every effort to learn the true facts. We do not desire to hide any facts. We shall do all in our power to correct any damage for which the Manhattan Project may have been responsible. It has always been the policy of the Manhattan District to settle promptly, and with a minimum of expense and trouble to claimants, all just claims. Information derived from reports of other governmental agencies making investigations at our request will be released to all truly interested parties if such release is not found to be prejudicial to the public interest. Sincerely yours, L.R. GROVES, Major General, USA.
The following is another letter from Harold Hodge. Hodge concludes the letter by asking whether the Government should begin emphasizing fluoride's supposed benefits to teeth as a means of counteracting the "local fear of fluoride" near Deepwater.
1 May 1946
U.S. Engineer OfficeManhattan District exP.O. Box EOak Ridge, Tennessee
Attn. Col. S.L. Warren, Medical Section
Dear Colonel Warren:
The following is the report of a trip to the DuPont Plant in Wilmington, Delaware on 13 March 1946.
Lt. Colonel Cooper Rhodes and I met Dr. Henke, fume expert, Mr. Lehner, Plant Manager, and Mr. W.C. Brothers, Assistant, and discussed major aspects of the problem briefly. Dr. Henke then took us by car on a visit to the various orchards concerned in the litigation. These included the orchards of Johnson (3 miles due east of the Chambers Works), Doughton (1/4 mile southwest of the Chambers), Goumari's (northeast of the Chambers Works near a crossroad east of Pennsgrove), Richard Kille, south of Pedricktown, Giardam, Freed, Huber, Dietrich, Cunard, Garrison, the latter seven orchards 5 to 7 miles northeast of the Chambers Works and all more or less in the same neighborhood.
Dr. Henke told us that the Atlantic City Power Plant which is located just across the canal from the Chambers Works add up to 40,000 pounds of S02 per day to the atmosphere. The H2SO4 plant adds 20,000 to 30,000 pounds per day. Even so, only extremely minute traces of SO2 are found in air samples at the orchards. Henke said that 0.3-0.5 ppm of S02 produces detectable damage to vegetation, whereas, 0.1 ppm HF causes detectable damage.
In the Kinetics Plant, Mr. Knowles described the practice of ten years back in which SiF4 was vented in the air. SiF4 is quite poisonous. At least 97% is now collected, not vented. The CaSO4 sludge used to be placed in hopper cars in hoods and the fumes were vented through a 35-foot stack. Since 1942, the sludge has been dumped in barrels of water, CaSO4 dissolved and disposed of. In 1943, there were fumes present at ground levels. Since September 1944, due to reduced feed and reduced losses, the HF loss was cut to nil. Seventy-five foot wooden stacks were established from July to October 1944. No hospitalised fume burns since September 1944. Air analyses not far from the plant show only 0.01 ppm. Mr. Knowles said that he thought 0.001 ppm HF gave a detectable odor and that 3 ppm was probably intolerable to the eye and skin. Dr. Dunphy, in charge of air analyses, stated that they can measure 1 ppm with error of only a few hundredths. 0.004 ppm analyses might be off by 50%; 1 ppm HF can be analyzed to within 10% in the presence of 1 ppm SO2. In air analyses in Pennsgrove, 0.04 ppm were found; no reasonable doubt existed that it is HF.
At the hospital we visited Dr. Evans and Wetherow, where we discussed a program of clinical examinations and the use of x-rays. Dr. Evans said that some urinary F analyses had been performed in Kehoe's laboratory in Cincinnati.
The Atlantic City Power Company, Dr. Henke told us, also puts 500-800 pounds of HF up the stacks per day from the coal. At the school building at Deep Water on the west side many windows show etching. The bluish sheen was especially noticeable on certain windows in which the panels had been replaced. The contrast of the shiny new glass with the filmy etched glass was quite apparent.
Question. Does exhaled air from an animal contain fluoride? Is there more fluoride in it than in inhaled air? Would there be any use in making attempts to counteract the local fear of fluoride on the part of residents of Salem and Gloucester counties through lectures on F toxicology and perhaps the usefulness of F in tooth health?" Yours very truly,
Harold C. HodgeChief Pharmacologist
This letter by Harold Hodge exemplifies the Government's efforts to obfuscate the source of the fluoride that ruined the peach orchards crops. Highlighting this effort to obfuscate, Hodge mentions that a question had been raised as to "whether PLANTS [emphasis added] could give off enough fluorine to account for that present in the atmosphere."
Hodge also mentions a particularly important piece of information that the Government's defense was relying on - namely, that high levels of atmospheric fluoride had been found to be generated by the burning of coal. This was important for the Government's case, because there was a power plant in the region where the farmer's lived (although relatively far away as compared to DuPont). Hodge mentions in the letter that plans were in the works to test for sulphur levels on the farmers' crops - for if high levels of sulphur were found, than they would have evidence to indicate that the farmers were exposed to fluoride from the coal burning power plant.
A later letter from Hodge, however, stated that their tests for sulphur around the farmers' fields, produced negligible results - thus ruling out the power plant as the cause of the damage.
Another note of interest in this letter is a suggestion which Hodge makes. Hodge, who was interested in determining the effects of rain and fog on fluoride air emissions, suggested to Col. Warren that they purposefully vent some hydrogen fluoride on a rainy and foggy day and then take tests to determine the varying concentrations of fluoride in the air. As Hodge writes:
"It may be that most of the F vented from various plants disappears but that occasionally, perhaps during a rain or fog, a large amount of the atmospheric F is brought down. It would be possible to make a setup on a rainy day to vent HF or F2 at a steady rate and to do air analyses downwind at various distances as well as to collect rainfall at various distances from the vent. The vegetation and soil in the neighborhood should also be sampled."
27 February 1946
U.S. Engineer OfficeManhattan DistrictP.O. Box EOak Ridge Tennessee Attn. Col. S.L. Warren, Medical Section
Dear Colonel Warren:
On February 26, 1946 a meeting called by Lt. Col. Rhodes was held in the Department of Agriculture Building at 10 a.m. in Washington, D.C. In attendance were Drs. McCall, Griffin, Robinson of the Bureau of Plant Industry, Dept. of Agriculture; Major Fox, CWS, Mr. Wilson and a colleague or two from CWS, Edgewood Arsenal; Drs. Wickers and Brewer with several others from the Bureau of Standards; Marion Voss and myself from Rochester, N.Y.
Dr. McCall opened the meeting by presenting four points as follows:
1. DuPont has been doing air samples, finding about the same amount of fluorine in New Jersey area and elsewhere in New York State and the Pennsylvania mountains.
2. The British reported (1945) soft coal burning may produce atmospheric fluorine since some coals contain up to 200 ppm.
3. Zimmerman raised the question whether plants could give off enough fluorine to account for that present in the atmosphere.
4. Satler analyzed vegetables, canned and fresh, found high fluoride; confirmed by F&DA, although later samples by F&DA do not show high values. (Leaves collected by Griffin have 40-100, sometimes 200 ppm, dry basis. Canned tomato juice 30 ppm, fresh basis).
Note for future reference: Willard Killey (?) President of the Gloucester County Farm Board is not a litigant but actively concerned with remedying the situation.
Dr. Robinson mentioned that brick yards might give off fluorine since some glass contains .15% F. Dr. McCall added that glass works in the area might be sources of fluorine and that there are a number of plants beside the DuPont Blue or East Works which may be suspect. For example, the Sun Oil Catalytic Tower, a few miles away, the I.V. Thomas Fertilizer Works or the Socony Vacuum Plant, both the latter in Paulsboro.
Dr. McCall's opinion was that our most vulnerable point is lack of complete analyses on vegetation. He suggested that more samples should be taken as soon as the plants start growing and the plant content should be followed closely for at least two or three months. The collection area should include more than the Deep Water area.
Dr. Wickers asked if any other chemicals than F could have caused the damage, specifically uranium. Dr. McCall told him that in the field it is impossible to differentiate between fume damage by HF, H2SO4 of HO1. Dr. McCall suggested that perhaps other organic fumes were involved and that perhaps fluorine might accentuate the effects of organic fumes.
McCall recommended the following program.
1. Analyses should be made of air and vegetable samples from at least as far away as Paulsboro.
2. They plan to go ahead with their fumigation studies under the direction of Griffin using HF on outdoor planting (as I understood it).
3. They plan to get soils, add soluble fluorine as HF or NaF (and CaF2), and follow absorption.
4. They plan to run base exchange studies in which soluble fluorides will be placed in contact with soil.
5. He recommends wider distribution of air samples. McCall said that the New Jersey Agricultural Experiment Station is interested and would like to cooperate.
McCall stressed the necessity for handling samples in such a way as to avoid loss of fluoride.
The Bureau of Standards has been asked to do analyses for fluorine, sulphur and uranium on samples in cooperation with the Department of Agriculture.
Dr. Wickers said the the [sic] CWS had invited them to participate to find whether the mass spectrometer can be adapted to rapid, sensitive fluoride determinations. Brewer mentioned the advantage, viz:
1. A photographic record which can be used as court evidence to a highly sensitive procedure.
2. Sensitivity and Specificity. They know that the final step is accurate but the many chemical difficulties in the preparation of the samples for the last step are not now licked and the future is uncertain.
Sulphur determinations are in progress, results are supposed to be available in a weak or two.
U analyses are now being made by fluorimetric methods supplementing beta counts.
Major Fox introduced Wilson who has carried out air sampling. His final report should be available in one month. They have had two jobs: (1) cooperation with the Bureau of Standards and the Department of Agriculture; (2) air tests for fluorine at four stations in Salem County.
Samples are collected in glass bubblers with dilute bicarbonate caustic for two hours and forty minutes. All values less than 0.01 micrograms per liter as HF were thrown out on the basis of 20 samples taken in Bel-Air, Maryland, which averaged 0.008 micrograms per liter. Twenty-three samples from the Salem area ranged from 0.011 to 0.049 micrograms per liter. The values seemed to be independent of wind direction.
Sulphur analyses of air are planned using the Thomas samplers beginning April 1. Some sulphur analyses have been done on past samples.
After considerable discussion it was agreed that air samples should be taken, if possible, from at least one station located on the farm of one of the litigants and that perhaps one could be put on the Dietrich farm where the nearest large orchard is located. The strategy of the location of the air sample stations arise from Rhodes suggestion that we wished not to controvert data on the F content of plants, but to show doubt as to the origin of the F on the plants.
McCall suggested that the particular type of plant that Satler used may be important. If he has chosen an 'accumulator' like Zimmerman's camellias, he may show very high values. Robinson suggested that the Aluminum Company of America has data on leaf content.
Several ideas, questions and suggestions came to my mind during the course of the conference.
1. Perhaps we should sample other types of vegetation besides vegetables.
2. It may be that most of the F vented from various plants disappears but that occasionally, perhaps during a rain or fog, a large amount of the atmospheric F is brought down. It would be possible to make a setup on a rainy day to vent HF or F2 at a steady rate and to do air analyses downwind at various distances as well as to collect rainfall at various distances from the vent. The vegetation and soil in the neighborhood should also be sampled.
3. Does the New Jersey Agricultural Experiment Station have F analyses of vegetables in 1944 and earlier?
4. We might take some colored pictures of the effluent from the various stacks throughout the Deep Water area to show different colored smokes, hence different fume exposures.
5. Perhaps our fluoride method could be readjusted to be done on a colorimeter using a photorecorder so that we would have records suitable for submission in court.
6. A visit to the area would be a good investment.
7. Since there is a ketchup plant at Salem it might be well to get some and do analyses on it.
8. It would be interesting to know how many ppm of F are found in leaves grown in atmosphere containing a certain ppm of HF. Is there any evidence that HF or F dust directly on the leaves is different from the same material deposited on the soil?
Very truly yours,
Harold C. HodgeChief Pharmacologist
cc. Col. RhodesCapt. Davies
The following is a letter from Hodge, describing a visit of his to the Deepwater area with David Ast. This is of historical importance because David Ast was the lead researcher of the infamous Newburgh/Kingston fluoridation trial - which was underway at the time. The Newburgh/Kingston trial was the study that proved in the minds of the US medical community that fluoridation was safe. Other documents from this period show that Dr. Ast also attended a top secret Manhattan Project conference on fluoride toxicity in New York City in 1944 (see list of attendees). However, despite the fact that documents clearly show that Ast was in contact with the Manhattan Project, Ast denied any such relationship when asked by Byson and Griffiths in the 1990s. According to Bryson and Griffiths (1997),
"Did he [David Ast] recall participating in the Manhattan Project's secret wartime conference on fluoride in January 1944, or going to New Jersey with Dr. Hodge to investigate human injury in the du Pont case--as secret memos state? He told the reporters he had no recollection of these events."
11 March 1946
U.S. Engineer OfficeManhattan District exP.O. Box EOak Ridge, Tennessee
Attn. Col. S.L. Warren, Medical Section
Dear Colonel Warren:
The following is the report of a trip to the Deep Water Area to study the relationship, if any, of mottled enamel and the reputed fluorine exposures.
Captain Mears picked up Dr. Ast and myself in New York City early Wednesday morning March 6. We drove to Trenton, New Jersey, where we talked with Dr. Jacob M. Wisan, Chief of the Dental Health Bureau, State Department of Health. Dr. Wisan is located in Room 17-M, Broad Street Bank Building, Montgomery and State Streets, Trenton, N.J.
Visit with Dr. Wisan. Dr. Wisan had made a survey published in 1944 of the dental health of children in the schools of six communities in southern New Jersey. These communities are Blackwood, Glassboro, Mantua, Mullica Hill, Wenonah, Woodstown, and Woodbury. The public water supplies of these towns contain between 1 and 2.4 ppm of fluorine.
Dr. Wisan had made arrangements for us to talk to Mr. J.E. Bacon a State chemist, of the State Water Department and to visit schools in Woodstown and Glassboro.
Dr. Wisan had found that the children of Cumberland county south of the mottled enamel area in Gloucester and Salem counties had better teeth than the children in the north part of the state but poorer than in the fluorine area.
Visit with Mr. Bacon. Mr. Bacon, the State water chemist, has been running fluoride analyses on water supplies for some time using a modification of the Sanchis method in which a little sulphate is added to the control. Samples are analyzed at Trenton. The water containing fluorine comes from deep wells 100-300 feet deep of artesian character. Deep wells are not necessarily fluorine bearing, thus Camden has wells 300-600 feet deep with practically no fluorine (.1-.3 ppm) in the water. Over in Atlantic county on the eastern seaboard deep wells have no fluorine. The farm wells which are shallow, 15 feet or so deep, have no fluorine as far as Mr. Bacon knows, regardless of distribution.
Mr. Bacon said that Mr. Weller of the Bureau of Industrial Hygiene was interested in urine analyses for fluorine but thought there were no data on urines other than industrial personnel.
The fluorine method Mr. Bacon used for food analyses of vegetables, fresh and canned, all analyzed since the peach tree episode began, is described in the JADA 27, 90 (1944).
Visit to Woodstown School. The supervising principal is Mrs. P.E. Batten, the nurse, Marelle (sp) Carter. Three children were presented to us as the ones showing 'mottling'. These children were as follows:
1. Nancy Buckley, 9 years. Incisors were pitted and there were 5 or 6 spots of color on each upper central incisor. The spots were the size of the head of a pin or smaller. She had milkiness of the enamel on the permanent molars, but not on the deciduous teeth. There were apparently no cavities.
2. Howard Harris, 14 years. There were opacities part way down the upper center incisors bounded by rather easily seen straight boundary running parallel to the incisal edge of the tooth. The tooth surfaces were smooth with no discoloration, the lower incisors were unmarked, there was considerable milkiness of the enamel on the molars; no cavities.
3. Donald Clawson, 14 years. The upper right central incisor had a colored streak, pale yellow, a third of the way from the incisal edge to the neck of the tooth about as broad as a pencil [illegible] and running half way across the tooth. There were opacities on the upper centrals, milky enamel was observed on the bicuspids and the molars. No cavities.
We examined all of the fourth grade pupils who had lived all their lives in Woodstown. I was amazed to find mouth after mouth of perfect teeth. A few children had some cavities; some quite well developed in mouths that looked like children's mouths elsewhere. But to see mouth after mouth with no evident caries was impressive.
We paid a brief visit to the school at Glassboro and returned.
Summary. In several towns situated in the district where the complaints have been registered the situation was complicated by the existence of mottled enamel as a result of fluoride in the drinking water.
Sincerely yours,
Harold C. HodgeChief Pharmacologist
cc Lt. Col. RhodesCapt. Davies
Another letter by Hodge discussing a meeting at the DuPont YMCA.
4 May 1946
U.S. Engineer OfficeManhattan DistrictP.O. Box EOak Ridge, Tennessee
Attn. Col. S.L. Warren, Medical Section
Dear Colonel Warren:
The following is the report of a trip to Wilmington, Delaware 1 May 1946.
A meeting was called by Lt. Col. Cooper B. Rhodes in the DuPont YMCA, Carney's Point, New Jersey. Those in attendance were as follows: Major Fox, Lt. Ballard, Mr. Wilson, all of the Chemical Warfare Service; Dr. Dunphy, Dr. Askert, Mr. Mausteller, all of the DuPont Company; Dr. McCall, Dr. Bales, Mr. Griffin and Mr. Robinson, all of the Department of Agriculture; Colonel Rhodes, Captain Ryan, Marion Voss, Frank Smith and I.
Dr. McCall opened the meeting. He described their early collaboration in which Mr. Griffin looked over various trees in Salem and Gloucester county orchards. Air samples were taken by the CWS for fluoride analyses. Other analyses were to be attempted by the Bureau of Standards. The CO2 masked the F in the Bureau of Standards analytical procedure, so Robinson took over all of the following program.
1. To do vegetable and plant samples; to do air samples; the idea being that the occurrence of F would indicate that the Manhattan sponsored operations were not the only source of F.
2. To test the effect of very dilute HF on accumulation of F in plant materials.
3. To study the effect of growth in soils either untreated or treated with NaF, HF or CF2 on the concentration of F in plants. To study errors in sampling and ashing.
4. Through cooperation of the Bureau of Standards, to obtain U and SO2 analyses on plant matters. Present data indicate that SO2 is a critical factor. It is believed that comparatively large amounts of U are required to affect plant growth. There was some evidence that more U may have been found on leaves near the East Area. Even in these instances, the amounts of U were insufficient to cause damage to vegetation.
Colonel Rhodes asked if concentrations of HF which produce leaf damage would of necessity cause a diminished crop.
Dr. McCall reported that two or three year old shoots have no more F than 1 year old shoots. Leaves may accumulate F. Griffin has seen 'shoot die-back' in 1944 and in 1945. Several causes are possible. In pines, needles are being analyzed.
Dr. McCall reported some results of U determinations on leaf samples; analyses by Bureau of Standards. The black cherries - 3 or 4 ppm U; white oak - 7 ppm U; white hale peach - 1 and 7 ppm U; Hemlock - 3 ppm U; Spruce - 6 ppm U; Weeping Willow - 1 ppm U (samples from Kille farm); 30 ppm in samples from playground near East Area; Maple - 7 ppm from trees in Chambers Works area; 1 ppm and 4 ppm from trees across the river.
N.B. Dr. McCall asked us to send samples from Western New York for U analysis. Mr. Griffin will give directions for collection. Dr. McCall would like to have us do some U analyses here.
Dr. McCall stated that dogwood is an accumulator of F: 110, 153 and 216 ppm F found in air-dried (105*0) samples. McCall intends to study age of leaf vs. F content.
Dr. Dunphy emphasized the importance of techniques, especially washing, in the collecting of vegetable samples. He found highly variable and inconsistent F contents on repeat analyses. He had found privet hedge leaves contain up to 1000 ppm F. He would like to know whether much F is lost in the drying process and when best to add a fixative. Robinson reported that Clifford, themselves, and another laboratory analyzed a dried thistle sample; found 7.7, 8.3 and 8.5 ppm.
Dr. Dunphy speaking of air analyses said that results from last summer may be too high; that solutions can absorb as much F from the glass of the absorber bottle as from the atmosphere. He stated that highly F sensitive plants have set out in various locations near Chambers Works.
The laboratory of the National Canners Association found normal F values in canned food samples from the Salem Area.
Dr. McCall reported for vegetables the following F analyses: sweet potatoes - 1.7, 1.6 and 1.9 ppm; irish potatoes - 2.3 ppm; asparagus bush - 128, 26 ppm; canned asparagus - 3.2 and 5.5 ppm; canned tomatoes - 4.7, 5.5 and 6.7 ppm; strawberries on fresh weight basis - 0.3 ppm; lima beans - 3.2 ppm; string beans - 11.6 ppm; peach roots, 1/8 to 1/4 inch thick - 1.7 ppm; 2 to 2 1/4 inches thick - 1.5 ppm. (All values on air-dried basis except strawberries).
Robinson reported that Borrelli's asparagus had 128, Kille's 26 ppm. Windows are etched on Borrelli's, but not on Kille's home. The houses are quite close together.
N.B. Bales suggested that we analyze blood from people in Texas who drink water containing 5 ppm F.
Dr. Dunphy stated that Largent adds [illegible] fixative for blood prior to ashing. Dr. Ackert reported that in a certain company, not his own, workers excreted 10 micrograms per liter F in the urine, although asymptomatic, showed mild fluorosis in the x-rays.
N.B. Question: Can blood be obtained from these men for analyses? Ackert stated that it is believed that man is more resistant than certain animals to HF in the air.
Wilson reported that last year the results of air analyses showed only negligible quantities of F in the air. This year using the 'ferrisal' method, larger amounts apparently are present. He believes these high values are only apparent values (e.g. up to .15 micrograms per liter) and are due to the method, because simultaneous samples with the old method gave no values over 0.014 micrograms per liter.
Dr. McCall asked how much HF could come down in rain. He had in mind the alleged chicken poisoning episode described by Mr. Kille. Mausteller told me privately that they had analyzed rain water in the Chambers Works and found of the order of 0.5 ppm.
In a tour of the air sampling stations we asked Wilson if samples could be taken with the bubbler on the roof, thereby omitting the long rubber tube through which air samples are now pulled. Mr. Voss suggested that it would be interesting to compare one of their air bubblers with one of ours at their air station. Wilson agreed to try if we sent him a bubbler.
Yours very truly,
Harold C. HodgeChief Pharmacologist
cc Lt. Col. RhodesCapt. Davies
Return to Fluoride Action Network's homepage
FLOURIDE: "This makes me ashamed to be a scientist."
Fluoride, Teeth, and the Atomic Bomb TRUTH
"This makes me ashamed to be a scientist."
Home
About FAN
Latest News
Water Fluoridation
Health Effects Database
Sources of Fluoride Exposure
Fluoride Pollution
Fluorine Pesticides
Take Action!
Contact Us
Donate
FAQs
In t r o d u c t i o n: The following article was commissioned by the Christian Science Monitor in the spring of 1997. Despite much favorable comment from editors, and full documentation, the story remains unpublished by the Monitor. By any yardstick, this report was an award-winning scoop for any national paper. The report offers a glimpse into the history of fluoride, a bio-accumulative toxic that Americans ingest every day. The authors, Griffiths and Bryson, spent more than a year on research. With the belief that the information should be withheld no longer, the authors gave their report to Waste Not, and others, with a short note: "use as you wish."
This introduction is taken from Waste Not #414 (September 1997) where the article was first published. The article went on to be nominated as the year's 18th most censored story in the 1998 Project Censored Series.
Fluoride, Teeth, and the Atomic Bombby Chris Bryson & Joel Griffiths
Some fifty years after the United States began adding fluoride to public water supplies to reduce cavities in children's teeth, declassified government documents are shedding new light on the roots of that still-controversial public health measure, revealing a surprising connection between fluoride and the dawning of the nuclear age. Today, two thirds of U.S. public drinking water is fluoridated. Many municipalities still resist the practice, disbelieving the government's assurances of safety.Since the days of World War II, when this nation prevailed by building the world's first atomic bomb, U.S. public health leaders have maintained that low doses of fluoride are safe for people, and good for children's teeth.That safety verdict should now be re-examined in the light of hundreds of once-secret WWII documents obtained by Griffiths and Bryson --including declassified papers of the Manhattan Project, the U.S. military group that built the atomic bomb.Fluoride was the key chemical in atomic bomb production, according to the documents. Massive quantities of fluoride-- millions of tons-- were essential for the manufacture of bomb-grade uranium and plutonium for nuclear weapons throughout the Cold War. One of the most toxic chemicals known, fluoride rapidly emerged as the leading chemical health hazard of the U.S atomic bomb program--both for workers and for nearby communities, the documents reveal.Other revelations include: * Much of the original proof that fluoride is safe for humans in low doses was generated by A-bomb program scientists, who had been secretly ordered to provide "evidence useful in litigation" against defense contractors for fluoride injury to citizens. The first lawsuits against the U.S. A-bomb program were not over radiation, but over fluoride damage, the documents show.* Human studies were required. Bomb program researchers played a leading role in the design and implementation of the most extensive U.S. study of the health effects of fluoridating public drinking water--conducted in Newburgh, New York from 1945 to 1956. Then, in a classified operation code-named "Program F," they secretly gathered and analyzed blood and tissue samples from Newburgh citizens, with the cooperation of State Health Department personnel.* The original secret version--obtained by these reporters--of a 1948 study published by Program F scientists in the Journal of the American Dental Association shows that evidence of adverse health effects from fluoride was censored by the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) --considered the most powerful of Cold War agencies-- for reasons of national security.* The bomb program's fluoride safety studies were conducted at the University of Rochester, site of one of the most notorious human radiation experiments of the Cold War, in which unsuspecting hospital patients were injected with toxic doses of radioactive plutonium. The fluoride studies were conducted with the same ethical mind-set, in which "national security" was paramount. * The U.S. government's conflict of interest--and its motive to prove fluoride "safe" -- has not until now been made clear to the general public in the furious debate over water fluoridation since the 1950's, nor to civilian researchers and health professionals, or journalists.The declassified documents resonate with a growing body of scientific evidence, and a chorus of questions, about the health effects of fluoride in the environment. Human exposure to fluoride has mushroomed since World War II, due not only to fluoridated water and toothpaste, but to environmental pollution by major industries from aluminum to pesticides: fluoride is a critical industrial chemical.The impact can be seen, literally, in the smiles of our children. Large numbers of U.S. young people--up to 80 percent in some cities--now have dental fluorosis, the first visible sign of excessive fluoride exposure, according to the U.S. National Research Council. (The signs are whitish flecks or spots, particularly on the front teeth, or dark spots or stripes in more severe cases.)Less-known to the public is that fluoride also accumulates in bones --"The teeth are windows to what's happening in the bones," explains Paul Connett, Professor of Chemistry at St. Lawrence University (N.Y.). In recent years, pediatric bone specialists have expressed alarm about an increase in stress fractures among U.S. young people. Connett and other scientists are concerned that fluoride --linked to bone damage by studies since the 1930's-- may be a contributing factor. The declassified documents add urgency: much of the original proof that low-dose fluoride is safe for children's bones came from U.S. bomb program scientists, according to this investigation.Now, researchers who have reviewed these declassified documents fear that Cold War national security considerations may have prevented objective scientific evaluation of vital public health questions concerning fluoride."Information was buried," concludes Dr. Phyllis Mullenix, former head of toxicology at Forsyth Dental Center in Boston, and now a critic of fluoridation. Animal studies Mullenix and co-workers conducted at Forsyth in the early 1990's indicated that fluoride was a powerful central nervous system (CNS) toxin, and might adversely affect human brain functioning, even at low doses. (New epidemiological evidence from China adds support, showing a correlation between low-dose fluoride exposure and diminished I.Q. in children.) Mullenix's results were published in 1995, in a reputable peer-reviewed scientific journal.During her investigation, Mullenix was astonished to discover there had been virtually no previous U.S. studies of fluoride's effects on the human brain. Then, her application for a grant to continue her CNS research was turned down by the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH), where an NIH panel, she says, flatly told her that "fluoride does not have central nervous system effects."Declassified documents of the U.S. atomic-bomb program indicate otherwise. An April 29, 1944 Manhattan Project memo reports: "Clinical evidence suggests that uranium hexafluoride may have a rather marked central nervous system effect.... It seems most likely that the F [code for fluoride] component rather than the T [code for uranium] is the causative factor." The memo --stamped "secret"-- is addressed to the head of the Manhattan Project's Medical Section, Colonel Stafford Warren. Colonel Warren is asked to approve a program of animal research on CNS effects: "Since work with these compounds is essential, it will be necessary to know in advance what mental effects may occur after exposure...This is important not only to protect a given individual, but also to prevent a confused workman from injuring others by improperly performing his duties."On the same day, Colonel Warren approved the CNS research program. This was in 1944, at the height of the Second World War and the nation's race to build the world's first atomic bomb. For research on fluoride's CNS effects to be approved at such a momentous time, the supporting evidence set forth in the proposal forwarded along with the memo must have been persuasive. The proposal, however, is missing from the files of the U.S. National Archives. "If you find the memos, but the document they refer to is missing, its probably still classified," said Charles Reeves, chief librarian at the Atlanta branch of the U.S. National Archives and Records Administration, where the memos were found. Similarly, no results of the Manhattan Project's fluoride CNS research could be found in the files.After reviewing the memos, Mullenix declared herself "flabbergasted." She went on, "How could I be told by NIH that fluoride has no central nervous system effects when these documents were sitting there all the time?" She reasons that the Manhattan Project did do fluoride CNS studies --"that kind of warning, that fluoride workers might be a danger to the bomb program by improperly performing their duties--I can't imagine that would be ignored"-- but that the results were buried because they might create a difficult legal and public relations problem for the government.
The author of the 1944 CNS research proposal was Dr. Harold C. Hodge, at the time chief of fluoride toxicology studies for the University of Rochester division of the Manhattan Project. Nearly fifty years later at the Forsyth Dental Center in Boston, Dr. Mullenix was introduced to a gently ambling elderly man brought in to serve as a consultant on her CNS research--Harold C. Hodge. By then Hodge had achieved status emeritus as a world authority on fluoride safety. "But even though he was supposed to be helping me," says Mullenix, "he never once mentioned the CNS work he had done for the Manhattan Project." The "black hole" in fluoride CNS research since the days of the Manhattan Project is unacceptable to Mullenix, who refuses to abandon the issue. "There is so much fluoride exposure now, and we simply do not know what it is doing," she says. "You can't just walk away from this."Dr. Antonio Noronha, an NIH scientific review advisor familiar with Dr. Mullenix's grant request, says her proposal was rejected by a scientific peer-review group. He terms her claim of institutional bias against fluoride CNS research "farfetched." He adds, "We strive very hard at NIH to make sure politics does not enter the picture."Fluoride and National SecurityThe documentary trail begins at the height of WW2, in 1944, when a severe pollution incident occurred downwind of the E.I. du Pont du Nemours Company chemical factory in Deepwater, New Jersey. The factory was then producing millions of pounds of fluoride for the Manhattan project, the ultra-secret U.S. military program racing to produce the world's first atomic bomb.The farms downwind in Gloucester and Salem counties were famous for their high-quality produce -- their peaches went directly to the Waldorf Astoria Hotel in New York. Their tomatoes were bought up by Campbell's Soup. But in the summer of 1943, the farmers began to report that their crops were blighted, and that "something is burning up the peach crops around here." Poultry died after an all-night thunderstorm, they reported. Farm workers who ate the produce they had picked sometimes vomited all night and into the next day. "I remember our horses looked sick and were too stiff to work," these reporters were told by Mildred Giordano, who was a teenager at the time. Some cows were so crippled they could not stand up, and grazed by crawling on their bellies. The account was confirmed in taped interviews, shortly before he died, with Philip Sadtler of Sadtler Laboratories of Philadelphia, one of the nation's oldest chemical consulting firms. Sadtler had personally conducted the initial investigation of the damage.Although the farmers did not know it, the attention of the Manhattan Project and the federal government was riveted on the New Jersey incident, according to once-secret documents obtained by these reporters. After the war's end, in a secret Manhattan Project memo dated March 1, 1946, the Project's chief of fluoride toxicology studies, Harold C. Hodge, worriedly wrote to his boss Colonel Stafford L. Warren, Chief of the Medical Division, about "problems associated with the question of fluoride contamination of the atmosphere in a certain section of New Jersey. There seem to be four distinct (though related) problems," continued Hodge;
1. A question of injury of the peach crop in 1944.2. A report of extraordinary fluoride content of vegetables grown in this area.3. A report of abnormally high fluoride content in the blood of human individuals residing in this area.4. A report raising the question of serious poisoning of horses and cattle in this area.
The New Jersey farmers waited until the war was over, then sued du Pont and the Manhattan Project for fluoride damage -- reportedly the first lawsuits against the U.S. A-bomb program. Although seemingly trivial, the lawsuits shook the government, the secret documents reveal. Under the personal direction of Manhattan Project chief Major General Leslie R.Groves, secret meetings were convened in Washington, with compulsory attendance by scores of scientists and officials from the U.S War Department, the Manhattan Project, the Food and Drug Administration, the Agriculture and Justice Departments, the U.S Army's Chemical Warfare Service and Edgewood Arsenal, the Bureau of Standards, and du Pont lawyers. Declassified memos of the meetings reveal a secret mobilization of the full forces of the government to defeat the New Jersey farmers: These agencies "are making scientific investigations to obtain evidence which may be used to protect the interest of the Government at the trial of the suits brought by owners of peach orchards in ... New Jersey," stated Manhattan Project Lieutenant Colonel Cooper B. Rhodes, in a memo c.c.'d to General Groves.
27 August 1945Subject: Investigation of Crop Damage at Lower Penns Neck, New JerseyTo: The Commanding General, Army Service Forces, Pentagon Building, Washington D.C."At the request of the Secretary of War the Department of Agriculture has agreed to cooperate in investigating complaints of crop damage attributed... to fumes from a plant operated in connection with the Manhattan Project."Signed, L.R. Groves, Major General U.S.
"The Department of Justice is cooperating in the defense of these suits," wrote General Groves in a Feb. 28, 1946 memo to the Chairman of the U.S. Senate Special Committee on Atomic Energy. Why the national-security emergency over a few lawsuits by New Jersey farmers? In 1946 the United States had begun full-scale production of atomic bombs. No other nation had yet tested a nuclear weapon, and the A-bomb was seen as crucial for U.S leadership of the postwar world. The New Jersey fluoride lawsuits were a serious roadblock to that strategy. "The specter of endless lawsuits haunted the military," writes Lansing Lamont in his acclaimed book about the first atomic bomb test, "Day of Trinity."In the case of fluoride, "If the farmers won, it would open the door to further suits, which might impede the bomb program's ability to use fluoride," said Jacqueline Kittrell, a Tennessee public interest lawyer specializing in nuclear cases, who examined the declassified fluoride documents. (Kittrell has represented plaintiffs in several human radiation experiment cases.) She added, "The reports of human injury were especially threatening, because of the potential for enormous settlements -- not to mention the PR problem." Indeed, du Pont was particularly concerned about the "possible psychologic reaction" to the New Jersey pollution incident, according to a secret 1946 Manhattan Project memo. Facing a threat from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to embargo the region's produce because of "high fluoride content," du Pont dispatched its lawyers to the FDA offices in Washington, where an agitated meeting ensued. According to a memo sent next day to General Groves, Du Pont's lawyer argued "that in view of the pending suits...any action by the Food and Drug Administration... would have a serious effect on the du Pont Company and would create a bad public relations situation." After the meeting adjourned, Manhattan Project Captain John Davies approached the FDA's Food Division chief and "impressed upon Dr. White the substantial interest which the Government had in claims which might arise as a result of action which might be taken by the Food and Drug Administration." There was no embargo. Instead, new tests for fluoride in the New Jersey area would be conducted -- not by the Department of Agriculture -- but by the U.S. Army's Chemical Warfare Service because "work done by the Chemical Warfare Service would carry the greatest weight as evidence if... lawsuits are started by the complainants." The memo was signed by General Groves. Meanwhile, the public relations problem remained unresolved -- local citizens were in a panic about fluoride. The farmer's spokesman, Willard B. Kille, was personally invited to dine with General Groves --then known as "the man who built the atomic bomb" -- at his office at the War Department on March 26, 1946. Although he had been diagnosed with fluoride poisoning by his doctor, Kille departed the luncheon convinced of the government's good faith. The next day he wrote to the general, wishing the other farmers could have been present, he said, so "they too could come away with the feeling that their interests in this particular matter were being safeguarded by men of the very highest type whose integrity they could not question." In a subsequent secret Manhattan project memo, a broader solution to the public relations problem was suggested by chief fluoride toxicologist Harold C. Hodge. He wrote to the Medical Section chief, Col. Warren: "Would there be any use in making attempts to counteract the local fear of fluoride on the part of residents of Salem and Gloucester counties through lectures on F toxicology and perhaps the usefulness of F in tooth health?" Such lectures were indeed given, not only to New Jersey citizens but to the rest of the nation throughout the Cold War.The New Jersey farmers' lawsuits were ultimately stymied by the government's refusal to reveal the key piece of information that would have settled the case --how much fluoride du Pont had vented into the atmosphere during the war. "Disclosure... would be injurious to the military security of the United States," wrote Manhattan Project Major C.A Taney, Jr. The farmers were pacified with token financial settlements, according to interviews with descendants still living in the area."All we knew is that du Pont released some chemical that burned up all the peach trees around here," recalls Angelo Giordano, whose father James was one of the original plaintiffs. "The trees were no good after that, so we had to give up on the peaches." Their horses and cows, too, acted stiff and walked stiff, recalls his sister Mildred. "Could any of that have been the fluoride ?" she asked. (The symptoms she detailed to the authors are cardinal signs of fluoride toxicity, according to veterinary toxicologists.) The Giordano family, too, has been plagued by bone and joint problems, Mildred adds. Recalling the settlement received by the Giordanos, Angelo told these reporters that "my father said he got about $200." The farmers were stonewalled in their search for information, and their complaints have long since been forgotten. But they unknowingly left their imprint on history -- their claims of injury to their health reverberated through the corridors of power in Washington, and triggered intensive secret bomb-program research on the health effects of fluoride. A secret 1945 memo from Manhattan Project Lt. Col. Rhodes to General Groves stated: "Because of complaints that animals and humans have been injured by hydrogen fluoride fumes in [the New Jersey] area, although there are no pending suits involving such claims, the University of Rochester is conducting experiments to determine the toxic effect of fluoride."Much of the proof of fluoride's safety in low doses rests on the postwar work performed by the University of Rochester, in anticipation of lawsuits against the bomb program for human injury.
Fluoride and the Cold War.
Delegating fluoride safety studies to the University of Rochester was not surprising. During WWII the federal government had become involved, for the first time, in large-scale funding of scientific research at government-owned labs and private colleges. Those early spending priorities were shaped by the nation's often-secret military needs. The prestigious upstate New York college, in particular, had housed a key wartime division of the Manhattan Project, studying the health effects of the new "special materials," such as uranium, plutonium, beryllium and fluoride, being used to make the atomic bomb. That work continued after the war, with millions of dollars flowing from the Manhattan Project and its successor organization, the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC). (Indeed, the bomb left an indelible imprint on all U.S. science in the late 1940's and 50's. Up to 90% of federal funds for university research came from either the Defense Department or the AEC in this period, according to Noam Chomsky's 1996 book "The Cold War and the University.")The University of Rochester medical school became a revolving door for senior bomb program scientists. Postwar faculty included Stafford Warren, the top medical officer of the Manhattan Project, and Harold Hodge, chief of fluoride research for the bomb program. But this marriage of military secrecy and medical science bore deformed offspring. The University of Rochester's classified fluoride studies -- code- named Program F -- were conducted at its Atomic Energy Project (AEP), a top-secret facility funded by the AEC and housed in Strong Memorial Hospital. It was there that one of the most notorious human radiation experiments of the Cold War took place, in which unsuspecting hospital patients were injected with toxic doses of radioactive plutonium. Revelation of this experiment in a Pulitzer prize-winning account by Eileen Welsome led to a 1995 U.S. Presidential investigation, and a multimillion-dollar cash settlement for victims.Program F was not about children's teeth. It grew directly out of litigation against the bomb program and its main purpose was to furnish scientific ammunition which the government and its nuclear contractors could use to defeat lawsuits for human injury. Program F's director was none other than Harold C. Hodge, who had led the Manhattan Project investigation of alleged human injury in the New Jersey fluoride-pollution incident.Program F's purpose is spelled out in a classified 1948 report. It reads: "To supply evidence useful in the litigation arising from an alleged loss of a fruit crop several years ago, a number of problems have been opened. Since excessive blood fluoride levels were reported in human residents of the same area, our principal effort has been devoted to describing the relationship of blood fluorides to toxic effects." The litigation referred to, of course, and the claims of human injury were against the bomb program and its contractors. Thus, the purpose of Program F was to obtain evidence useful in litigation against the bomb program. The research was being conducted by the defendants.The potential conflict of interest is clear. If lower dose ranges were found hazardous by Program F, it might have opened the bomb program and its contractors to lawsuits for injury to human health, as well as public outcry.Comments lawyer Kittrell: "This and other documents indicate that the University of Rochester's fluoride research grew out of the New Jersey lawsuits and was performed in anticipation of lawsuits against the bomb program for human injury. Studies undertaken for litigation purposes by the defendants would not be considered scientifically acceptable today, " adds Kittrell, "because of their inherent bias to prove the chemical safe."Unfortunately, much of the proof of fluoride's safety rests on the work performed by Program F Scientists at the University of Rochester. During the postwar period that university emerged as the leading academic center for establishing the safety of fluoride, as well as its effectiveness in reducing tooth decay, according to Dental School spokesperson William H. Bowen, MD.
The key figure in this research, Bowen said, was Harold C. Hodge-- who also became a leading national proponent of fluoridating public drinking water. Program F's interest in water fluoridation was not just 'to counteract the local fear of fluoride on the part of residents,' as Hodge had earlier written. The bomb program needed human studies, as they had needed human studies for plutonium, and adding fluoride to public water supplies provided one opportunity.
The A-Bomb Program and Water FluoridationBomb-program scientists played a prominent -- if unpublicized -- role in the nation's first-planned water fluoridation experiment, in Newburgh, New York. The Newburgh Demonstration Project is considered the most extensive study of the health effects of fluoridation, supplying much of the evidence that low doses are safe for children's bones, and good for their teeth.
Planning began in 1943 with the appointment of a special New York State Health Department committee to study the advisability of adding fluoride to Newburgh's drinking water. The chairman of the committee was Dr. Hodge, then chief of fluoride toxicity studies for the Manhattan Project.Subsequent members included Henry L. Barnett, a captain in the Project's Medical section, and John W. Fertig, in 1944 with the office of Scientific Research and Development, the Pentagon group which sired the Manhattan Project. Their military affiliations were kept secret: Hodge was described as a pharmacologist, Barnett as a pediatrician. Placed in charge of the Newburgh project was David B. Ast, chief dental officer of the State Health Department. Ast had participated in a key secret wartime conference on fluoride held by the Manhattan Project, and later worked with Dr. Hodge on the Project's investigation of human injury in the New Jersey incident, according to once-secret memos.The committee recommended that Newburgh be fluoridated. It also selected the types of medical studies to be done, and "provided expert guidance" for the duration of the experiment. The key question to be answered was: "Are there any cumulative effects -- beneficial or otherwise, on tissues and organs other than the teeth -- of long-continued ingestion of such small concentrations...?" According to the declassified documents, this was also key information sought by the bomb program, which would require long-continued exposure of workers and communities to fluoride throughout the Cold War.
In May 1945, Newburgh's water was fluoridated, and over the next ten years its residents were studied by the State Health Department. In tandem, Program F conducted its own secret studies, focusing on the amounts of fluoride Newburgh citizens retained in their blood and tissues - key information sought by the bomb program: "Possible toxic effects of fluoride were in the forefront of consideration," the advisory committee stated. Health Department personnel cooperated, shipping blood and placenta samples to the Program F team at the University of Rochester. The samples were collected by Dr. David B. Overton, the Department's chief of pediatric studies at Newburgh.The final report of the Newburgh Demonstration Project, published in 1956 in the Journal of the American Dental Association, concluded that "small concentrations" of fluoride were safe for U.S.citizens.
The biological proof -- "based on work performed ... at the University of Rochester Atomic Energy Project" -- was delivered by Dr. Hodge.Today, news that scientists from the atomic bomb program secretly shaped and guided the Newburgh fluoridation experiment, and studied the citizen's blood and tissue samples, is greeted with incredulity. "I'm shocked -- beyond words," said present-day Newburgh Mayor Audrey Carey, commenting on these reporters' findings. "It reminds me of the Tuskegee experiment that was done on syphilis patients down in Alabama." As a child in the early 1950's, Mayor Carey was taken to the old firehouse on Broadway in Newburgh, which housed the Public Health Clinic. There, doctors from the Newburgh fluoridation project studied her teeth, and a peculiar fusion of two finger bones on her left hand she had been born with. Today, adds Carey, her granddaughter has white dental-fluorosis marks on her front teeth. Mayor Carey wants answers from the government about the secret history of fluoride, and the Newburgh fluoridation experiment. "I absolutely want to pursue it," she said. "It is appalling to do any kind of experimentation and study without people's knowledge and permission."Contacted by these reporters, the director of the Newburgh experiment, David B. Ast, says he was unaware Manhattan Project scientists were involved. "If I had known, I would have been certainly investigating why, and what the connection was," he said. Did he know that blood and placenta samples from Newburgh were being sent to bomb program researchers at the University of Rochester? "I was not aware of it," Ast replied. Did he recall participating in the Manhattan Project's secret wartime conference on fluoride in January 1944, or going to New Jersey with Dr. Hodge to investigate human injury in the du Pont case--as secret memos state? He told the reporters he had no recollection of these events.A spokesperson for the University of Rochester Medical Center, Bob Loeb, confirmed that blood and tissue samples from Newburgh had been tested by the University's Dr. Hodge. On the ethics of secretly studying U.S citizens to obtain information useful in litigation against the A-bomb program, he said, "that's a question we cannot answer." He referred inquiries to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), successor to the Atomic Energy Commission.A spokesperson for the DOE in Washington, Jayne Brady, confirmed that a review of DOE files indicated that a "significant reason" for fluoride experiments conducted at the University of Rochester after the war was "impending litigation between the du Pont company and residents of New Jersey areas." However, she added, "DOE has found no documents to indicate that fluoride research was done to protect the Manhattan Project or its contractors from lawsuits."
On Manhattan Project involvement in Newburgh, the spokesperson stated, "Nothing that we have suggests that the DOE or predecessor agencies -- especially the Manhattan Project -- authorized fluoride experiments to be performed on children in the 1940's." When told that the reporters had several documents that directly tied the Manhattan Project's successor agency at the University of Rochester, the AEP, to the Newburgh experiment, the DOE spokesperson later conceded her study was confined to "the available universe" of documents. Two days later spokesperson Jayne Brady faxed a statement for clarification: "My search only involved the documents that we collected as part of our human radiation experiments project -- fluoride was not part of our research effort. "Most significantly," the statement continued, relevant documents may be in a classified collection at the DOE Oak Ridge National Laboratory known as the Records Holding Task Group.
"This collection consists entirely of classified documents removed from other files for the purpose of classified document accountability many years ago," and was "a rich source of documents for the human radiation experiments project," she said. The crucial question arising from this investigation is: Were adverse health findings from Newburgh and other bomb-program fluoride studies suppressed? All AEC-funded studies had to be declassified before publication in civilian medical and dental journals. Where are the original classified versions?The transcript of one of the major secret scientific conferences of WW2--on "fluoride metabolism"--is missing from the files of the U.S. National Archives. Participants in the conference included key figures who promoted the safety of fluoride and water fluoridation to the public after the war - Harold Hodge of the Manhattan Project, David B. Ast of the Newburgh Project, and U.S. Public Health Service dentist H.Trendley Dean, popularly known as the "father of fluoridation." "If it is missing from the files, it is probably still classified," National Archives librarians told these reporters.A 1944 WW2 Manhattan Project classified report on water fluoridation is missing from the files of the University of Rochester Atomic Energy Project, the U.S. National Archives, and the Nuclear Repository at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville. The next four numerically consecutive documents are also missing, while the remainder of the "MP-1500 series" is present. "Either those documents are still classified, or they've been 'disappeared' by the government," says Clifford Honicker, Executive Director of the American Environmental Health Studies Project, in Knoxville, Tennessee, which provided key evidence in the public exposure and prosecution of U.S. human radiation experiments.Seven pages have been cut out of a 1947 Rochester bomb-project notebook entitled "Du Pont litigation." "Most unusual," commented chief medical school archivist Chris Hoolihan. Similarly, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests by these authors over a year ago with the DOE for hundreds of classified fluoride reports have failed to dislodge any. "We're behind," explained Amy Rothrock, FOIA officer for the Department of Energy at their Oak Ridge operations.Was information suppressed?
These reporters made what appears to be the first discovery of the original classified version of a fluoride safety study by bomb program scientists. A censored version of this study was later published in the August 1948 Journal of the American Dental Association. Comparison of the secret with the published version indicates that the U.S. AEC did censor damaging information on fluoride, to the point of tragicomedy.
This was a study of the dental and physical health of workers in a factory producing fluoride for the A-bomb program, conducted by a team of dentists from the Manhattan Project.* The secret version reports that most of the men had no teeth left. The published version reports only that the men had fewer cavities.* The secret version says the men had to wear rubber boots because the fluoride fumes disintegrated the nails in their shoes. The published version does not mention this. * The secret version says the fluoride may have acted similarly on the men's teeth, contributing to their toothlessness. The published version omits this statement.The published version concludes that "the men were unusually healthy, judged from both a medical and dental point of view."
Asked for comment on the early links of the Manhattan Project to water fluoridation, Dr Harold Slavkin, Director of the National Institute for Dental Research, the U.S. agency which today funds fluoride research, said, "I wasn't aware of any input from the Atomic Energy Commission." Nevertheless, he insisted, fluoride's efficacy and safety in the prevention of dental cavities over the last fifty years is well-proved. "The motivation of a scientist is often different from the outcome, " he reflected. "I do not hold a prejudice about where the knowledge comes from."After comparing the secret and published versions of the censored study, toxicologist Phyllis Mullenix commented, "This makes me ashamed to be a scientist." Of other Cold War-era fluoride safety studies, she asks, "Were they all done like this?"
Archival research by Clifford Honicker
About the authors :
Joel Griffiths is a medical writer in New York City, author of a book on radiation hazards and numerous articles for medical and popular publications. Joel can be contacted at 212-662-6695.
Chris Bryson holds a Masters degree from the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism, and has worked for the British Broadcasting Corporation, The Manchester Guardian, The Christian Science Monitor and Public Television. Chris can be contacted at 212-665-3442.
Waste Not # 414 Published 48 times a year. Annual rates: Groups & Non-Profits $50; Individuals $40; Students & Seniors $35; Consultants & For-Profits $125; Canadian $US45; Overseas $65. Editors: Ellen & Paul Connett, 82 Judson Street, Canton NY 13617. Tel: 315-379-9200. Fax: 315-379-0448. Email: wastenot@northnet.org
Fluoride Action Network 802-338-5577 info@fluoridealert.org
"This makes me ashamed to be a scientist."
Home
About FAN
Latest News
Water Fluoridation
Health Effects Database
Sources of Fluoride Exposure
Fluoride Pollution
Fluorine Pesticides
Take Action!
Contact Us
Donate
FAQs
In t r o d u c t i o n: The following article was commissioned by the Christian Science Monitor in the spring of 1997. Despite much favorable comment from editors, and full documentation, the story remains unpublished by the Monitor. By any yardstick, this report was an award-winning scoop for any national paper. The report offers a glimpse into the history of fluoride, a bio-accumulative toxic that Americans ingest every day. The authors, Griffiths and Bryson, spent more than a year on research. With the belief that the information should be withheld no longer, the authors gave their report to Waste Not, and others, with a short note: "use as you wish."
This introduction is taken from Waste Not #414 (September 1997) where the article was first published. The article went on to be nominated as the year's 18th most censored story in the 1998 Project Censored Series.
Fluoride, Teeth, and the Atomic Bombby Chris Bryson & Joel Griffiths
Some fifty years after the United States began adding fluoride to public water supplies to reduce cavities in children's teeth, declassified government documents are shedding new light on the roots of that still-controversial public health measure, revealing a surprising connection between fluoride and the dawning of the nuclear age. Today, two thirds of U.S. public drinking water is fluoridated. Many municipalities still resist the practice, disbelieving the government's assurances of safety.Since the days of World War II, when this nation prevailed by building the world's first atomic bomb, U.S. public health leaders have maintained that low doses of fluoride are safe for people, and good for children's teeth.That safety verdict should now be re-examined in the light of hundreds of once-secret WWII documents obtained by Griffiths and Bryson --including declassified papers of the Manhattan Project, the U.S. military group that built the atomic bomb.Fluoride was the key chemical in atomic bomb production, according to the documents. Massive quantities of fluoride-- millions of tons-- were essential for the manufacture of bomb-grade uranium and plutonium for nuclear weapons throughout the Cold War. One of the most toxic chemicals known, fluoride rapidly emerged as the leading chemical health hazard of the U.S atomic bomb program--both for workers and for nearby communities, the documents reveal.Other revelations include: * Much of the original proof that fluoride is safe for humans in low doses was generated by A-bomb program scientists, who had been secretly ordered to provide "evidence useful in litigation" against defense contractors for fluoride injury to citizens. The first lawsuits against the U.S. A-bomb program were not over radiation, but over fluoride damage, the documents show.* Human studies were required. Bomb program researchers played a leading role in the design and implementation of the most extensive U.S. study of the health effects of fluoridating public drinking water--conducted in Newburgh, New York from 1945 to 1956. Then, in a classified operation code-named "Program F," they secretly gathered and analyzed blood and tissue samples from Newburgh citizens, with the cooperation of State Health Department personnel.* The original secret version--obtained by these reporters--of a 1948 study published by Program F scientists in the Journal of the American Dental Association shows that evidence of adverse health effects from fluoride was censored by the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) --considered the most powerful of Cold War agencies-- for reasons of national security.* The bomb program's fluoride safety studies were conducted at the University of Rochester, site of one of the most notorious human radiation experiments of the Cold War, in which unsuspecting hospital patients were injected with toxic doses of radioactive plutonium. The fluoride studies were conducted with the same ethical mind-set, in which "national security" was paramount. * The U.S. government's conflict of interest--and its motive to prove fluoride "safe" -- has not until now been made clear to the general public in the furious debate over water fluoridation since the 1950's, nor to civilian researchers and health professionals, or journalists.The declassified documents resonate with a growing body of scientific evidence, and a chorus of questions, about the health effects of fluoride in the environment. Human exposure to fluoride has mushroomed since World War II, due not only to fluoridated water and toothpaste, but to environmental pollution by major industries from aluminum to pesticides: fluoride is a critical industrial chemical.The impact can be seen, literally, in the smiles of our children. Large numbers of U.S. young people--up to 80 percent in some cities--now have dental fluorosis, the first visible sign of excessive fluoride exposure, according to the U.S. National Research Council. (The signs are whitish flecks or spots, particularly on the front teeth, or dark spots or stripes in more severe cases.)Less-known to the public is that fluoride also accumulates in bones --"The teeth are windows to what's happening in the bones," explains Paul Connett, Professor of Chemistry at St. Lawrence University (N.Y.). In recent years, pediatric bone specialists have expressed alarm about an increase in stress fractures among U.S. young people. Connett and other scientists are concerned that fluoride --linked to bone damage by studies since the 1930's-- may be a contributing factor. The declassified documents add urgency: much of the original proof that low-dose fluoride is safe for children's bones came from U.S. bomb program scientists, according to this investigation.Now, researchers who have reviewed these declassified documents fear that Cold War national security considerations may have prevented objective scientific evaluation of vital public health questions concerning fluoride."Information was buried," concludes Dr. Phyllis Mullenix, former head of toxicology at Forsyth Dental Center in Boston, and now a critic of fluoridation. Animal studies Mullenix and co-workers conducted at Forsyth in the early 1990's indicated that fluoride was a powerful central nervous system (CNS) toxin, and might adversely affect human brain functioning, even at low doses. (New epidemiological evidence from China adds support, showing a correlation between low-dose fluoride exposure and diminished I.Q. in children.) Mullenix's results were published in 1995, in a reputable peer-reviewed scientific journal.During her investigation, Mullenix was astonished to discover there had been virtually no previous U.S. studies of fluoride's effects on the human brain. Then, her application for a grant to continue her CNS research was turned down by the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH), where an NIH panel, she says, flatly told her that "fluoride does not have central nervous system effects."Declassified documents of the U.S. atomic-bomb program indicate otherwise. An April 29, 1944 Manhattan Project memo reports: "Clinical evidence suggests that uranium hexafluoride may have a rather marked central nervous system effect.... It seems most likely that the F [code for fluoride] component rather than the T [code for uranium] is the causative factor." The memo --stamped "secret"-- is addressed to the head of the Manhattan Project's Medical Section, Colonel Stafford Warren. Colonel Warren is asked to approve a program of animal research on CNS effects: "Since work with these compounds is essential, it will be necessary to know in advance what mental effects may occur after exposure...This is important not only to protect a given individual, but also to prevent a confused workman from injuring others by improperly performing his duties."On the same day, Colonel Warren approved the CNS research program. This was in 1944, at the height of the Second World War and the nation's race to build the world's first atomic bomb. For research on fluoride's CNS effects to be approved at such a momentous time, the supporting evidence set forth in the proposal forwarded along with the memo must have been persuasive. The proposal, however, is missing from the files of the U.S. National Archives. "If you find the memos, but the document they refer to is missing, its probably still classified," said Charles Reeves, chief librarian at the Atlanta branch of the U.S. National Archives and Records Administration, where the memos were found. Similarly, no results of the Manhattan Project's fluoride CNS research could be found in the files.After reviewing the memos, Mullenix declared herself "flabbergasted." She went on, "How could I be told by NIH that fluoride has no central nervous system effects when these documents were sitting there all the time?" She reasons that the Manhattan Project did do fluoride CNS studies --"that kind of warning, that fluoride workers might be a danger to the bomb program by improperly performing their duties--I can't imagine that would be ignored"-- but that the results were buried because they might create a difficult legal and public relations problem for the government.
The author of the 1944 CNS research proposal was Dr. Harold C. Hodge, at the time chief of fluoride toxicology studies for the University of Rochester division of the Manhattan Project. Nearly fifty years later at the Forsyth Dental Center in Boston, Dr. Mullenix was introduced to a gently ambling elderly man brought in to serve as a consultant on her CNS research--Harold C. Hodge. By then Hodge had achieved status emeritus as a world authority on fluoride safety. "But even though he was supposed to be helping me," says Mullenix, "he never once mentioned the CNS work he had done for the Manhattan Project." The "black hole" in fluoride CNS research since the days of the Manhattan Project is unacceptable to Mullenix, who refuses to abandon the issue. "There is so much fluoride exposure now, and we simply do not know what it is doing," she says. "You can't just walk away from this."Dr. Antonio Noronha, an NIH scientific review advisor familiar with Dr. Mullenix's grant request, says her proposal was rejected by a scientific peer-review group. He terms her claim of institutional bias against fluoride CNS research "farfetched." He adds, "We strive very hard at NIH to make sure politics does not enter the picture."Fluoride and National SecurityThe documentary trail begins at the height of WW2, in 1944, when a severe pollution incident occurred downwind of the E.I. du Pont du Nemours Company chemical factory in Deepwater, New Jersey. The factory was then producing millions of pounds of fluoride for the Manhattan project, the ultra-secret U.S. military program racing to produce the world's first atomic bomb.The farms downwind in Gloucester and Salem counties were famous for their high-quality produce -- their peaches went directly to the Waldorf Astoria Hotel in New York. Their tomatoes were bought up by Campbell's Soup. But in the summer of 1943, the farmers began to report that their crops were blighted, and that "something is burning up the peach crops around here." Poultry died after an all-night thunderstorm, they reported. Farm workers who ate the produce they had picked sometimes vomited all night and into the next day. "I remember our horses looked sick and were too stiff to work," these reporters were told by Mildred Giordano, who was a teenager at the time. Some cows were so crippled they could not stand up, and grazed by crawling on their bellies. The account was confirmed in taped interviews, shortly before he died, with Philip Sadtler of Sadtler Laboratories of Philadelphia, one of the nation's oldest chemical consulting firms. Sadtler had personally conducted the initial investigation of the damage.Although the farmers did not know it, the attention of the Manhattan Project and the federal government was riveted on the New Jersey incident, according to once-secret documents obtained by these reporters. After the war's end, in a secret Manhattan Project memo dated March 1, 1946, the Project's chief of fluoride toxicology studies, Harold C. Hodge, worriedly wrote to his boss Colonel Stafford L. Warren, Chief of the Medical Division, about "problems associated with the question of fluoride contamination of the atmosphere in a certain section of New Jersey. There seem to be four distinct (though related) problems," continued Hodge;
1. A question of injury of the peach crop in 1944.2. A report of extraordinary fluoride content of vegetables grown in this area.3. A report of abnormally high fluoride content in the blood of human individuals residing in this area.4. A report raising the question of serious poisoning of horses and cattle in this area.
The New Jersey farmers waited until the war was over, then sued du Pont and the Manhattan Project for fluoride damage -- reportedly the first lawsuits against the U.S. A-bomb program. Although seemingly trivial, the lawsuits shook the government, the secret documents reveal. Under the personal direction of Manhattan Project chief Major General Leslie R.Groves, secret meetings were convened in Washington, with compulsory attendance by scores of scientists and officials from the U.S War Department, the Manhattan Project, the Food and Drug Administration, the Agriculture and Justice Departments, the U.S Army's Chemical Warfare Service and Edgewood Arsenal, the Bureau of Standards, and du Pont lawyers. Declassified memos of the meetings reveal a secret mobilization of the full forces of the government to defeat the New Jersey farmers: These agencies "are making scientific investigations to obtain evidence which may be used to protect the interest of the Government at the trial of the suits brought by owners of peach orchards in ... New Jersey," stated Manhattan Project Lieutenant Colonel Cooper B. Rhodes, in a memo c.c.'d to General Groves.
27 August 1945Subject: Investigation of Crop Damage at Lower Penns Neck, New JerseyTo: The Commanding General, Army Service Forces, Pentagon Building, Washington D.C."At the request of the Secretary of War the Department of Agriculture has agreed to cooperate in investigating complaints of crop damage attributed... to fumes from a plant operated in connection with the Manhattan Project."Signed, L.R. Groves, Major General U.S.
"The Department of Justice is cooperating in the defense of these suits," wrote General Groves in a Feb. 28, 1946 memo to the Chairman of the U.S. Senate Special Committee on Atomic Energy. Why the national-security emergency over a few lawsuits by New Jersey farmers? In 1946 the United States had begun full-scale production of atomic bombs. No other nation had yet tested a nuclear weapon, and the A-bomb was seen as crucial for U.S leadership of the postwar world. The New Jersey fluoride lawsuits were a serious roadblock to that strategy. "The specter of endless lawsuits haunted the military," writes Lansing Lamont in his acclaimed book about the first atomic bomb test, "Day of Trinity."In the case of fluoride, "If the farmers won, it would open the door to further suits, which might impede the bomb program's ability to use fluoride," said Jacqueline Kittrell, a Tennessee public interest lawyer specializing in nuclear cases, who examined the declassified fluoride documents. (Kittrell has represented plaintiffs in several human radiation experiment cases.) She added, "The reports of human injury were especially threatening, because of the potential for enormous settlements -- not to mention the PR problem." Indeed, du Pont was particularly concerned about the "possible psychologic reaction" to the New Jersey pollution incident, according to a secret 1946 Manhattan Project memo. Facing a threat from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to embargo the region's produce because of "high fluoride content," du Pont dispatched its lawyers to the FDA offices in Washington, where an agitated meeting ensued. According to a memo sent next day to General Groves, Du Pont's lawyer argued "that in view of the pending suits...any action by the Food and Drug Administration... would have a serious effect on the du Pont Company and would create a bad public relations situation." After the meeting adjourned, Manhattan Project Captain John Davies approached the FDA's Food Division chief and "impressed upon Dr. White the substantial interest which the Government had in claims which might arise as a result of action which might be taken by the Food and Drug Administration." There was no embargo. Instead, new tests for fluoride in the New Jersey area would be conducted -- not by the Department of Agriculture -- but by the U.S. Army's Chemical Warfare Service because "work done by the Chemical Warfare Service would carry the greatest weight as evidence if... lawsuits are started by the complainants." The memo was signed by General Groves. Meanwhile, the public relations problem remained unresolved -- local citizens were in a panic about fluoride. The farmer's spokesman, Willard B. Kille, was personally invited to dine with General Groves --then known as "the man who built the atomic bomb" -- at his office at the War Department on March 26, 1946. Although he had been diagnosed with fluoride poisoning by his doctor, Kille departed the luncheon convinced of the government's good faith. The next day he wrote to the general, wishing the other farmers could have been present, he said, so "they too could come away with the feeling that their interests in this particular matter were being safeguarded by men of the very highest type whose integrity they could not question." In a subsequent secret Manhattan project memo, a broader solution to the public relations problem was suggested by chief fluoride toxicologist Harold C. Hodge. He wrote to the Medical Section chief, Col. Warren: "Would there be any use in making attempts to counteract the local fear of fluoride on the part of residents of Salem and Gloucester counties through lectures on F toxicology and perhaps the usefulness of F in tooth health?" Such lectures were indeed given, not only to New Jersey citizens but to the rest of the nation throughout the Cold War.The New Jersey farmers' lawsuits were ultimately stymied by the government's refusal to reveal the key piece of information that would have settled the case --how much fluoride du Pont had vented into the atmosphere during the war. "Disclosure... would be injurious to the military security of the United States," wrote Manhattan Project Major C.A Taney, Jr. The farmers were pacified with token financial settlements, according to interviews with descendants still living in the area."All we knew is that du Pont released some chemical that burned up all the peach trees around here," recalls Angelo Giordano, whose father James was one of the original plaintiffs. "The trees were no good after that, so we had to give up on the peaches." Their horses and cows, too, acted stiff and walked stiff, recalls his sister Mildred. "Could any of that have been the fluoride ?" she asked. (The symptoms she detailed to the authors are cardinal signs of fluoride toxicity, according to veterinary toxicologists.) The Giordano family, too, has been plagued by bone and joint problems, Mildred adds. Recalling the settlement received by the Giordanos, Angelo told these reporters that "my father said he got about $200." The farmers were stonewalled in their search for information, and their complaints have long since been forgotten. But they unknowingly left their imprint on history -- their claims of injury to their health reverberated through the corridors of power in Washington, and triggered intensive secret bomb-program research on the health effects of fluoride. A secret 1945 memo from Manhattan Project Lt. Col. Rhodes to General Groves stated: "Because of complaints that animals and humans have been injured by hydrogen fluoride fumes in [the New Jersey] area, although there are no pending suits involving such claims, the University of Rochester is conducting experiments to determine the toxic effect of fluoride."Much of the proof of fluoride's safety in low doses rests on the postwar work performed by the University of Rochester, in anticipation of lawsuits against the bomb program for human injury.
Fluoride and the Cold War.
Delegating fluoride safety studies to the University of Rochester was not surprising. During WWII the federal government had become involved, for the first time, in large-scale funding of scientific research at government-owned labs and private colleges. Those early spending priorities were shaped by the nation's often-secret military needs. The prestigious upstate New York college, in particular, had housed a key wartime division of the Manhattan Project, studying the health effects of the new "special materials," such as uranium, plutonium, beryllium and fluoride, being used to make the atomic bomb. That work continued after the war, with millions of dollars flowing from the Manhattan Project and its successor organization, the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC). (Indeed, the bomb left an indelible imprint on all U.S. science in the late 1940's and 50's. Up to 90% of federal funds for university research came from either the Defense Department or the AEC in this period, according to Noam Chomsky's 1996 book "The Cold War and the University.")The University of Rochester medical school became a revolving door for senior bomb program scientists. Postwar faculty included Stafford Warren, the top medical officer of the Manhattan Project, and Harold Hodge, chief of fluoride research for the bomb program. But this marriage of military secrecy and medical science bore deformed offspring. The University of Rochester's classified fluoride studies -- code- named Program F -- were conducted at its Atomic Energy Project (AEP), a top-secret facility funded by the AEC and housed in Strong Memorial Hospital. It was there that one of the most notorious human radiation experiments of the Cold War took place, in which unsuspecting hospital patients were injected with toxic doses of radioactive plutonium. Revelation of this experiment in a Pulitzer prize-winning account by Eileen Welsome led to a 1995 U.S. Presidential investigation, and a multimillion-dollar cash settlement for victims.Program F was not about children's teeth. It grew directly out of litigation against the bomb program and its main purpose was to furnish scientific ammunition which the government and its nuclear contractors could use to defeat lawsuits for human injury. Program F's director was none other than Harold C. Hodge, who had led the Manhattan Project investigation of alleged human injury in the New Jersey fluoride-pollution incident.Program F's purpose is spelled out in a classified 1948 report. It reads: "To supply evidence useful in the litigation arising from an alleged loss of a fruit crop several years ago, a number of problems have been opened. Since excessive blood fluoride levels were reported in human residents of the same area, our principal effort has been devoted to describing the relationship of blood fluorides to toxic effects." The litigation referred to, of course, and the claims of human injury were against the bomb program and its contractors. Thus, the purpose of Program F was to obtain evidence useful in litigation against the bomb program. The research was being conducted by the defendants.The potential conflict of interest is clear. If lower dose ranges were found hazardous by Program F, it might have opened the bomb program and its contractors to lawsuits for injury to human health, as well as public outcry.Comments lawyer Kittrell: "This and other documents indicate that the University of Rochester's fluoride research grew out of the New Jersey lawsuits and was performed in anticipation of lawsuits against the bomb program for human injury. Studies undertaken for litigation purposes by the defendants would not be considered scientifically acceptable today, " adds Kittrell, "because of their inherent bias to prove the chemical safe."Unfortunately, much of the proof of fluoride's safety rests on the work performed by Program F Scientists at the University of Rochester. During the postwar period that university emerged as the leading academic center for establishing the safety of fluoride, as well as its effectiveness in reducing tooth decay, according to Dental School spokesperson William H. Bowen, MD.
The key figure in this research, Bowen said, was Harold C. Hodge-- who also became a leading national proponent of fluoridating public drinking water. Program F's interest in water fluoridation was not just 'to counteract the local fear of fluoride on the part of residents,' as Hodge had earlier written. The bomb program needed human studies, as they had needed human studies for plutonium, and adding fluoride to public water supplies provided one opportunity.
The A-Bomb Program and Water FluoridationBomb-program scientists played a prominent -- if unpublicized -- role in the nation's first-planned water fluoridation experiment, in Newburgh, New York. The Newburgh Demonstration Project is considered the most extensive study of the health effects of fluoridation, supplying much of the evidence that low doses are safe for children's bones, and good for their teeth.
Planning began in 1943 with the appointment of a special New York State Health Department committee to study the advisability of adding fluoride to Newburgh's drinking water. The chairman of the committee was Dr. Hodge, then chief of fluoride toxicity studies for the Manhattan Project.Subsequent members included Henry L. Barnett, a captain in the Project's Medical section, and John W. Fertig, in 1944 with the office of Scientific Research and Development, the Pentagon group which sired the Manhattan Project. Their military affiliations were kept secret: Hodge was described as a pharmacologist, Barnett as a pediatrician. Placed in charge of the Newburgh project was David B. Ast, chief dental officer of the State Health Department. Ast had participated in a key secret wartime conference on fluoride held by the Manhattan Project, and later worked with Dr. Hodge on the Project's investigation of human injury in the New Jersey incident, according to once-secret memos.The committee recommended that Newburgh be fluoridated. It also selected the types of medical studies to be done, and "provided expert guidance" for the duration of the experiment. The key question to be answered was: "Are there any cumulative effects -- beneficial or otherwise, on tissues and organs other than the teeth -- of long-continued ingestion of such small concentrations...?" According to the declassified documents, this was also key information sought by the bomb program, which would require long-continued exposure of workers and communities to fluoride throughout the Cold War.
In May 1945, Newburgh's water was fluoridated, and over the next ten years its residents were studied by the State Health Department. In tandem, Program F conducted its own secret studies, focusing on the amounts of fluoride Newburgh citizens retained in their blood and tissues - key information sought by the bomb program: "Possible toxic effects of fluoride were in the forefront of consideration," the advisory committee stated. Health Department personnel cooperated, shipping blood and placenta samples to the Program F team at the University of Rochester. The samples were collected by Dr. David B. Overton, the Department's chief of pediatric studies at Newburgh.The final report of the Newburgh Demonstration Project, published in 1956 in the Journal of the American Dental Association, concluded that "small concentrations" of fluoride were safe for U.S.citizens.
The biological proof -- "based on work performed ... at the University of Rochester Atomic Energy Project" -- was delivered by Dr. Hodge.Today, news that scientists from the atomic bomb program secretly shaped and guided the Newburgh fluoridation experiment, and studied the citizen's blood and tissue samples, is greeted with incredulity. "I'm shocked -- beyond words," said present-day Newburgh Mayor Audrey Carey, commenting on these reporters' findings. "It reminds me of the Tuskegee experiment that was done on syphilis patients down in Alabama." As a child in the early 1950's, Mayor Carey was taken to the old firehouse on Broadway in Newburgh, which housed the Public Health Clinic. There, doctors from the Newburgh fluoridation project studied her teeth, and a peculiar fusion of two finger bones on her left hand she had been born with. Today, adds Carey, her granddaughter has white dental-fluorosis marks on her front teeth. Mayor Carey wants answers from the government about the secret history of fluoride, and the Newburgh fluoridation experiment. "I absolutely want to pursue it," she said. "It is appalling to do any kind of experimentation and study without people's knowledge and permission."Contacted by these reporters, the director of the Newburgh experiment, David B. Ast, says he was unaware Manhattan Project scientists were involved. "If I had known, I would have been certainly investigating why, and what the connection was," he said. Did he know that blood and placenta samples from Newburgh were being sent to bomb program researchers at the University of Rochester? "I was not aware of it," Ast replied. Did he recall participating in the Manhattan Project's secret wartime conference on fluoride in January 1944, or going to New Jersey with Dr. Hodge to investigate human injury in the du Pont case--as secret memos state? He told the reporters he had no recollection of these events.A spokesperson for the University of Rochester Medical Center, Bob Loeb, confirmed that blood and tissue samples from Newburgh had been tested by the University's Dr. Hodge. On the ethics of secretly studying U.S citizens to obtain information useful in litigation against the A-bomb program, he said, "that's a question we cannot answer." He referred inquiries to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), successor to the Atomic Energy Commission.A spokesperson for the DOE in Washington, Jayne Brady, confirmed that a review of DOE files indicated that a "significant reason" for fluoride experiments conducted at the University of Rochester after the war was "impending litigation between the du Pont company and residents of New Jersey areas." However, she added, "DOE has found no documents to indicate that fluoride research was done to protect the Manhattan Project or its contractors from lawsuits."
On Manhattan Project involvement in Newburgh, the spokesperson stated, "Nothing that we have suggests that the DOE or predecessor agencies -- especially the Manhattan Project -- authorized fluoride experiments to be performed on children in the 1940's." When told that the reporters had several documents that directly tied the Manhattan Project's successor agency at the University of Rochester, the AEP, to the Newburgh experiment, the DOE spokesperson later conceded her study was confined to "the available universe" of documents. Two days later spokesperson Jayne Brady faxed a statement for clarification: "My search only involved the documents that we collected as part of our human radiation experiments project -- fluoride was not part of our research effort. "Most significantly," the statement continued, relevant documents may be in a classified collection at the DOE Oak Ridge National Laboratory known as the Records Holding Task Group.
"This collection consists entirely of classified documents removed from other files for the purpose of classified document accountability many years ago," and was "a rich source of documents for the human radiation experiments project," she said. The crucial question arising from this investigation is: Were adverse health findings from Newburgh and other bomb-program fluoride studies suppressed? All AEC-funded studies had to be declassified before publication in civilian medical and dental journals. Where are the original classified versions?The transcript of one of the major secret scientific conferences of WW2--on "fluoride metabolism"--is missing from the files of the U.S. National Archives. Participants in the conference included key figures who promoted the safety of fluoride and water fluoridation to the public after the war - Harold Hodge of the Manhattan Project, David B. Ast of the Newburgh Project, and U.S. Public Health Service dentist H.Trendley Dean, popularly known as the "father of fluoridation." "If it is missing from the files, it is probably still classified," National Archives librarians told these reporters.A 1944 WW2 Manhattan Project classified report on water fluoridation is missing from the files of the University of Rochester Atomic Energy Project, the U.S. National Archives, and the Nuclear Repository at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville. The next four numerically consecutive documents are also missing, while the remainder of the "MP-1500 series" is present. "Either those documents are still classified, or they've been 'disappeared' by the government," says Clifford Honicker, Executive Director of the American Environmental Health Studies Project, in Knoxville, Tennessee, which provided key evidence in the public exposure and prosecution of U.S. human radiation experiments.Seven pages have been cut out of a 1947 Rochester bomb-project notebook entitled "Du Pont litigation." "Most unusual," commented chief medical school archivist Chris Hoolihan. Similarly, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests by these authors over a year ago with the DOE for hundreds of classified fluoride reports have failed to dislodge any. "We're behind," explained Amy Rothrock, FOIA officer for the Department of Energy at their Oak Ridge operations.Was information suppressed?
These reporters made what appears to be the first discovery of the original classified version of a fluoride safety study by bomb program scientists. A censored version of this study was later published in the August 1948 Journal of the American Dental Association. Comparison of the secret with the published version indicates that the U.S. AEC did censor damaging information on fluoride, to the point of tragicomedy.
This was a study of the dental and physical health of workers in a factory producing fluoride for the A-bomb program, conducted by a team of dentists from the Manhattan Project.* The secret version reports that most of the men had no teeth left. The published version reports only that the men had fewer cavities.* The secret version says the men had to wear rubber boots because the fluoride fumes disintegrated the nails in their shoes. The published version does not mention this. * The secret version says the fluoride may have acted similarly on the men's teeth, contributing to their toothlessness. The published version omits this statement.The published version concludes that "the men were unusually healthy, judged from both a medical and dental point of view."
Asked for comment on the early links of the Manhattan Project to water fluoridation, Dr Harold Slavkin, Director of the National Institute for Dental Research, the U.S. agency which today funds fluoride research, said, "I wasn't aware of any input from the Atomic Energy Commission." Nevertheless, he insisted, fluoride's efficacy and safety in the prevention of dental cavities over the last fifty years is well-proved. "The motivation of a scientist is often different from the outcome, " he reflected. "I do not hold a prejudice about where the knowledge comes from."After comparing the secret and published versions of the censored study, toxicologist Phyllis Mullenix commented, "This makes me ashamed to be a scientist." Of other Cold War-era fluoride safety studies, she asks, "Were they all done like this?"
Archival research by Clifford Honicker
About the authors :
Joel Griffiths is a medical writer in New York City, author of a book on radiation hazards and numerous articles for medical and popular publications. Joel can be contacted at 212-662-6695.
Chris Bryson holds a Masters degree from the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism, and has worked for the British Broadcasting Corporation, The Manchester Guardian, The Christian Science Monitor and Public Television. Chris can be contacted at 212-665-3442.
Waste Not # 414 Published 48 times a year. Annual rates: Groups & Non-Profits $50; Individuals $40; Students & Seniors $35; Consultants & For-Profits $125; Canadian $US45; Overseas $65. Editors: Ellen & Paul Connett, 82 Judson Street, Canton NY 13617. Tel: 315-379-9200. Fax: 315-379-0448. Email: wastenot@northnet.org
Fluoride Action Network 802-338-5577 info@fluoridealert.org
miércoles 14 de mayo de 2008
Why EPA's Headquarters Professionals' Union Opposes Fluoridation
Why EPA's Headquarters Professionals' Union Opposes Fluoridation
National Treasury Employees Union - Chapter 280
May 1, 1999
Why EPA's Headquarters Professionals' Union Opposes Fluoridation
by Dr. J. William HirzySenior Vice President, NTEU Chapter 280
The following documents why our union, formerly National Federation of Federal Employees Local 2050 and since April 1998 Chapter 280 of the National Treasury Employees Union, took the stand it did opposing fluoridation of drinking water supplies. Our union is comprised of and represents the approximately 1500 scientists, lawyers, engineers and other professional employees at EPA Headquarters here in Washington, D.C.
The union first became interested in this issue rather by accident. Like most Americans, including many physicians and dentists, most of our members had thought that fluoride's only effects were beneficial - reductions in tooth decay, etc. We too believed assurances of safety and effectiveness of water fluoridation. For a history of how drinking water fluoridation began, see "Fluoride, Teeth and the Atomic Bomb", by investigative reporters Joel Griffiths and Chris Bryson.
Then, as EPA was engaged in revising its drinking water standard for fluoride in 1985, an employee came to the union with a complaint: he said he was being forced to write into the regulation a statement to the effect that EPA thought it was alright for children to have "funky" teeth. It was OK, EPA said, because it considered that condition to be only a cosmetic effect, not an adverse health effect.
The reason for this EPA position was that it was under political pressure to set its health-based standard for fluoride at 4 mg/liter. At that level, EPA knew that a significant number of children develop moderate to severe dental fluorosis, but since it had deemed the effect as only cosmetic, EPA didn't have to set its health-based standard at a lower level to prevent it. We tried to settle this ethics issue quietly, within the family, but EPA was unable or unwilling to resist external political pressure, and we took the fight public with a union amicus curiae brief in a lawsuit filed against EPA by a public interest group. The union has published on this initial involvement period in detail (1).
Since then our opposition to drinking water fluoridation has grown, based on the scientific literature documenting the increasingly out-of-control exposures to fluoride, the lack of benefit to dental health from ingestion of fluoride and the hazards to human health from such ingestion.
These hazards include acute toxic hazard, such as to people with impaired kidney function, as well as chronic toxic hazards of gene mutations, cancer, reproductive effects, neurotoxicity, bone pathology and dental fluorosis.
First, a review of recent neurotoxicity research results.
In 1995, Mullenix and co-workers (2) showed that rats given fluoride in drinking water at levels that give rise to plasma fluoride concentrations in the range seen in humans suffer neurotoxic effects that vary according to when the rats were given the fluoride - as adult animals, as young animals, or through the placenta before birth. Those exposed before birth were born hyperactive and remained so throughout their lives. Those exposed as young or adult animals displayed depressed activity.
Then in 1998, Guan and co-workers (3) gave doses similar to those used by the Mullenix research group to try to understand the mechanism(s) underlying the effects seen by the Mullenix group. Guan's group found that several key chemicals in the brain - those that form the membrane of brain cells - were substantially depleted in rats given fluoride, as compared to those who did not get fluoride.
Another 1998 publication by Varner, Jensen and others (4) reported on the brain- and kidney damaging effects in rats that were given fluoride in drinking water at the same level deemed "optimal" by pro-fluoridation groups, namely 1 part per million (1 ppm). Even more pronounced damage was seen in animals that got the fluoride in conjunction with aluminum.
These results are especially disturbing because of the low dose level of fluoride that shows the toxic effect in rats -rats are more resistant to fluoride than humans. This latter statement is based on Mullenix's finding that it takes substantially more fluoride in the drinking water of rats than of humans to reach the same fluoride level in plasma. It is the level in plasma that determines how much fluoride is "seen" by particular tissues in the body. So when rats get 1 ppm in drinking water, their brains and kidneys are exposed to much less fluoride than humans getting 1 ppm, yet they are experiencing toxic effects. Thus we are compelled to consider the likelihood that humans are experiencing damage to their brains and kidneys at the 'optimal' level of 1 ppm.
In support of this concern are results from two epidemiology studies from China (5,6) that show decreases in I.Q. in children who get more fluoride than the control groups of children in each study. These decreases are about 5 to 10 I.Q. points in children aged 8 to 13 years.
Another troubling brain effect has recently surfaced: fluoride's interference with the function of the brain's pineal gland. The pineal gland produces melatonin which, among other roles, mediates the body's internal clock, doing such things as governing the onset of puberty. Jennifer Luke (7) has shown that fluoride accumulates in the pineal gland and inhibits its production of melatonin. She showed in test animals that this inhibition causes an earlier onset of sexual maturity, an effect reported in humans as well in 1956, as part of the Kingston/Newburgh study, which is discussed below. In fluoridated Newburgh, young girls experienced earlier onset of menstruation (on average, by six months) than girls in non-fluoridated Kingston (8).
From a risk assessment perspective, all these brain effect data are particularly compelling and disturbing because they are convergent. We looked at the cancer data with alarm as well. There are epidemiology studies that are convergent with whole-animal and single-cell studies (dealing with the cancer hazard), just as the neurotoxicity research just mentioned all points in the same direction. EPA fired the Office of Drinking Water's chief toxicologist, Dr. William Marcus, who also was our local union's treasurer at the time, for refusing to remain silent on the cancer risk issue (9). The judge who heard the lawsuit he brought against EPA over the firing made that finding - that EPA fired him over his fluoride work and not for the phony reason put forward by EPA management at his dismissal. Dr. Marcus won his lawsuit and is again at work at EPA. Documentation is available on request.
The type of cancer of particular concern with fluoride, although not the only type, is osteosarcoma, especially in males. The National Toxicology Program conducted a two-year study (10) in which rats and mice were given sodium fluoride in drinking water. The positive result of that study (in which malignancies in tissues other than bone were also observed), particularly in male rats, is convergent with a host of data from tests showing fluoride's ability to cause mutations (a principal 'trigger' mechanism for inducing a cell to become cancerous) (e.g.11a, b, c, d and data showing increases in osteosarcomas in young men in New Jersey 12, Washington and Iowa 13) based on their drinking fluoridated water. It was his analysis, repeated statements about all these and other incriminating cancer data, and his requests for an independent, unbiased evaluation of them that got Dr. Marcus fired.
Bone pathology other than cancer is a concern as well. An excellent review of this issue was published by Diesendorf et al. in 1997 (14). Five epidemiology studies have shown a higher rate of hip fractures in fluoridated vs. non-fluoridated communities (15a, b, c, d, e). Crippling skeletal fluorosis was the endpoint used by EPA to set its primary drinking water standard in 1986, and the ethical deficiencies in that standard setting process prompted our union to join the Natural Resources Defense Council in opposing the standard in court, as mentioned above.
Regarding the effectiveness of fluoride in reducing dental cavities, there has not been any double-blind study of fluoride's effectiveness as a caries preventative. There have been many, many small scale, selective publications on this issue that proponents cite to justify fluoridation, but the largest and most comprehensive study, one done by dentists trained by the National Institute of Dental Research, on over 39,000 school children aged 5-17 years, shows no significant differences (in terms of decayed, missing and filled teeth) among caries incidences in fluoridated, non-fluoridated and partially fluoridated communities (16).
The latest publication (17) on the fifty-year fluoridation experiment in two New York cities, Newburgh and Kingston, shows the same thing. the only significant difference in dental health between the two communities as a whole is that fluoridated Newburgh, N.Y. shows about twice the incidence of dental fluorosis (the first, visible sign of fluoride chronic toxicity) as seen in non-fluoridated Kingston.
John Colquhoun's publication on this point of efficacy is especially important (18). Dr. Colquhoun was Principal Dental Officer for Auckland, the largest city in New Zealand, and a staunch supporter of fluoridation - until he was given the task of looking at the world-wide data on fluoridation's effectiveness in preventing cavities. The paper is titled, "Why I changed My Mind About Water Fluoridation." In it Colquhoun provides details on how data were manipulated to support fluoridation in English speaking countries, especially the U.S. and New Zealand. This paper explains why an ethical public health professional was compelled to do a 180 degree turn on fluoridation.
Further on the point of the tide turning against drinking water fluoridation, statements are now coming from other dentists in the pro-fluoride camp who are starting to warn that topical fluoride (e.g. fluoride in tooth paste) is the only significantly beneficial way in which that substance affects dental health (19, 20, 21). However, if the concentrations of fluoride in the oral cavity are sufficient to inhibit bacterial enzymes and cause other bacteriostatic effects, then those concentrations of flouride are also capable of producing adverse effects in mammalian tissue, which likewise relies on enzyme systems. This statement is based not only on common sense, but also on results of mutation studies which show that fluoride can cause gene mutations in mammalian and lower order tissues at fluoride concentrations estimated to be present in the mouth from fluoridated tooth paste (22). Further, there were tumors of the oral cavity seen in the NTP cancer study mentioned above, further strengthening concern over the toxicity of topically applied fluoride.
In any event, a person can choose whether to use fluoridated tooth paste or not (although finding non-fluoridated kinds is getting harder and harder), but one cannot avoid fluoride when it is put into the public water supplies. So, in addition to our concern over the toxicity of fluoride, we note the uncontrolled - and apparently uncontrollable - exposures to fluoride that are occurring nationwide via drinking water, processed foods, fluoride pesticide residues and dental care products. A recent report in the lay media (23), that, according to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), at least 22 percent of America's children now have dental fluorosis, is just one indication of this uncontrolled, excess exposure. The finding of nearly 12 percent incidence of dental fluorosis among children in un-fluoridated Kingston New York (17) is another.
For governmental and other organizations to continue to push for more FLOURIDE exposure in the face of current levels of FLOURIDE over-exposure coupled with an increasing crescendo of adverse toxicity findings is irrational and irresponsible at best.
Thus, we took the stand that a policy which makes the public water supply a vehicle for disseminating this toxic and prophylactically useless (via ingestion, at any rate) substance is wrong.
We have also taken a direct step to protect the employees we represent from the risks of drinking fluoridated water. We applied EPA's risk control methodology, the Reference Dose, to the recent neurotoxicity data. The Reference Dose is the daily dose, expressed in milligrams of chemical per kilogram of body weight, that a person can receive over the long term with reasonable assurance of safety from adverse effects. Application of this methodology to the Varner et al.(4) data leads to a Reference Dose for fluoride of 0.000007 mg/kg-day. Persons who drink about one quart of fluoridated water from the public drinking water supply of the District of Columbia while at work receive about 0.01mg/kg-day from that source alone.
This amount of fluoride is more than 100 times the Reference Dose. On the basis of these results the union filed a grievance, asking that EPA provide un-fluoridated drinking water to its employees.
The implication for the general public of these calculations is clear. Recent, peer-reviewed toxicity data, when applied to EPA's standard method for controlling risks from toxic chemicals, require an immediate halt to the use of the nation's drinking water reservoirs as disposal sites for the toxic waste of the phosphate fertilizer industry (24).
* Read an interview with Dr. Hirzy concerning the NTP's Fluoride Cancer study* Read Dr. Hirzy's June 2000 Testimony to the US Senate
This document was prepared on behalf of the National Treasury Employees Union Chapter 280 by Chapter Senior Vice-President J. William Hirzy, Ph.D. For more information please call Dr. Hirzy at 202-260-4683. His E-mail address is
END NOTE LITERATURE CITATIONS
1. Applying the NAEP code of ethics to the Environmental Protection Agency and the fluoride in drinking water standard. Carton, R.J. and Hirzy, J.W. Proceedings of the 23rd Ann. Conf. of the National Association of Environmental Professionals. 20-24 June, 1998. GEN 51-61. On-line at http//:www.rvi.net/~fluoride/naep.htm
2. Neurotoxicity of sodium fluoride in rats. Mullenix, P.J., Denbesten, P.K., Schunior, A. and Kernan, W.J. Neurotoxicol. Teratol. 17 169-177 (1995)
3. Influence of chronic fluorosis on membrane lipids in rat brain. Z.Z. Guan, Y.N. Wang, K.Q. Xiao, D.Y. Dai, Y.H. Chen, J.L. Liu, P. Sindelar and G. Dallner, Neurotoxicology and Teratology 20 537-542 (1998).
4. Chronic administration of aluminum- fluoride or sodium-fluoride to rats in drinking water: alterations in neuronal and cerebrovascular integrity. Varner, J.A., Jensen, K.F., Horvath, W. And Isaacson, R.L. Brain Research 784 284-298 (1998).
5. Effect of high fluoride water supply on children's intelligence. Zhao, L.B., Liang, G.H., Zhang, D.N., and Wu, X.R. Fluoride 29 190-192 (1996)
6. Effect of fluoride exposure on intelligence in children. Li, X.S., Zhi, J.L., and Gao, R.O. Fluoride 28 (1995).
7. Effect of fluoride on the physiology of the pineal gland. Luke, J.A. Caries Research 28 204 (1994).
8. Newburgh-Kingston caries-fluorine study XIII. Pediatric findings after ten years. Schlesinger, E.R., Overton, D.E., Chase, H.C., and Cantwell, K.T. JADA 52 296-306 (1956).
9. Memorandum dated May 1, 1990. Subject: Fluoride Conference to Review the NTP Draft Fluoride Report; From: Wm. L. Marcus, Senior Science Advisor ODW; To: Alan B. Hais, Acting Director Criteria & Standards Division ODW.
10. Toxicology and carcinogenesis studies of sodium fluoride in F344/N rats and B6C3F1 mice. NTP Report No. 393 (1991).
11a. Chromosome aberrations, sister chromatid exchanges, unscheduled DNA synthesis and morphological neoplastic transformation in Syrian hamster embryo cells. Tsutsui et al. Cancer Research 44 938-941 (1984).
11b. Cytotoxicity, chromosome aberrations and unscheduled DNA synthesis in cultured human diploid fibroblasts. Tsutsui et al. Mutation Research 139 193-198 (1984).
11c. Positive mouse lymphoma assay with and without S-9 activation; positive sister chromatid exchange in Chinese hamster ovary cells with and without S-9 activation; positive chromosome aberration without S-9 activation. Toxicology and carcinogenesis studies of sodium fluoride in F344/N rats and B6C3F1 mice. NTP Report No. 393 (1991).
11d. An increase in the number of Down's syndrome babies born to younger mothers in cities following fluoridation. Science and Public Policy 12 36-46 (1985).
12. A brief report on the association of drinking water fluoridation and the incidence of osteosarcoma among young males. Cohn, P.D. New Jersey Department of Health (1992).
13. Surveillance, epidemiology and end results (SEER) program. National Cancer Institute in Review of fluoride benefits and risks. Department of Health and Human Services. F1-F7 (1991).
14. New evidence on fluoridation. Diesendorf, M., Colquhoun, J., Spittle, B.J., Everingham, D.N., and Clutterbuck, F.W. Australian and New Zealand J. Public Health. 21 187-190 (1997).
15a. Regional variation in the incidence of hip fracture: U.S. white women aged 65 years and older. Jacobsen, S.J., Goldberg, J., Miles, ,T.P. et al. JAMA 264 500-502 (1990)
15b. Hip fracture and fluoridation in Utah?s elderly population. Danielson, C., Lyon, J.L., Egger, M., and Goodenough, G.K. JAMA 268 746-748 (1992).
15c. The association between water fluoridation and hip fracture among white women and men aged 65 years and older: a national ecological study. Jacobsen, S.J., Goldberg, J., Cooper, C. and Lockwood, S.A. Ann. Epidemiol.2 617-626 (1992).
15d. Fluorine concentration is drinking water and fractures in the elderly [letter]. Jacqmin-Gadda, H., Commenges, D. and Dartigues, J.F. JAMA 273 775-776 (1995).
15e. Water fluoridation and hip fracture [letter]. Cooper, C., Wickham, C.A.C., Barker, D.J.R. and Jacobson, S.J. JAMA 266 513-514 (1991).
16. Water fluoridation and tooth decay: Results from the 1986-1987 national survey of U.S. school children. Yiamouyannis, J. Fluoride 23 55-67 (1990).
17. Recommendations for fluoride use in children. Kumar, J.V. and Green, E.L. New York State Dent. J. (1998) 40-47.
18. Why I changed my mind about water fluoridation. Colquhoun, J. Perspectives in Biol. And Medicine 41 1-16 (1997).
19. A re-examination of the pre-eruptive and post-eruptive mechanism of the anti-caries effects of fluoride: is there any anti-caries benefit from swallowing fluoride? Limeback, H. Community Dent. Oral Epidemiol. 27 62-71 (1999).
20. Fluoride supplements for young children: an analysis of the literature focussing on benefits and risks. Riordan, P.J. Community Dent. Oral Epidemiol. 27 72-83 (1999).
21. Prevention and reversal of dental caries: role of low level fluoride. Featherstone, J.D. Community Dent. Oral Epidemiol. 27 31-40 (1999).
22. Appendix H. Review of fluoride benefits and risks. Department of Health and Human Services. H1-H6 (1991).
23. Some young children get too much fluoride. Parker-Pope, T. Wall Street Journal Dec. 21, 1998.
24. Letter from Rebecca Hanmer, Deputy Assistant Administrator for Water, to Leslie Russell re: EPA view on use of by-product fluosilicic (sic) acid as low cost source of fluoride to water authorities. March 30, 1983.
OTHER CITATIONS (This short list does not include the entire literature on fluoride effects)
a. Exposure to high fluoride concentrations in drinking water is associated with decreased birth rates. Freni, S.C. J. Toxicol. Environ. Health 42 109-121 (1994)
b. Ameliorative effects of reduced food-borne fluoride on reproduction in silver foxes. Eckerlin, R.H., Maylin, G.A., Krook, L., and Carmichael, D.T. Cornell Vet. 78 75-91 (1988).
c. Milk production of cows fed fluoride contaminated commercial feed. Eckerlin, R.H., Maylin, G.A., and Krook, L. Cornell Vet. 76 403-404 (1986).
d. Maternal-fetal transfer of fluoride in pregnant women. Calders, R., Chavine, J., Fermanian, J., Tortrat, D., and Laurent, A.M. Biol. Neonate 54 263-269 (1988).
e. Effects of fluoride on screech owl reproduction: teratological evaluation, growth, and blood chemistry in hatchlings. Hoffman, D.J., Pattee, O.H., and Wiemeyer, S.N. Toxicol. Lett. 26 19-24 (1985).
f. Fluoride intoxication in dairy calves. Maylin, G.A., Eckerlin, R.H., and Krook, L. Cornell Vet. 77 84-98 (1987).
g. Fluoride inhibition of protein synthesis. Holland, R.I. Cell Biol. Int. Rep. 3 701-705 (1979).
h. An unexpectedly strong hydrogen bond: ab initio calculations and spectroscopic studies of amide-fluoride systems. Emsley, J., Jones, D.J., Miller, J.M., Overill, R.E. and Waddilove, R.A. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 103 24-28 (1981).
i. The effect of sodium fluoride on the growth and differentiation of human fetal osteoblasts. Song, X.D., Zhang, W.Z., Li, L.Y., Pang, Z.L., and Tan, Y.B. Fluoride 21 149-158 (1988).
j. Modulation of phosphoinositide hydrolysis by NaF and aluminum in rat cortical slices. Jope, R.S. J. Neurochem. 51 1731-1736 (1988).
k. The crystal structure of fluoride-inhibited cytochrome c peroxidase. Edwards, S.L., Poulos, T.L., Kraut, J. J. Biol. Chem. 259 12984-12988 (1984).
l. Intracellular fluoride alters the kinetic properties of calcium currents facilitating the investigation of synaptic events in hippocampal neurons. Kay, A.R., Miles, R., and Wong, R.K.S. J. Neurosci. 6 2915-2920 (1986).
m. Fluoride intoxication: a clinical-hygienic study with a review of the literature and some experimental investigations. Roholm, K. H.K. Lewis Ltd (London) (1937).
n. Toxin-induced blood vessel inclusions caused by the chronic administration of aluminum and sodium fluoride and their implications for dementia. Isaacson, R.L., Varner, J.A., and Jensen, K. F. Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 825 152-166 (1997).
o. Allergy and hypersensitivity to fluoride. Spittle, B. Fluoride 26 267-273 (1993)
Fluoride Action Network 802-338-5577 info@fluoridealert.org
domingo 11 de mayo de 2008
Mycelia--the "Gran Disasemblers of Nature."
The Sun Interview February 2008 issue 386
Going Underground
Paul Stamets On:
"The Vast, Intelligent Network Beneath Our Feet"
by Derrick Jensen
The complete text of this selection is available in our print edition.
requires javascript
DERRICK JENSEN’s most recent book is titled As the World Burns: 50 Simple Things You Can Do to Stay in Denial (Seven Stories Press). He lives in Crescent City, California.
http://www.derrickjensen.org/
Also by this author:Thought To Exist In The WildNeighborhood BullyTruth In Advertising
All selections by this author
For several years people from different places and backgrounds kept recommending the same oddly titled book to me: Paul Stamets’s Mycelium Running: How Mushrooms Can Help Save the World (Ten Speed Press). Everyone told me it was one of the most mind-bending texts they’d ever read. With so many recommendations, I perversely hesitated to pick the book up, and when I finally did, I prepared myself to be disappointed.
I wasn’t. Stamets fundamentally changed my view of nature — in particular, fungi: yeasts, mushrooms, molds, the whole lot of them.
When we think of fungi, most of us picture mushrooms, those slightly mysterious, potentially poisonous denizens of dark, damp places. But a mushroom is just the fruit of the mycelium, which is an underground network of rootlike fibers that can stretch for miles. Stamets calls mycelia the “grand disassemblers of nature” because they break down complex substances into simpler components. For example, some fungi can take apart the hydrogen-carbon bonds that hold petroleum products together. Others have shown the potential to clean up nerve-gas agents, dioxins, and plastics. They may even be skilled enough to undo the ecological damage pollution has wrought.
Since reading Mycelium Running, I’ve begun to consider the possibility that mycelia know something we don’t. Stamets believes they have not just the ability to protect the environment but the intelligence to do so on purpose. His theory stems in part from the fact that mycelia transmit information across their huge networks using the same neurotransmitters that our brains do: the chemicals that allow us to think. In fact, recent discoveries suggest that humans are more closely related to fungi than we are to plants.
Almost since life began on earth, mycelia have performed important ecological roles: nourishing ecosystems, repairing them, and sometimes even helping create them. The fungi’s exquisitely fine filaments absorb nutrients from the soil and then trade them with the roots of plants for some of the energy that the plants produce through photosynthesis. No plant community could exist without mycelia. I’ve long been a resident and defender of forests, but Stamets helped me understand that I’ve been misperceiving my home. I thought a forest was made up entirely of trees, but now I know that the foundation lies below ground, in the fungi.
Stamets became interested in biology in kindergarten, when he planted a sunflower seed in a paper cup and watched it sprout and lift itself toward the light. Somewhere along the way, he developed a fascination with life forms that grow not toward the sun but away from it. In the late seventies he got a Drug Enforcement Administration permit to research hallucinogenic psilocybin mushrooms at Evergreen State College in Washington. Stamets is now fifty-two and has studied mycelia for more than thirty years, naming five new species and authoring or coauthoring six books, including Growing Gourmet and Medicinal Mushrooms (Ten Speed Press) and The Mushroom Cultivator (Agarikon Press). He’s the founder and director of Fungi Perfecti (http://www.fungi.com/), a company based outside Olympia, Washington, that provides mushroom research, information, classes, and spawn — the mushroom farmer’s equivalent of seed.
Much of the company’s profits go to help protect endangered strains of fungi in the old-growth forests of the Pacific Northwest. I interviewed Stamets in June 2007.
Jensen: How many different types of mushrooms are there?
Stamets: There are an estimated one to two million species of fungi, of which about 150,000 form mushrooms. A mushroom is the fruit body — the reproductive structure — of the mycelium, which is the network of thin, cobweblike cells that infuses all soil. The spores in the mushroom are somewhat analogous to seeds. Because mushrooms are fleshy, succulent, fragrant, and rich in nutrients, they attract animals — including humans — who eat them and thereby participate in spreading the spores through their feces.
Our knowledge of fungi is far exceeded by our ignorance. To date, we’ve identified approximately 14,000 of the 150,000 species of mushroom-forming fungi estimated to exist, which means that more than 90 percent have not yet been identified. Fungi are essential for ecological health, and losing any of these species would be like losing rivets in an airplane. Flying squirrels and voles, for example, are dependent upon truffles, and in old-growth forests, the main predator of flying squirrels and voles is the spotted owl. This means that killing off truffles would kill off flying squirrels and voles, which would kill off spotted owls.
That’s just one food chain that we can identify; there are many thousands more we cannot. Biological systems are so complex that they far exceed our cognitive abilities and our linear logic. We are essentially children when it comes to our understanding of the natural world.
Jensen: In your book you say that animals are more closely related to fungi than they are to plants or protozoa or bacteria.
Stamets: Yes. For example, we inhale oxygen and exhale carbon dioxide; so do fungi. One of the big differences between animals and fungi is that animals have their stomachs on the inside. About 600 million years ago, the branch of fungi leading to animals evolved to capture nutrients by surrounding their food with cellular sacs — essentially primitive stomachs. As these organisms evolved, they developed outer layers of cells — skins, basically — to prevent moisture loss and as a barrier against infection. Their stomachs were confined within the skin. These were the earliest animals.
Mycelia took a different evolutionary path, going underground and forming a network of interwoven chains of cells, a vast food web upon which life flourished. These fungi paved the way for plants and animals. They munched rocks, producing enzymes and acids that could pull out calcium, magnesium, iron, and other minerals. In the process they converted rocks into usable foods for other species. And they still do this, of course.
Fungi are fundamental to life on earth. They are ancient, they are widespread, and they have formed partnerships with many other species. We know from the fossil record that evolution on this planet has largely been steered by two cataclysmic asteroid impacts. The first was 250 million years ago. The earth became shrouded in dust. Sunlight was cut off, and in the darkness, massive plant communities died. More than 90 percent of species disappeared. And fungi inherited the earth. Organisms that paired with fungi through natural selection were rewarded. Then the skies cleared, and light came back, and evolution continued on its course until 65 million years ago, bam! It happened again. We were hit by another asteroid, and there were more massive extinctions. That’s when the dinosaurs died out. Again, organisms that paired with fungi were rewarded. So these asteroid impacts steered life toward symbiosis with fungi: not just plants and animals, but bacteria and viruses, as well.
Jensen: Can you give some examples of these partnerships?
Stamets: A familiar one is lichens, which are actually a fungus and an alga growing symbiotically together. Another is “sleepy grass”: Mesoamerican ranchers realized that when their horses ate a certain type of grass, the horses basically got stoned. When scientists studied sleepy grass, they found that it wasn’t the grass at all that was causing the horses to get stoned, but an endophytic fungus, meaning one that grows within a plant, in the stems and leaves.
Here’s another example: At Yellowstone’s hot springs and Lassen Volcanic Park, people noticed that some grasses could survive contact with scalding hot water — up to 160 degrees. Scientists cultured these grasses in a laboratory and saw a fungus growing on them. They thought it was a contaminant, so they separated the fungus from the grass cells and tried to regrow the grass. But without the fungus the grass died at around 110 degrees. So they reintroduced this fungus and regrew the grass, and once again it survived to 160 degrees. That particular fungus, of the genus Curvularia, conveyed heat tolerance to the grass. Scientists are now looking at the possibility of getting this Curvularia to convey heat tolerance to corn, rice, and wheat, so that these grasses could be grown under drought conditions or in extremely arid environments, expanding the grain-growing regions of the world.
Other researchers took a Curvularia fungus from cold storage at a culture bank and joined it with tomatoes, expecting that it would confer heat tolerance. But the tomatoes all died at 105 degrees. They discovered that the cold storage had killed a virus that wild Curvularia fungus carries within it — which was odd, since you’d think cold storage would keep the virus alive. When they reintroduced the virus back into the Curvularia cultures and then reassociated the fungus with tomato plants, the plants survived the heat. So this is a symbiosis of three organisms: a plant, a fungus, and a virus. Only together could they survive extreme conditions.
These examples are just the tip of the iceberg. They show the intelligence of nature, how these different entities form partnerships to the benefit of all.
Jensen: Of course this raises the question of boundaries: Is that tomato-fungus-virus one entity or three? Where does one organism stop and the other begin?
Stamets: Well, humans aren’t just one organism. We are composites. Scientists label species as separate so we can communicate easily about the variety we see in nature. We need to be able to look at a tree and say it’s a Douglas fir and look at a mammal and say it’s a harbor seal. But, indeed, I speak to you as a unified composite of microbes. I guess you could say I am the “elected voice” of a microbial community. This is the way of life on our planet. It is all based on complex symbiotic relationships.
A mycelial “mat,” which scientists think of as one entity, can be thousands of acres in size. The largest organism in the world is a mycelial mat in eastern Oregon that covers 2,200 acres and is more than two thousand years old. Its survival strategy is somewhat mysterious. We have five or six layers of skin to protect us from infection; the mycelium has one cell wall. How is it that this vast mycelial network, which is surrounded by hundreds of millions of microbes all trying to eat it, is protected by one cell wall? I believe it’s because the mycelium is in constant biochemical communication with its ecosystem.
I think these mycelial mats are neurological networks. They’re sentient, they’re aware, and they’re highly evolved. They have external stomachs, which produce enzymes and acids to digest nutrients outside the mycelium, and then bring in those compounds that it needs for nutrition. As you walk through a forest, you break twigs underneath your feet, and the mycelium surges upward to capture those newly available nutrients as quickly as possible. I say they have “lungs,” because they are inhaling oxygen and exhaling carbon dioxide, just like we are. I say they are sentient, because they produce pharmacological compounds — which can activate receptor sites in our neurons — and also serotonin-like compounds, including psilocybin, the hallucinogen found in some mushrooms. This speaks to the fact that there is an evolutionary common denominator between fungi and humans. We evolved from fungi. We took an overground route. The fungi took the route of producing these underground networks that are highly resilient and extremely adaptive: if you disturb a mycelial network, it just regrows. It might even benefit from the disturbance.I have long proposed that mycelia are the earth’s “natural Internet.” I’ve gotten some flak for this, but recently scientists in Great Britain have published papers about the “architecture” of a mycelium — how it’s organized. They focused on the nodes of crossing, which are the branchings that allow the mycelium, when there is a breakage or an infection, to choose an alternate route and regrow. There’s no one specific point on the network that can shut the whole operation down. These nodes of crossing, those scientists found, conform to the same mathematical optimization curves that computer scientists have developed to optimize the Internet. Or, rather, I should say that the Internet conforms to the same optimization curves as the mycelium, since the mycelium came first.
The complete text of this selection is available in our print edition.
Going Underground
Paul Stamets On:
"The Vast, Intelligent Network Beneath Our Feet"
by Derrick Jensen
The complete text of this selection is available in our print edition.
requires javascript
DERRICK JENSEN’s most recent book is titled As the World Burns: 50 Simple Things You Can Do to Stay in Denial (Seven Stories Press). He lives in Crescent City, California.
http://www.derrickjensen.org/
Also by this author:Thought To Exist In The WildNeighborhood BullyTruth In Advertising
All selections by this author
For several years people from different places and backgrounds kept recommending the same oddly titled book to me: Paul Stamets’s Mycelium Running: How Mushrooms Can Help Save the World (Ten Speed Press). Everyone told me it was one of the most mind-bending texts they’d ever read. With so many recommendations, I perversely hesitated to pick the book up, and when I finally did, I prepared myself to be disappointed.
I wasn’t. Stamets fundamentally changed my view of nature — in particular, fungi: yeasts, mushrooms, molds, the whole lot of them.
When we think of fungi, most of us picture mushrooms, those slightly mysterious, potentially poisonous denizens of dark, damp places. But a mushroom is just the fruit of the mycelium, which is an underground network of rootlike fibers that can stretch for miles. Stamets calls mycelia the “grand disassemblers of nature” because they break down complex substances into simpler components. For example, some fungi can take apart the hydrogen-carbon bonds that hold petroleum products together. Others have shown the potential to clean up nerve-gas agents, dioxins, and plastics. They may even be skilled enough to undo the ecological damage pollution has wrought.
Since reading Mycelium Running, I’ve begun to consider the possibility that mycelia know something we don’t. Stamets believes they have not just the ability to protect the environment but the intelligence to do so on purpose. His theory stems in part from the fact that mycelia transmit information across their huge networks using the same neurotransmitters that our brains do: the chemicals that allow us to think. In fact, recent discoveries suggest that humans are more closely related to fungi than we are to plants.
Almost since life began on earth, mycelia have performed important ecological roles: nourishing ecosystems, repairing them, and sometimes even helping create them. The fungi’s exquisitely fine filaments absorb nutrients from the soil and then trade them with the roots of plants for some of the energy that the plants produce through photosynthesis. No plant community could exist without mycelia. I’ve long been a resident and defender of forests, but Stamets helped me understand that I’ve been misperceiving my home. I thought a forest was made up entirely of trees, but now I know that the foundation lies below ground, in the fungi.
Stamets became interested in biology in kindergarten, when he planted a sunflower seed in a paper cup and watched it sprout and lift itself toward the light. Somewhere along the way, he developed a fascination with life forms that grow not toward the sun but away from it. In the late seventies he got a Drug Enforcement Administration permit to research hallucinogenic psilocybin mushrooms at Evergreen State College in Washington. Stamets is now fifty-two and has studied mycelia for more than thirty years, naming five new species and authoring or coauthoring six books, including Growing Gourmet and Medicinal Mushrooms (Ten Speed Press) and The Mushroom Cultivator (Agarikon Press). He’s the founder and director of Fungi Perfecti (http://www.fungi.com/), a company based outside Olympia, Washington, that provides mushroom research, information, classes, and spawn — the mushroom farmer’s equivalent of seed.
Much of the company’s profits go to help protect endangered strains of fungi in the old-growth forests of the Pacific Northwest. I interviewed Stamets in June 2007.
Jensen: How many different types of mushrooms are there?
Stamets: There are an estimated one to two million species of fungi, of which about 150,000 form mushrooms. A mushroom is the fruit body — the reproductive structure — of the mycelium, which is the network of thin, cobweblike cells that infuses all soil. The spores in the mushroom are somewhat analogous to seeds. Because mushrooms are fleshy, succulent, fragrant, and rich in nutrients, they attract animals — including humans — who eat them and thereby participate in spreading the spores through their feces.
Our knowledge of fungi is far exceeded by our ignorance. To date, we’ve identified approximately 14,000 of the 150,000 species of mushroom-forming fungi estimated to exist, which means that more than 90 percent have not yet been identified. Fungi are essential for ecological health, and losing any of these species would be like losing rivets in an airplane. Flying squirrels and voles, for example, are dependent upon truffles, and in old-growth forests, the main predator of flying squirrels and voles is the spotted owl. This means that killing off truffles would kill off flying squirrels and voles, which would kill off spotted owls.
That’s just one food chain that we can identify; there are many thousands more we cannot. Biological systems are so complex that they far exceed our cognitive abilities and our linear logic. We are essentially children when it comes to our understanding of the natural world.
Jensen: In your book you say that animals are more closely related to fungi than they are to plants or protozoa or bacteria.
Stamets: Yes. For example, we inhale oxygen and exhale carbon dioxide; so do fungi. One of the big differences between animals and fungi is that animals have their stomachs on the inside. About 600 million years ago, the branch of fungi leading to animals evolved to capture nutrients by surrounding their food with cellular sacs — essentially primitive stomachs. As these organisms evolved, they developed outer layers of cells — skins, basically — to prevent moisture loss and as a barrier against infection. Their stomachs were confined within the skin. These were the earliest animals.
Mycelia took a different evolutionary path, going underground and forming a network of interwoven chains of cells, a vast food web upon which life flourished. These fungi paved the way for plants and animals. They munched rocks, producing enzymes and acids that could pull out calcium, magnesium, iron, and other minerals. In the process they converted rocks into usable foods for other species. And they still do this, of course.
Fungi are fundamental to life on earth. They are ancient, they are widespread, and they have formed partnerships with many other species. We know from the fossil record that evolution on this planet has largely been steered by two cataclysmic asteroid impacts. The first was 250 million years ago. The earth became shrouded in dust. Sunlight was cut off, and in the darkness, massive plant communities died. More than 90 percent of species disappeared. And fungi inherited the earth. Organisms that paired with fungi through natural selection were rewarded. Then the skies cleared, and light came back, and evolution continued on its course until 65 million years ago, bam! It happened again. We were hit by another asteroid, and there were more massive extinctions. That’s when the dinosaurs died out. Again, organisms that paired with fungi were rewarded. So these asteroid impacts steered life toward symbiosis with fungi: not just plants and animals, but bacteria and viruses, as well.
Jensen: Can you give some examples of these partnerships?
Stamets: A familiar one is lichens, which are actually a fungus and an alga growing symbiotically together. Another is “sleepy grass”: Mesoamerican ranchers realized that when their horses ate a certain type of grass, the horses basically got stoned. When scientists studied sleepy grass, they found that it wasn’t the grass at all that was causing the horses to get stoned, but an endophytic fungus, meaning one that grows within a plant, in the stems and leaves.
Here’s another example: At Yellowstone’s hot springs and Lassen Volcanic Park, people noticed that some grasses could survive contact with scalding hot water — up to 160 degrees. Scientists cultured these grasses in a laboratory and saw a fungus growing on them. They thought it was a contaminant, so they separated the fungus from the grass cells and tried to regrow the grass. But without the fungus the grass died at around 110 degrees. So they reintroduced this fungus and regrew the grass, and once again it survived to 160 degrees. That particular fungus, of the genus Curvularia, conveyed heat tolerance to the grass. Scientists are now looking at the possibility of getting this Curvularia to convey heat tolerance to corn, rice, and wheat, so that these grasses could be grown under drought conditions or in extremely arid environments, expanding the grain-growing regions of the world.
Other researchers took a Curvularia fungus from cold storage at a culture bank and joined it with tomatoes, expecting that it would confer heat tolerance. But the tomatoes all died at 105 degrees. They discovered that the cold storage had killed a virus that wild Curvularia fungus carries within it — which was odd, since you’d think cold storage would keep the virus alive. When they reintroduced the virus back into the Curvularia cultures and then reassociated the fungus with tomato plants, the plants survived the heat. So this is a symbiosis of three organisms: a plant, a fungus, and a virus. Only together could they survive extreme conditions.
These examples are just the tip of the iceberg. They show the intelligence of nature, how these different entities form partnerships to the benefit of all.
Jensen: Of course this raises the question of boundaries: Is that tomato-fungus-virus one entity or three? Where does one organism stop and the other begin?
Stamets: Well, humans aren’t just one organism. We are composites. Scientists label species as separate so we can communicate easily about the variety we see in nature. We need to be able to look at a tree and say it’s a Douglas fir and look at a mammal and say it’s a harbor seal. But, indeed, I speak to you as a unified composite of microbes. I guess you could say I am the “elected voice” of a microbial community. This is the way of life on our planet. It is all based on complex symbiotic relationships.
A mycelial “mat,” which scientists think of as one entity, can be thousands of acres in size. The largest organism in the world is a mycelial mat in eastern Oregon that covers 2,200 acres and is more than two thousand years old. Its survival strategy is somewhat mysterious. We have five or six layers of skin to protect us from infection; the mycelium has one cell wall. How is it that this vast mycelial network, which is surrounded by hundreds of millions of microbes all trying to eat it, is protected by one cell wall? I believe it’s because the mycelium is in constant biochemical communication with its ecosystem.
I think these mycelial mats are neurological networks. They’re sentient, they’re aware, and they’re highly evolved. They have external stomachs, which produce enzymes and acids to digest nutrients outside the mycelium, and then bring in those compounds that it needs for nutrition. As you walk through a forest, you break twigs underneath your feet, and the mycelium surges upward to capture those newly available nutrients as quickly as possible. I say they have “lungs,” because they are inhaling oxygen and exhaling carbon dioxide, just like we are. I say they are sentient, because they produce pharmacological compounds — which can activate receptor sites in our neurons — and also serotonin-like compounds, including psilocybin, the hallucinogen found in some mushrooms. This speaks to the fact that there is an evolutionary common denominator between fungi and humans. We evolved from fungi. We took an overground route. The fungi took the route of producing these underground networks that are highly resilient and extremely adaptive: if you disturb a mycelial network, it just regrows. It might even benefit from the disturbance.I have long proposed that mycelia are the earth’s “natural Internet.” I’ve gotten some flak for this, but recently scientists in Great Britain have published papers about the “architecture” of a mycelium — how it’s organized. They focused on the nodes of crossing, which are the branchings that allow the mycelium, when there is a breakage or an infection, to choose an alternate route and regrow. There’s no one specific point on the network that can shut the whole operation down. These nodes of crossing, those scientists found, conform to the same mathematical optimization curves that computer scientists have developed to optimize the Internet. Or, rather, I should say that the Internet conforms to the same optimization curves as the mycelium, since the mycelium came first.
The complete text of this selection is available in our print edition.
The Global economy and finacial system is coming unglued...fast...
Dear friend,
The global economy and monetary system continues in chaos, even though the "talking-heads" in the media assure us otherwise. Don't be fooled or caught off guard!
When Richard Nixon closed the gold redemption window on August 14, 1971, redeemable debt gave way to irredeemable debt. This watershed event set the stage for the global financial chaos being experienced today.
Professor Antal Fekete, esteemed scholar of economics now residing in Hungary, hits the nail on the head in his must-read article,
The Twilight of Irredeemable Debt
Please forward this email to those who need to know, and make liberal use of the Recommend Us link on The August Review. Don't forget to "Digg" the article if you want to discuss it with others!
Regards,
Patrick Wood, Editor: The August Review
******************
The Twilight of Irredeemable Debt
("http://www.augustreview.'http://www.augustreview.com/news_commentary/global_banking/the_twilight_of_irredeemable_debt_2008050890/';
By Professor Antal E. Fekete
May 2, 2008
The most powerful of the latter-day pagan gods that have guided the destinies of humanity for the past two-score years is irredeemable debt. Before August 14, 1971, debts were obligations, and the word "bond" was to mean literally what it said: the opposite of freedom. The privilege of issuing debt had a countervailing responsibility: that of repayment. On that fateful day all that was changed by a stroke of the pen. President Richard Nixon embraced the woolly theory of Milton Friedman and declared the irredeemable dollar a monad, that is, a thing that exists in and of itself. According to this theory the government has the power to create irredeemable debt - debt that never needs to be repaid yet will not lose its value - subject only to a "quantity rule", for example, it must not be increased by more than 3% annually.
This idea is so preposterously silly that "only very learned men could have thought of it". If the thief is thieving modestly, then he will not be detected. It never occurred to the professors of economics and financial journalists that a modest thief is an oxymoron, a contradiction in terms. How did they get to believing in irredeemable debt? The explanation is most likely found in Schiller's dictum: "Anyone taken as an individual is tolerably sensible and reasonable. But taken as a member of a crowd - he at once becomes a blockhead." Economics professors and financial journalists are no exception. For a time it appeared that Friedman was right. The world has become dedicated to the proposition that it is possible, even desirable, to expand irredeemable debt in order to make the economy prosper. Never mind the default of the US government on its bonded debt held by foreigners. Never mind people victimized by theft.
Thanks to the quantity rule, they will never notice the difference. For all its seductive attractiveness, Friedmanite economics is ignoring the effect of irredeemable debt on productivity. It watches debt per GDP and is happy as long as this ratio stays below 100% by a fair amount. However, what should be watched is the ratio of additional debt to additional GDP. By that indicator the patient's condition could be diagnosed as that of pernicious anemia. It set in immediately after the US dollar debt in the world was converted into irredeemable debt. The increase in GDP brought about by the addition of $1 of new debt to the economy is called the marginal productivity of debt. That ratio is the only one that matters in judging the quality of debt. After all, the purpose of contracting debt is to increase productivity. If debt volume rises faster than national income, there is big trouble is brewing, but only the marginal productivity of debt is capable of revealing it.
Precipitous declineBefore 1971, the introduction of $1 new debt used to increase the GDP by as much as $3 or more. Since 1971, this ratio started its precipitous decline that has continued to this day without interruption. It went negative in 2006, forecasting the financial crisis that broke a year later. The reason for the decline is that irredeemable debt causes capital destruction. It adds nothing to the per capita quota of capital invested in aid of production. Indeed, it may take away from it. As it displaces real capital, which represents the deployment of more and better tools, productivity declines. The laws of physics, unlike human beings, cannot be conned. Irredeemable debt may only create make-belief capital. By confusing capital and credit, Friedmanite economics obliterates truth. It makes the cost of running the merry-go-round of debt-breeding disappear. It makes capital destruction invisible.
The stock of accumulated capital supporting world production, large as it may be, is not inexhaustible. When it is exhausted, the music stops and the merry-go-round comes to a screechy halt. It does not happen everywhere all at the same time, but it will happen everywhere sooner or later. When it does, Swissair falls out of the sky, Enron goes belly-up, and Bear Stearns caves in. The marginal productivity of debt is an unimaginative taskmaster. It insists that new debt be justified by a minimum increase in the GDP. Otherwise capital destruction follows, a most vicious process. At first, there are no signs of trouble. If anything the picture looks rosier than ever. But the seeds of destruction inevitably, if invisibly, have sprouted and will at one point paralyze further growth and production. To deny this is tantamount to denying the most fundamental law of the universe: the Law of Conservation of Energy and Matter.
The captains of the banking system in effect deny and defy that basic law. They are leading a blind crowd of mesmerized people to the brink where momentum may sweep most of them into the abyss to their financial destruction. Yet not one university in the world has issued a warning, and not one court of justice allowed indictments to be heard from individuals and institutions charging that the issuance of irredeemable debt is a crude form of fraud, calling for the punishment of the swindlers issuing it, whether they are in the Treasury or in the central bank. The behavior of universities and courts in this regard could not be more reprehensible. Rather than acting to protect the weak, they act to cover up plundering by the mighty. The inconspicuous beginnings of irredeemable debt have blossomed into a colossal edifice, a fantastic debt tower that is bound to topple upon the prevailing complacency and apathy. Actually "tower" is a misnomer. Rather, what we have is an inverted pyramid, a vast and expanding superstructure precariously balanced on a tiny and ever-shrinking gold foundation - the only asset in existence with power to reduce gross debt. The construction has no precedent in history, and no place in theory, whether Ricardian, Walrasian, Marxian, Keynesian or Austrian.
As a matter of fact, no one is analyzing the process. Research has been placed under taboo by the powers that be, lest diagnosis reveal the presence of cancer caused by irredeemability. There is no known pattern or model that would apply to its mechanism in terms of equilibrium analysis. Two negative conclusions emerge. One is that the edifice of irredeemable debt must grow at an accelerating pace as markets for derivatives providing "insurance" to holders of debt proliferate. The insurer of debt must also be insured, as must the insurer of the insurers, and so on, ad infinitum. This is due to the fact that the risk of collapsing bond values has been created by man. In contrast, the risk of price changes of agricultural commodities are created by nature, and the futures market provides insurance, with no need to re-insure. The other conclusion is that the unwieldy size of the debt structure excludes the possibility of a normal correction: a major liquidation would dwarf the calamities of the Great Depression. The debt delusionIt is a delusion to think that the government can splatter debt all over the economic landscape to cover up its warts, and reap everlasting prosperity as a result. The stimulation and leverage of debt has always caused stock markets to boom, so that the impact of debt was aided and magnified by the added paper wealth which, in turn, increased the propensity to spend and borrow still more.
Businessmen are supposed to be more realistic in contracting debt. Yet the pattern of increase in corporate debt has also changed tremendously. Whereas traditionally corporations used to finance their capital needs in a ratio of $3 in debt for every $1 in stock, in the years leading up to 1971 they issued $20 in debt for every $1 in stock, with the ratio sky-rocketing thereafter. We hear arguments that economists have by now learned how to control the economy with the so-called built-in stabilizers.
Debt has largely lost its sting as a consequence, we are told. For example, bank deposits can now be insured. They couldn't in the 1930s. But when the government itself is loaded with debt, and runs boom-time deficits, the built-in stabilizers may backfire and destabilize the economy further. The government has commitments so great that its endeavor to offset a depression in our vast economy can only result in a loss of confidence. Anxious withholding of purchasing power in the private sector could far outweigh anything the government can add. To make matters worse, government income is highly dependent on a prosperous economy. The magnitude of the problem of offsetting a depression is grossly disproportionate to resources available. One of the marks of great delusions is that nearly everyone tends to share them. It is a sorry tale - any delusion gives rise to a rude awakening in due course. Public attitudes to debt have changed so radically since 1971 that today indebtedness is practically a status symbol, instead of the shameful condition it used to be in a bygone era. The most striking reversal in traditional American attitudes towards debt is the widespread acceptance of perpetual national indebtedness, copied by perpetual personal indebtedness - a never-ending lien on future income. Perhaps the worst aspect of the regime of irredeemable debt is the lowest level of morals followed by governments in modern history. It is epitomized by an elaborate check-kiting (using a bad check to get money) conspiracy between the US Treasury and the Federal Reserve. Treasury bonds, contrary to appearances, are no more redeemable than Federal Reserve notes. It’s all very neat: the notes are backed by the bonds, and the bonds are redeemable by the notes. Therefore each is valued in terms of itself, rather than by an independent outside asset. Each is an irredeemable liability of the US government. The whole scheme boils down to a farce. It is check-kiting at the highest level. At maturity the bonds are replaced by another with a more distant maturity date, or they are ostensibly paid in the form of irredeemable currency. The issuer of either type of debt is usurping a privilege without accepting the countervailing duty. They issue obligations without taking any further responsibility for their fate or for the effect they have on the economy. Moreover, a double standard of justice is involved.
Check-kiting is a crime under the Criminal Code. That is, provided that it is perpetrated by private individuals. Practiced at the highest level, check-kiting is the corner-stone of the monetary system. But our world is still one of crime and punishment, tolerating no double standard. The twilight of irredeemable debt is upon us. The sign is that banks are reluctant to take the promissory notes of one another. Significantly, this also includes overnight drafts. The banks know there is bad debt at large, and they don't want to be victimized by taking in some inadvertently. What the banks don't yet know, but will soon learn, is that all irredeemable debt is bad debt, and there is no way to rid the system of poison through administering more.
Redeemability of debt is not a superfluous embellishment. It has a function of fundamental importance: the proper allocation of resources to the different channels of their utilization. The obligation to redeem debt hangs as the sword of Damocles over the government, just as it does over the head of every economic participant. It compels economy and foresight. It forces balancing of income and expenditures. It adjusts claims and commitments. It limits expansion by shifting resources away from the incompetent, and away from unhealthy projects. The regime of irredeemable debt creates an escape route from commitments by the promise of eliminating the pressure of solvency. Whether it promises eternal prosperity, or it promises eternal subsidies, it does not matter. The results are the same. They consist in misleading people, enticing them to skate on thin ice, and luring them into financial adventures, private or public, which are not warranted by the ability to pay. The logical consequence is wholesale bankruptcy of individuals as well as that of the political setup. Losses breed more losses, until they become an avalanche. The present crisis is just the first sign of that denouement. More is on the way. It is still possible to escape the catastrophe which this process would entail. The way out is to open the US Mint to gold and silver, as advocated by presidential candidate Ron Paul. The logic of this remedy is that it would mobilize potentially unlimited resources, presently tied up in idled gold, and re-introduce the indispensable means of debt-retirement into the economy. Failing to bring gold back, where are we heading? The short answer is: we are marching into the death-valley of collectivism. The alternative to re-introducing redeemable currency is that the debt behemoth will force the imposition of a capital-levy type of taxation - along the lines of Solon, back in the Athens of 594 BC.
---- Antal E Fekete has since 2001 been consulting professor at Sapientia University, Cluj-Napoca, Romania. He also runs the Gold Standard University, whose next session is to take place in Szombathely, Hungary from July 3-6 on "The Bond Market and the Market Process Determining the Rate of Interest". For more information see www.professorfekete.com/gsul.asp or contact
mailto:GSUL@t-online.hu
(Copyright © 2008 A E Fekete)
The global economy and monetary system continues in chaos, even though the "talking-heads" in the media assure us otherwise. Don't be fooled or caught off guard!
When Richard Nixon closed the gold redemption window on August 14, 1971, redeemable debt gave way to irredeemable debt. This watershed event set the stage for the global financial chaos being experienced today.
Professor Antal Fekete, esteemed scholar of economics now residing in Hungary, hits the nail on the head in his must-read article,
The Twilight of Irredeemable Debt
Please forward this email to those who need to know, and make liberal use of the Recommend Us link on The August Review. Don't forget to "Digg" the article if you want to discuss it with others!
Regards,
Patrick Wood, Editor: The August Review
******************
The Twilight of Irredeemable Debt
("http://www.augustreview.'http://www.augustreview.com/news_commentary/global_banking/the_twilight_of_irredeemable_debt_2008050890/';
By Professor Antal E. Fekete
May 2, 2008
The most powerful of the latter-day pagan gods that have guided the destinies of humanity for the past two-score years is irredeemable debt. Before August 14, 1971, debts were obligations, and the word "bond" was to mean literally what it said: the opposite of freedom. The privilege of issuing debt had a countervailing responsibility: that of repayment. On that fateful day all that was changed by a stroke of the pen. President Richard Nixon embraced the woolly theory of Milton Friedman and declared the irredeemable dollar a monad, that is, a thing that exists in and of itself. According to this theory the government has the power to create irredeemable debt - debt that never needs to be repaid yet will not lose its value - subject only to a "quantity rule", for example, it must not be increased by more than 3% annually.
This idea is so preposterously silly that "only very learned men could have thought of it". If the thief is thieving modestly, then he will not be detected. It never occurred to the professors of economics and financial journalists that a modest thief is an oxymoron, a contradiction in terms. How did they get to believing in irredeemable debt? The explanation is most likely found in Schiller's dictum: "Anyone taken as an individual is tolerably sensible and reasonable. But taken as a member of a crowd - he at once becomes a blockhead." Economics professors and financial journalists are no exception. For a time it appeared that Friedman was right. The world has become dedicated to the proposition that it is possible, even desirable, to expand irredeemable debt in order to make the economy prosper. Never mind the default of the US government on its bonded debt held by foreigners. Never mind people victimized by theft.
Thanks to the quantity rule, they will never notice the difference. For all its seductive attractiveness, Friedmanite economics is ignoring the effect of irredeemable debt on productivity. It watches debt per GDP and is happy as long as this ratio stays below 100% by a fair amount. However, what should be watched is the ratio of additional debt to additional GDP. By that indicator the patient's condition could be diagnosed as that of pernicious anemia. It set in immediately after the US dollar debt in the world was converted into irredeemable debt. The increase in GDP brought about by the addition of $1 of new debt to the economy is called the marginal productivity of debt. That ratio is the only one that matters in judging the quality of debt. After all, the purpose of contracting debt is to increase productivity. If debt volume rises faster than national income, there is big trouble is brewing, but only the marginal productivity of debt is capable of revealing it.
Precipitous declineBefore 1971, the introduction of $1 new debt used to increase the GDP by as much as $3 or more. Since 1971, this ratio started its precipitous decline that has continued to this day without interruption. It went negative in 2006, forecasting the financial crisis that broke a year later. The reason for the decline is that irredeemable debt causes capital destruction. It adds nothing to the per capita quota of capital invested in aid of production. Indeed, it may take away from it. As it displaces real capital, which represents the deployment of more and better tools, productivity declines. The laws of physics, unlike human beings, cannot be conned. Irredeemable debt may only create make-belief capital. By confusing capital and credit, Friedmanite economics obliterates truth. It makes the cost of running the merry-go-round of debt-breeding disappear. It makes capital destruction invisible.
The stock of accumulated capital supporting world production, large as it may be, is not inexhaustible. When it is exhausted, the music stops and the merry-go-round comes to a screechy halt. It does not happen everywhere all at the same time, but it will happen everywhere sooner or later. When it does, Swissair falls out of the sky, Enron goes belly-up, and Bear Stearns caves in. The marginal productivity of debt is an unimaginative taskmaster. It insists that new debt be justified by a minimum increase in the GDP. Otherwise capital destruction follows, a most vicious process. At first, there are no signs of trouble. If anything the picture looks rosier than ever. But the seeds of destruction inevitably, if invisibly, have sprouted and will at one point paralyze further growth and production. To deny this is tantamount to denying the most fundamental law of the universe: the Law of Conservation of Energy and Matter.
The captains of the banking system in effect deny and defy that basic law. They are leading a blind crowd of mesmerized people to the brink where momentum may sweep most of them into the abyss to their financial destruction. Yet not one university in the world has issued a warning, and not one court of justice allowed indictments to be heard from individuals and institutions charging that the issuance of irredeemable debt is a crude form of fraud, calling for the punishment of the swindlers issuing it, whether they are in the Treasury or in the central bank. The behavior of universities and courts in this regard could not be more reprehensible. Rather than acting to protect the weak, they act to cover up plundering by the mighty. The inconspicuous beginnings of irredeemable debt have blossomed into a colossal edifice, a fantastic debt tower that is bound to topple upon the prevailing complacency and apathy. Actually "tower" is a misnomer. Rather, what we have is an inverted pyramid, a vast and expanding superstructure precariously balanced on a tiny and ever-shrinking gold foundation - the only asset in existence with power to reduce gross debt. The construction has no precedent in history, and no place in theory, whether Ricardian, Walrasian, Marxian, Keynesian or Austrian.
As a matter of fact, no one is analyzing the process. Research has been placed under taboo by the powers that be, lest diagnosis reveal the presence of cancer caused by irredeemability. There is no known pattern or model that would apply to its mechanism in terms of equilibrium analysis. Two negative conclusions emerge. One is that the edifice of irredeemable debt must grow at an accelerating pace as markets for derivatives providing "insurance" to holders of debt proliferate. The insurer of debt must also be insured, as must the insurer of the insurers, and so on, ad infinitum. This is due to the fact that the risk of collapsing bond values has been created by man. In contrast, the risk of price changes of agricultural commodities are created by nature, and the futures market provides insurance, with no need to re-insure. The other conclusion is that the unwieldy size of the debt structure excludes the possibility of a normal correction: a major liquidation would dwarf the calamities of the Great Depression. The debt delusionIt is a delusion to think that the government can splatter debt all over the economic landscape to cover up its warts, and reap everlasting prosperity as a result. The stimulation and leverage of debt has always caused stock markets to boom, so that the impact of debt was aided and magnified by the added paper wealth which, in turn, increased the propensity to spend and borrow still more.
Businessmen are supposed to be more realistic in contracting debt. Yet the pattern of increase in corporate debt has also changed tremendously. Whereas traditionally corporations used to finance their capital needs in a ratio of $3 in debt for every $1 in stock, in the years leading up to 1971 they issued $20 in debt for every $1 in stock, with the ratio sky-rocketing thereafter. We hear arguments that economists have by now learned how to control the economy with the so-called built-in stabilizers.
Debt has largely lost its sting as a consequence, we are told. For example, bank deposits can now be insured. They couldn't in the 1930s. But when the government itself is loaded with debt, and runs boom-time deficits, the built-in stabilizers may backfire and destabilize the economy further. The government has commitments so great that its endeavor to offset a depression in our vast economy can only result in a loss of confidence. Anxious withholding of purchasing power in the private sector could far outweigh anything the government can add. To make matters worse, government income is highly dependent on a prosperous economy. The magnitude of the problem of offsetting a depression is grossly disproportionate to resources available. One of the marks of great delusions is that nearly everyone tends to share them. It is a sorry tale - any delusion gives rise to a rude awakening in due course. Public attitudes to debt have changed so radically since 1971 that today indebtedness is practically a status symbol, instead of the shameful condition it used to be in a bygone era. The most striking reversal in traditional American attitudes towards debt is the widespread acceptance of perpetual national indebtedness, copied by perpetual personal indebtedness - a never-ending lien on future income. Perhaps the worst aspect of the regime of irredeemable debt is the lowest level of morals followed by governments in modern history. It is epitomized by an elaborate check-kiting (using a bad check to get money) conspiracy between the US Treasury and the Federal Reserve. Treasury bonds, contrary to appearances, are no more redeemable than Federal Reserve notes. It’s all very neat: the notes are backed by the bonds, and the bonds are redeemable by the notes. Therefore each is valued in terms of itself, rather than by an independent outside asset. Each is an irredeemable liability of the US government. The whole scheme boils down to a farce. It is check-kiting at the highest level. At maturity the bonds are replaced by another with a more distant maturity date, or they are ostensibly paid in the form of irredeemable currency. The issuer of either type of debt is usurping a privilege without accepting the countervailing duty. They issue obligations without taking any further responsibility for their fate or for the effect they have on the economy. Moreover, a double standard of justice is involved.
Check-kiting is a crime under the Criminal Code. That is, provided that it is perpetrated by private individuals. Practiced at the highest level, check-kiting is the corner-stone of the monetary system. But our world is still one of crime and punishment, tolerating no double standard. The twilight of irredeemable debt is upon us. The sign is that banks are reluctant to take the promissory notes of one another. Significantly, this also includes overnight drafts. The banks know there is bad debt at large, and they don't want to be victimized by taking in some inadvertently. What the banks don't yet know, but will soon learn, is that all irredeemable debt is bad debt, and there is no way to rid the system of poison through administering more.
Redeemability of debt is not a superfluous embellishment. It has a function of fundamental importance: the proper allocation of resources to the different channels of their utilization. The obligation to redeem debt hangs as the sword of Damocles over the government, just as it does over the head of every economic participant. It compels economy and foresight. It forces balancing of income and expenditures. It adjusts claims and commitments. It limits expansion by shifting resources away from the incompetent, and away from unhealthy projects. The regime of irredeemable debt creates an escape route from commitments by the promise of eliminating the pressure of solvency. Whether it promises eternal prosperity, or it promises eternal subsidies, it does not matter. The results are the same. They consist in misleading people, enticing them to skate on thin ice, and luring them into financial adventures, private or public, which are not warranted by the ability to pay. The logical consequence is wholesale bankruptcy of individuals as well as that of the political setup. Losses breed more losses, until they become an avalanche. The present crisis is just the first sign of that denouement. More is on the way. It is still possible to escape the catastrophe which this process would entail. The way out is to open the US Mint to gold and silver, as advocated by presidential candidate Ron Paul. The logic of this remedy is that it would mobilize potentially unlimited resources, presently tied up in idled gold, and re-introduce the indispensable means of debt-retirement into the economy. Failing to bring gold back, where are we heading? The short answer is: we are marching into the death-valley of collectivism. The alternative to re-introducing redeemable currency is that the debt behemoth will force the imposition of a capital-levy type of taxation - along the lines of Solon, back in the Athens of 594 BC.
---- Antal E Fekete has since 2001 been consulting professor at Sapientia University, Cluj-Napoca, Romania. He also runs the Gold Standard University, whose next session is to take place in Szombathely, Hungary from July 3-6 on "The Bond Market and the Market Process Determining the Rate of Interest". For more information see www.professorfekete.com/gsul.asp or contact
mailto:GSUL@t-online.hu
(Copyright © 2008 A E Fekete)
Portrait of an Oil-Addicted Former Superpower:
How Rising Oil Prices Are Obliterating America's Superpower Status
By Michael T. Klare TomDispatch.com
Thursday 08 May 2008
Nineteen years ago, the fall of the Berlin Wall effectively eliminated the Soviet Union as the world's other superpower. Yes, the USSR as a political entity stumbled on for another two years, but it was clearly an ex-superpower from the moment it lost control over its satellites in Eastern Europe.
Less than a month ago, the United States similarly lost its claim to superpower status when a barrel crude oil roared past $110 on the international market, gasoline prices crossed the $3.50 threshold at American pumps, and diesel fuel topped $4.00. As was true of the USSR following the dismantling of the Berlin Wall, the USA will no doubt continue to stumble on like the superpower it once was; but as the nation's economy continues to be eviscerated to pay for its daily oil fix, it, too, will be seen by increasing numbers of savvy observers as an ex-superpower-in-the-making.
That the fall of the Berlin Wall spelled the erasure of the Soviet Union's superpower status was obvious to international observers at the time. After all, the USSR visibly ceased to exercise dominion over an empire (and an associated military-industrial complex) encompassing nearly half of Europe and much of Central Asia. The relationship between rising oil prices and the obliteration of America's superpower status is, however, hardly as self-evident. So let's consider the connection.
Dry Hole Superpower
The fact is, America's wealth and power has long rested on the abundance of cheap petroleum. The United States was, for a long time, the world's leading producer of oil, supplying its own needs while generating a healthy surplus for export.
Oil was the basis for the rise of first giant multinational corporations in the U.S., notably John D. Rockefeller's Standard Oil Company (now reconstituted as Exxon Mobil, the world's wealthiest publicly-traded corporation). Abundant, exceedingly affordable petroleum was also responsible for the emergence of the American automotive and trucking industries, the flourishing of the domestic airline industry, the development of the petrochemical and plastics industries, the suburbanization of America, and the mechanization of its agriculture. Without cheap and abundant oil, the United States would never have experienced the historic economic expansion of the post-World War II era.
No less important was the role of abundant petroleum in fueling the global reach of U.S. military power. For all the talk of America's growing reliance on computers, advanced sensors, and stealth technology to prevail in warfare, it has been oil above all that gave the U.S. military its capacity to "project power" onto distant battlefields like Iraq and Afghanistan. Every Humvee, tank, helicopter, and jet fighter requires its daily ration of petroleum, without which America's technology-driven military would be forced to abandon the battlefield. No surprise, then, that the U.S. Department of Defense is the world's single biggest consumer of petroleum, using more of it every day than the entire nation of Sweden.
From the end of World War II through the height of the Cold War, the U.S. claim to superpower status rested on a vast sea of oil. As long as most of our oil came from domestic sources and the price remained reasonably low, the American economy thrived and the annual cost of deploying vast armies abroad was relatively manageable. But that sea has been shrinking since the 1950s. Domestic oil production reached a peak in 1970 and has been in decline ever since - with a growing dependency on imported oil as the result. When it came to reliance on imports, the United States crossed the 50% threshold in 1998 and now has passed 65%.
Though few fully realized it, this represented a significant erosion of sovereign independence even before the price of a barrel of crude soared above $110. By now, we are transferring such staggering sums yearly to foreign oil producers, who are using it to gobble up valuable American assets, that, whether we know it or not, we have essentially abandoned our claim to superpowerdom.
According to the latest data from the U.S. Department of Energy, the United States is importing 12-14 million barrels of oil per day. At a current price of about $115 per barrel, that's $1.5 billion per day, or $548 billion per year. This represents the single largest contribution to America's balance-of-payments deficit, and is a leading cause for the dollar's ongoing drop in value. If oil prices rise any higher - in response, perhaps, to a new crisis in the Middle East (as might be occasioned by U.S. air strikes on Iran) - our annual import bill could quickly approach three-quarters of a trillion dollars or more per year.
While our economy is being depleted of these funds, at a moment when credit is scarce and economic growth has screeched to a halt, the oil regimes on which we depend for our daily fix are depositing their mountains of accumulating petrodollars in "sovereign wealth funds" (SWFs) - state-controlled investment accounts that buy up prized foreign assets in order to secure non-oil-dependent sources of wealth. At present, these funds are already believed to hold in excess of several trillion dollars; the richest, the Abu Dhabi Investment Authority (ADIA), alone holds $875 billion.
The ADIA first made headlines in November 2007 when it acquired a $7.5 billion stake in Citigroup, America's largest bank holding company. The fund has also made substantial investments in Advanced Micro Systems, a major chip maker, and the Carlyle Group, the private equity giant. Another big SWF, the Kuwait Investment Authority, also acquired a multibillion-dollar stake in Citigroup, along with a $6.6 billion chunk of Merrill Lynch. And these are but the first of a series of major SWF moves that will be aimed at acquiring stakes in top American banks and corporations.
The managers of these funds naturally insist that they have no intention of using their ownership of prime American properties to influence U.S. policy. In time, however, a transfer of economic power of this magnitude cannot help but translate into a transfer of political power as well. Indeed, this prospect has already stirred deep misgivings in Congress. "In the short run, that they [the Middle Eastern SWFs] are investing here is good," Senator Evan Bayh (D-Indiana) recently observed. "But in the long run it is unsustainable. Our power and authority is eroding because of the amounts of dollars we are sending abroad for energy."
No Summer Tax Holiday for the Pentagon
Foreign ownership of key nodes of our economy is only one sign of fading American superpower status. Oil's impact on the military is another.
Every day, the average G.I. in Iraq uses approximately 27 gallons of petroleum-based fuels. With some 160,000 American troops in Iraq, that amounts to 4.37 million gallons in daily oil usage, including gasoline for vans and light vehicles, diesel for trucks and armored vehicles, and aviation fuel for helicopters, drones, and fixed-wing aircraft. With U.S. forces paying, as of late April, an average of $3.23 per gallon for these fuels, the Pentagon is already spending approximately $14 million per day on oil ($98 million per week, $5.1 billion per year) to stay in Iraq. Meanwhile, our Iraqi allies, who are expected to receive a windfall of $70 billion this year from the rising price of their oil exports, charge their citizens $1.36 per gallon for gasoline.
When questioned about why Iraqis are paying almost a third less for oil than American forces in their country, senior Iraqi government officials scoff at any suggestion of impropriety. "America has hardly even begun to repay its debt to Iraq," said Abdul Basit, the head of Iraq's Supreme Board of Audit, an independent body that oversees Iraqi governmental expenditures. "This is an immoral request because we didn't ask them to come to Iraq, and before they came in 2003 we didn't have all these needs."
Needless to say, this is not exactly the way grateful clients are supposed to address superpower patrons. "It's totally unacceptable to me that we are spending tens of billions of dollars on rebuilding Iraq while they are putting tens of billions of dollars in banks around the world from oil revenues," said Senator Carl Levin (D-Michigan), chairman of the Armed Services Committee. "It doesn't compute as far as I'm concerned."
Certainly, however, our allies in the region, especially the Sunni kingdoms of Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) that presumably look to Washington to stabilize Iraq and curb the growing power of Shiite Iran, are willing to help the Pentagon out by supplying U.S. troops with free or deeply-discounted petroleum. No such luck. Except for some partially subsidized oil supplied by Kuwait, all oil-producing U.S. allies in the region charge us the market rate for petroleum. Take that as a striking reflection of how little credence even countries whose ruling elites have traditionally looked to the U.S. for protection now attach to our supposed superpower status.
Think of this as a strikingly clear-eyed assessment of American power. As far as they're concerned, we're now just another of those hopeless oil addicts driving a monster gas-guzzler up to the pump - and they're perfectly happy to collect our cash which they can then use to cherry-pick our prime assets. So expect no summer tax holidays for the Pentagon, not in the Middle East, anyway.
Worse yet, the U.S. military will need even more oil for the future wars on which the Pentagon is now doing the planning. In this way, the U.S. experience in Iraq has especially worrisome implications. Under the military "transformation" initiated by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld in 2001, the future U.S. war machine will rely less on "boots on the ground" and ever more on technology. But technology entails an ever-greater requirement for oil, as the newer weapons sought by Rumsfeld (and now Secretary of Defense Robert Gates) all consume many times more fuel than those they will replace. To put this in perspective: The average G.I in Iraq now uses about seven times as much oil per day as G.I.s did in the first the Gulf War less than two decades ago. And every sign indicates that the same ratio of increase will apply to coming conflicts; that the daily cost of fighting will skyrocket; and that the Pentagon's capacity to shoulder multiple foreign military burdens will unravel. Thus are superpowers undone.
Russia's Gusher
If anything demonstrates the critical role of oil in determining the fate of superpowers in the current milieu, it is the spectacular reemergence of Russia as a Great Power on the basis of its superior energy balance. Once derided as the humiliated, enfeebled loser in the U.S.-Soviet rivalry, Russia is again a force to be reckoned with in world affairs. It possesses the fastest-growing economy among the G-8 group of major industrial powers, is the world's second leading producer of oil (after Saudi Arabia), and its top producer of natural gas. Because it produces far more energy than it consumes, Russia exports a substantial portion of its oil and gas to neighboring countries, making it the only Great Power not dependent on other states for its energy needs.
As Russia has become an energy-exporting state, it has moved from the list of has-beens to the front rank of major players. When President Bush first occupied the White House, in February 2001, one of his highest priorities was to downgrade U.S. ties with Russia and annul the various arms-control agreements that had been forged between the two countries by his predecessors, agreements that explicitly conferred equal status on the USA and the USSR.
As an indication of how contemptuously the Bush team viewed Russia at that time, Condoleezza Rice, while still an adviser to the Bush presidential campaign, wrote, in the January/February 2000 issue of the influential Foreign Affairs, "U.S. policy must recognize that American security is threatened less by Russia's strength than by its weakness and incoherence." Under such circumstances, she continued, there was no need to preserve obsolete relics of the dual superpower past like the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty; rather, the focus of U.S. efforts should be on preventing the further erosion of Russian nuclear safeguards and the potential escape of nuclear materials.
In line with this outlook, President Bush believed that he could convert an impoverished and compliant Russia into a major source of oil and natural gas for the United States - with American energy companies running the show. This was the evident aim of the U.S.-Russian "energy dialogue" announced by Bush and Russian President Vladimir Putin in May 2002. But if Bush thought Russia was prepared to turn into a northern version of Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, or Venezuela prior to the arrival of Hugo Chávez, he was to be sorely disappointed. Putin never permitted American firms to acquire substantial energy assets in Russia. Instead, he presided over a major recentralization of state control when it came to the country's most valuable oil and gas reserves, putting most of them in the hands of Gazprom, the state-controlled natural gas behemoth.
Once in control of these assets, moreover, Putin has used his renascent energy power to exert influence over states that were once part of the former Soviet Union, as well as those in Western Europe that rely on Russian oil and gas for a substantial share of their energy needs. In the most extreme case, Moscow turned off the flow of natural gas to Ukraine on January 1, 2006, in the midst of an especially cold winter, in what was said to be a dispute over pricing but was widely viewed as punishment for Ukraine's political drift westwards. (The gas was turned back on four days later when Ukraine agreed to pay a higher price and offered other concessions.) Gazprom has threatened similar action in disputes with Armenia, Belarus, and Georgia - in each case forcing those former Soviet SSRs to back down.
When it comes to the U.S.-Russian relationship, just how much the balance of power has shifted was evident at the NATO summit at Bucharest in early April. There, President Bush asked that Georgia and Ukraine both be approved for eventual membership in the alliance, only to find top U.S. allies (and Russian energy users) France and Germany blocking the measure out of concern for straining ties with Russia. "It was a remarkable rejection of American policy in an alliance normally dominated by Washington," Steven Erlanger and Steven Lee Myers of the New York Times reported, "and it sent a confusing signal to Russia, one that some countries considered close to appeasement of Moscow."
For Russian officials, however, the restoration of their country's great power status is not the product of deceit or bullying, but a natural consequence of being the world's leading energy provider. No one is more aware of this than Dmitri Medvedev, the former Chairman of Gazprom and new Russian president. "The attitude toward Russia in the world is different now," he declared on December 11, 2007. "We are not being lectured like schoolchildren; we are respected and we are deferred to. Russia has reclaimed its proper place in the world community. Russia has become a different country, stronger and more prosperous."
The same, of course, can be said about the United States - in reverse. As a result of our addiction to increasingly costly imported oil, we have become a different country, weaker and less prosperous. Whether we know it or not, the energy Berlin Wall has already fallen and the United States is an ex-superpower-in-the-making.
---------
Michael Klare is a professor of peace and world security studies at Hampshire College and author of the just-released Rising Powers, Shrinking Planet: The New Geopolitics of Energy (Metropolitan Books). A documentary film based on his previous book, Blood and Oil, is available from the Media Education Foundation and can be ordered at bloodandoilmovie.com. A brief video of Klare discussing key subjects in his new book can be viewed by clicking here.
-------
Jump to today's Truthout Features: Today's Truthout Features
-------------- FBI Withdraws Digital Library's National Security Letter Russ Feingold Government in Secret Burma: Junta Referendum Priority Over Cyclone Relief US Evangelicals Call for Step Back From Politics Sara Robinson Outright Barbarism vs. the Civil Society Michael T. Klare Portrait of an Oil-Addicted Former Superpower Roger de Weck From Crisis to Crisis? A Return to the 1970s? Helen Thomas A Picture Worth A Thousand Words Maya Schenwar Women in the Running Blue Dogs Vow to Bite on Iraq Spending Bill Michigan Democrats Plan for Delegate Seating 216 Arrested in Protests of Sean Bell Case Acquittals Obama's Got a Confident New Strategy The "Surge" of Iraqi Prisoners Pressure to Cut Costs, Troops Strains "Surge" Special Counsel Shut Down Probe of Siegelman Case Violence Escalates Between Sunni and Shia in Beirut Chimienti and Baker Three Things That Won't Help the Foreclosure Crisis -------------- t r u t h o u t Home
(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. t r u t h o u t has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is t r u t h o u t endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)
"Go to Original" links are provided as a convenience to our readers and allow for verification of authenticity. However, as originating pages are often updated by their originating host sites, the versions posted on TO may not match the versions our readers view when clicking the "Go to Original" links.
How Rising Oil Prices Are Obliterating America's Superpower Status
By Michael T. Klare TomDispatch.com
Thursday 08 May 2008
Nineteen years ago, the fall of the Berlin Wall effectively eliminated the Soviet Union as the world's other superpower. Yes, the USSR as a political entity stumbled on for another two years, but it was clearly an ex-superpower from the moment it lost control over its satellites in Eastern Europe.
Less than a month ago, the United States similarly lost its claim to superpower status when a barrel crude oil roared past $110 on the international market, gasoline prices crossed the $3.50 threshold at American pumps, and diesel fuel topped $4.00. As was true of the USSR following the dismantling of the Berlin Wall, the USA will no doubt continue to stumble on like the superpower it once was; but as the nation's economy continues to be eviscerated to pay for its daily oil fix, it, too, will be seen by increasing numbers of savvy observers as an ex-superpower-in-the-making.
That the fall of the Berlin Wall spelled the erasure of the Soviet Union's superpower status was obvious to international observers at the time. After all, the USSR visibly ceased to exercise dominion over an empire (and an associated military-industrial complex) encompassing nearly half of Europe and much of Central Asia. The relationship between rising oil prices and the obliteration of America's superpower status is, however, hardly as self-evident. So let's consider the connection.
Dry Hole Superpower
The fact is, America's wealth and power has long rested on the abundance of cheap petroleum. The United States was, for a long time, the world's leading producer of oil, supplying its own needs while generating a healthy surplus for export.
Oil was the basis for the rise of first giant multinational corporations in the U.S., notably John D. Rockefeller's Standard Oil Company (now reconstituted as Exxon Mobil, the world's wealthiest publicly-traded corporation). Abundant, exceedingly affordable petroleum was also responsible for the emergence of the American automotive and trucking industries, the flourishing of the domestic airline industry, the development of the petrochemical and plastics industries, the suburbanization of America, and the mechanization of its agriculture. Without cheap and abundant oil, the United States would never have experienced the historic economic expansion of the post-World War II era.
No less important was the role of abundant petroleum in fueling the global reach of U.S. military power. For all the talk of America's growing reliance on computers, advanced sensors, and stealth technology to prevail in warfare, it has been oil above all that gave the U.S. military its capacity to "project power" onto distant battlefields like Iraq and Afghanistan. Every Humvee, tank, helicopter, and jet fighter requires its daily ration of petroleum, without which America's technology-driven military would be forced to abandon the battlefield. No surprise, then, that the U.S. Department of Defense is the world's single biggest consumer of petroleum, using more of it every day than the entire nation of Sweden.
From the end of World War II through the height of the Cold War, the U.S. claim to superpower status rested on a vast sea of oil. As long as most of our oil came from domestic sources and the price remained reasonably low, the American economy thrived and the annual cost of deploying vast armies abroad was relatively manageable. But that sea has been shrinking since the 1950s. Domestic oil production reached a peak in 1970 and has been in decline ever since - with a growing dependency on imported oil as the result. When it came to reliance on imports, the United States crossed the 50% threshold in 1998 and now has passed 65%.
Though few fully realized it, this represented a significant erosion of sovereign independence even before the price of a barrel of crude soared above $110. By now, we are transferring such staggering sums yearly to foreign oil producers, who are using it to gobble up valuable American assets, that, whether we know it or not, we have essentially abandoned our claim to superpowerdom.
According to the latest data from the U.S. Department of Energy, the United States is importing 12-14 million barrels of oil per day. At a current price of about $115 per barrel, that's $1.5 billion per day, or $548 billion per year. This represents the single largest contribution to America's balance-of-payments deficit, and is a leading cause for the dollar's ongoing drop in value. If oil prices rise any higher - in response, perhaps, to a new crisis in the Middle East (as might be occasioned by U.S. air strikes on Iran) - our annual import bill could quickly approach three-quarters of a trillion dollars or more per year.
While our economy is being depleted of these funds, at a moment when credit is scarce and economic growth has screeched to a halt, the oil regimes on which we depend for our daily fix are depositing their mountains of accumulating petrodollars in "sovereign wealth funds" (SWFs) - state-controlled investment accounts that buy up prized foreign assets in order to secure non-oil-dependent sources of wealth. At present, these funds are already believed to hold in excess of several trillion dollars; the richest, the Abu Dhabi Investment Authority (ADIA), alone holds $875 billion.
The ADIA first made headlines in November 2007 when it acquired a $7.5 billion stake in Citigroup, America's largest bank holding company. The fund has also made substantial investments in Advanced Micro Systems, a major chip maker, and the Carlyle Group, the private equity giant. Another big SWF, the Kuwait Investment Authority, also acquired a multibillion-dollar stake in Citigroup, along with a $6.6 billion chunk of Merrill Lynch. And these are but the first of a series of major SWF moves that will be aimed at acquiring stakes in top American banks and corporations.
The managers of these funds naturally insist that they have no intention of using their ownership of prime American properties to influence U.S. policy. In time, however, a transfer of economic power of this magnitude cannot help but translate into a transfer of political power as well. Indeed, this prospect has already stirred deep misgivings in Congress. "In the short run, that they [the Middle Eastern SWFs] are investing here is good," Senator Evan Bayh (D-Indiana) recently observed. "But in the long run it is unsustainable. Our power and authority is eroding because of the amounts of dollars we are sending abroad for energy."
No Summer Tax Holiday for the Pentagon
Foreign ownership of key nodes of our economy is only one sign of fading American superpower status. Oil's impact on the military is another.
Every day, the average G.I. in Iraq uses approximately 27 gallons of petroleum-based fuels. With some 160,000 American troops in Iraq, that amounts to 4.37 million gallons in daily oil usage, including gasoline for vans and light vehicles, diesel for trucks and armored vehicles, and aviation fuel for helicopters, drones, and fixed-wing aircraft. With U.S. forces paying, as of late April, an average of $3.23 per gallon for these fuels, the Pentagon is already spending approximately $14 million per day on oil ($98 million per week, $5.1 billion per year) to stay in Iraq. Meanwhile, our Iraqi allies, who are expected to receive a windfall of $70 billion this year from the rising price of their oil exports, charge their citizens $1.36 per gallon for gasoline.
When questioned about why Iraqis are paying almost a third less for oil than American forces in their country, senior Iraqi government officials scoff at any suggestion of impropriety. "America has hardly even begun to repay its debt to Iraq," said Abdul Basit, the head of Iraq's Supreme Board of Audit, an independent body that oversees Iraqi governmental expenditures. "This is an immoral request because we didn't ask them to come to Iraq, and before they came in 2003 we didn't have all these needs."
Needless to say, this is not exactly the way grateful clients are supposed to address superpower patrons. "It's totally unacceptable to me that we are spending tens of billions of dollars on rebuilding Iraq while they are putting tens of billions of dollars in banks around the world from oil revenues," said Senator Carl Levin (D-Michigan), chairman of the Armed Services Committee. "It doesn't compute as far as I'm concerned."
Certainly, however, our allies in the region, especially the Sunni kingdoms of Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) that presumably look to Washington to stabilize Iraq and curb the growing power of Shiite Iran, are willing to help the Pentagon out by supplying U.S. troops with free or deeply-discounted petroleum. No such luck. Except for some partially subsidized oil supplied by Kuwait, all oil-producing U.S. allies in the region charge us the market rate for petroleum. Take that as a striking reflection of how little credence even countries whose ruling elites have traditionally looked to the U.S. for protection now attach to our supposed superpower status.
Think of this as a strikingly clear-eyed assessment of American power. As far as they're concerned, we're now just another of those hopeless oil addicts driving a monster gas-guzzler up to the pump - and they're perfectly happy to collect our cash which they can then use to cherry-pick our prime assets. So expect no summer tax holidays for the Pentagon, not in the Middle East, anyway.
Worse yet, the U.S. military will need even more oil for the future wars on which the Pentagon is now doing the planning. In this way, the U.S. experience in Iraq has especially worrisome implications. Under the military "transformation" initiated by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld in 2001, the future U.S. war machine will rely less on "boots on the ground" and ever more on technology. But technology entails an ever-greater requirement for oil, as the newer weapons sought by Rumsfeld (and now Secretary of Defense Robert Gates) all consume many times more fuel than those they will replace. To put this in perspective: The average G.I in Iraq now uses about seven times as much oil per day as G.I.s did in the first the Gulf War less than two decades ago. And every sign indicates that the same ratio of increase will apply to coming conflicts; that the daily cost of fighting will skyrocket; and that the Pentagon's capacity to shoulder multiple foreign military burdens will unravel. Thus are superpowers undone.
Russia's Gusher
If anything demonstrates the critical role of oil in determining the fate of superpowers in the current milieu, it is the spectacular reemergence of Russia as a Great Power on the basis of its superior energy balance. Once derided as the humiliated, enfeebled loser in the U.S.-Soviet rivalry, Russia is again a force to be reckoned with in world affairs. It possesses the fastest-growing economy among the G-8 group of major industrial powers, is the world's second leading producer of oil (after Saudi Arabia), and its top producer of natural gas. Because it produces far more energy than it consumes, Russia exports a substantial portion of its oil and gas to neighboring countries, making it the only Great Power not dependent on other states for its energy needs.
As Russia has become an energy-exporting state, it has moved from the list of has-beens to the front rank of major players. When President Bush first occupied the White House, in February 2001, one of his highest priorities was to downgrade U.S. ties with Russia and annul the various arms-control agreements that had been forged between the two countries by his predecessors, agreements that explicitly conferred equal status on the USA and the USSR.
As an indication of how contemptuously the Bush team viewed Russia at that time, Condoleezza Rice, while still an adviser to the Bush presidential campaign, wrote, in the January/February 2000 issue of the influential Foreign Affairs, "U.S. policy must recognize that American security is threatened less by Russia's strength than by its weakness and incoherence." Under such circumstances, she continued, there was no need to preserve obsolete relics of the dual superpower past like the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty; rather, the focus of U.S. efforts should be on preventing the further erosion of Russian nuclear safeguards and the potential escape of nuclear materials.
In line with this outlook, President Bush believed that he could convert an impoverished and compliant Russia into a major source of oil and natural gas for the United States - with American energy companies running the show. This was the evident aim of the U.S.-Russian "energy dialogue" announced by Bush and Russian President Vladimir Putin in May 2002. But if Bush thought Russia was prepared to turn into a northern version of Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, or Venezuela prior to the arrival of Hugo Chávez, he was to be sorely disappointed. Putin never permitted American firms to acquire substantial energy assets in Russia. Instead, he presided over a major recentralization of state control when it came to the country's most valuable oil and gas reserves, putting most of them in the hands of Gazprom, the state-controlled natural gas behemoth.
Once in control of these assets, moreover, Putin has used his renascent energy power to exert influence over states that were once part of the former Soviet Union, as well as those in Western Europe that rely on Russian oil and gas for a substantial share of their energy needs. In the most extreme case, Moscow turned off the flow of natural gas to Ukraine on January 1, 2006, in the midst of an especially cold winter, in what was said to be a dispute over pricing but was widely viewed as punishment for Ukraine's political drift westwards. (The gas was turned back on four days later when Ukraine agreed to pay a higher price and offered other concessions.) Gazprom has threatened similar action in disputes with Armenia, Belarus, and Georgia - in each case forcing those former Soviet SSRs to back down.
When it comes to the U.S.-Russian relationship, just how much the balance of power has shifted was evident at the NATO summit at Bucharest in early April. There, President Bush asked that Georgia and Ukraine both be approved for eventual membership in the alliance, only to find top U.S. allies (and Russian energy users) France and Germany blocking the measure out of concern for straining ties with Russia. "It was a remarkable rejection of American policy in an alliance normally dominated by Washington," Steven Erlanger and Steven Lee Myers of the New York Times reported, "and it sent a confusing signal to Russia, one that some countries considered close to appeasement of Moscow."
For Russian officials, however, the restoration of their country's great power status is not the product of deceit or bullying, but a natural consequence of being the world's leading energy provider. No one is more aware of this than Dmitri Medvedev, the former Chairman of Gazprom and new Russian president. "The attitude toward Russia in the world is different now," he declared on December 11, 2007. "We are not being lectured like schoolchildren; we are respected and we are deferred to. Russia has reclaimed its proper place in the world community. Russia has become a different country, stronger and more prosperous."
The same, of course, can be said about the United States - in reverse. As a result of our addiction to increasingly costly imported oil, we have become a different country, weaker and less prosperous. Whether we know it or not, the energy Berlin Wall has already fallen and the United States is an ex-superpower-in-the-making.
---------
Michael Klare is a professor of peace and world security studies at Hampshire College and author of the just-released Rising Powers, Shrinking Planet: The New Geopolitics of Energy (Metropolitan Books). A documentary film based on his previous book, Blood and Oil, is available from the Media Education Foundation and can be ordered at bloodandoilmovie.com. A brief video of Klare discussing key subjects in his new book can be viewed by clicking here.
-------
Jump to today's Truthout Features: Today's Truthout Features
-------------- FBI Withdraws Digital Library's National Security Letter Russ Feingold Government in Secret Burma: Junta Referendum Priority Over Cyclone Relief US Evangelicals Call for Step Back From Politics Sara Robinson Outright Barbarism vs. the Civil Society Michael T. Klare Portrait of an Oil-Addicted Former Superpower Roger de Weck From Crisis to Crisis? A Return to the 1970s? Helen Thomas A Picture Worth A Thousand Words Maya Schenwar Women in the Running Blue Dogs Vow to Bite on Iraq Spending Bill Michigan Democrats Plan for Delegate Seating 216 Arrested in Protests of Sean Bell Case Acquittals Obama's Got a Confident New Strategy The "Surge" of Iraqi Prisoners Pressure to Cut Costs, Troops Strains "Surge" Special Counsel Shut Down Probe of Siegelman Case Violence Escalates Between Sunni and Shia in Beirut Chimienti and Baker Three Things That Won't Help the Foreclosure Crisis -------------- t r u t h o u t Home
(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. t r u t h o u t has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is t r u t h o u t endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)
"Go to Original" links are provided as a convenience to our readers and allow for verification of authenticity. However, as originating pages are often updated by their originating host sites, the versions posted on TO may not match the versions our readers view when clicking the "Go to Original" links.
sábado 3 de mayo de 2008
Basta Ya con el capitalismo: La lucha Bolivariana por el Socialismo del Siglo XXI
ACTUALIDAD DEL SOCIALISMO CIENTÍFICO EN LA LUCHA POR EL NUEVO SOCIALISMO
Cambios en el capitalismo, en el imperialismo y en las alternativas revolucionarias.
Por Narciso Isa Conde
El final del siglo XX coincidió con el paso a una nueva época, con el establecimiento de un orden mundial diferente, con importantes cambios al interior del capitalismo y la existencia de un planeta sensiblemente alterado.
En esta mutación no sólo intervino el extraordinario impacto del derrumbe del llamado socialismo real euro-oriental.
El cambio de época y el nuevo ordenamiento mundial guardó relación también con otros factores que necesariamente deben ser tenidos en cuenta para que la necesaria metamorfosis de las fuerzas revolucionarias pueda servir para contrarrestar la que han tenido y sigue teniendo lugar en el seno del sistema capitalista mundial a la entrada de este tercer milenio; y, sobre todo, para que ella pueda dar lugar a la recuperación de su poder transformador, vía la superación de la crisis de crecimiento y de construcción que la ha venido afectando en los últimos decenios.
Esto no puede hacerse- y así lo indica la actual experiencia de nuestra América, erigida en continente de la esperanza y vanguardia de la lucha actual contra el neoliberalismo- nueva modalidad del capitalismo- sin acompañarnos en forma preeminente de los inmensos e imprescindibles aportes de los(as) fundadores del socialismo científico y de sus grandes continuadores en el mundo y el continente, y sin trascenderlos y enriquecerlos desde la permanencia de sus esencias en relación a los cambios reales, apelando además a otras valiosas fuentes inspiración articuladas a nuestras historias y a nuestras culturas, como las cosmovisiones indígenas, el socialismo indo-americano de José Carlos Mariategui, la audacia intelectual y la obra teórica de Ernesto-Che-Guevara, el pensamiento social avanzado de nuestros próceres, los nuevos aportes a teoría de género, la teología de la liberación…
Nueva época.
El siglo XX, antes de espirar, abrió el proceso hacia una época diferente a la que se inició en 1917.
La Revolución Bolchevique, cuyo 90 aniversario se conmemoró recientemente, incorporó desde la segunda década del siglo XX un proceso de profundas convulsiones sociales y trascendentales luchas políticas; lo abrió a una intensa dinámica de enfrentamientos entre la necesidad de transitar al socialismo y el interés de salvar y reciclar el capitalismo.
Ese proceso dio lugar al mundo bipolar y a una época en la que los regímenes de orientación socialista y las izquierdas logramos avances tan espectaculares que proclamamos la transición del capitalismo al socialismo a escala mundial, sin reparar en que el excesivo entusiasmo mezclado con el dogma no permitían ver en su real dimensión, analizar en toda su profundidad y superar los fenómenos que erosionaban la reciente experiencia socialistas.
Influyeron además en las fallas registradas en ese período, el menosprecio y el desconocimiento de las modificaciones que experimentaba en capitalismo a consecuencia de la tercera y cuarta olas revolución científico-técnica, de una mayor trans-nacionalización del capital, de un proceso de reestructuración profunda sobre la marcha y de la progresiva adopción y configuración de una estrategia de dominación integral (ideológica, política, cultural, social, económica y militar), evidentemente destinada a garantizar la hegemonía dentro de la transición sistémica, la cual responde al nombre de estrategia neoliberal.
El derrumbe del socialismo real en Europa oriental clausuró una época dentro de este siglo declinante y abrió paso a otra que ya venía gestándose, que si bien reduce enormemente la significación del enfrentamiento entre los dos sistemas anteriormente conformados, pone sobre la palestra mundial, mucho más crudamente que antes, la crisis integral del sistema capitalista mundial en el marco de su transición a un nuevo patrón de acumulación y dominación, y pone en movimiento a nuevos sujetos político-sociales objetivamente enfrentados a esa dominación y a los riesgos que ella acarrea para la existencia misma de la humanidad y del ecosistema planetario.
De un mundo compartido entre el tránsito al socialismo y el capitalismo, se pasó a un dominio casi incompartido, dominado por el capitalismo neoliberal.
Del mundo bipolar en el plano político-militar, se pasó a un mundo unipolar bajo hegemonía estadounidense.
De un proceso de relativa internacionalización del mercado (con un proteccionismo muy difundido), de una cierta mundialización de las relaciones, las comunicaciones, las inversiones y el crédito, se pasó a una extraordinaria globalización fraccionada, manipulada y dominada (con proteccionismos mucho más concentrados en sus centros desarrollados) por los países del capitalismo altamente subdesarrollado (Europa Occidental, Japón y Estados Unidos), y por consiguiente, en detrimento de la inmensa mayoría de los países de capitalismo periférico-dependiente.
De un capitalismo que superó al liberalismo de la fase de la libre competencia a través del capitalismo monopolista de Estado y la trans-nacionalización, se ha pasado a un capitalismo que retoma como falacia la libre competencia y el liberalismo para concentrar más, dominar más mercados, imponer la dictadura de los oligopolios y monopolios, derrumbar las barreras proteccionistas de los países dependientes y apabullar a los países y las fuerzas productivas más débiles.
De la concepción del Estado Benefactor, ideado por Ford y Keyness, se pasó al auge del neoliberalismo y al desmonte de la protección y las conquistas sociales en grados e intensidades variadas.
Más polarización.
En esta nueva etapa, la dinámica expansiva del capitalismo neoliberal presentó dos vertientes: su desarrollo a profundidad en los países imperialistas (con una orientación que va desde las tecnologías de punta y el boom de la informática, la micro-electrónica, la robótica , la biotecnología y la biomédica- apuntando a la cooptación de los adelantos relacionados con la física cuántica y el genoma humano- hasta los nuevos fetiches de esa tecnología destinados a enajenar a los seres humanos a través de apabullantes aparatos de comunicación, desinformación y manipulación de las conciencias individual y colectiva) y la incorporación y el control acelerado y salvaje de territorios de Africa, Asia y América Latina, que si bien estaban subordinados al sistema, se mantenían distantes de sus nuevas formas de existencia, vida y reproducción. Esto último potencia y profundiza los desniveles Norte-Sur y agrava las desigualdades y contradicciones planetarias.
El contrasentido de ese proceso consistió en que su avance ha tenido que hacerse a costa de una exclusión, una marginación y un empobrecimiento mayores, que afectan a centenares de millones de seres humanos, y en que su proceso de reestructuración, aunque acrecienta la movilidad social y alteran viejos sujetos sociales explotados, coloca objetivamente en su contra un abanico social inmenso y diverso, y provoca, a través de nuevos cambios en la división social, sexual, generacional, tecnológica y ambiental del trabajo, nuevos y pujantes movimientos sociales que con sus luchas y reclamos impactan el ámbito mundial. Esto pone además al rojo vivo la crisis de participación y la deslegitimación de las superestructuras políticas, jurídicas e ideológicas del sistema dominante; fenómeno que en el caso de América Latina y el Caribe ha estado en la base de la decadencia del neoliberalismo y de la nueva ola de cambios, situándose a la vanguardia de la búsqueda de nuevas alternativas aun presentándose serios déficit en los procesos de conformación de las nuevas vanguardias revolucionarias.
La democracia capitalista neo-liberalizada habla tanto de democracia y aporta tan poco en esa materia, que emerge como contrapartida un reclamo de participación, de democratización y de poder de decisión que, junto al clamor por el derecho a comer y a vivir, al reclamo de autodeterminación nacional, a la emergencia de la rebeldía femenina y de la reivindicación de un ambiente sano y una ecología equilibrada, tiende en perspectiva a poner en un serio aprieto al sistema dominante y a convertir la necesidad de la nueva revolución social, política y cultural en posibilidad real.
Profundización de la crisis y la vigencia de un orden dominante más brutal
Las cúpulas dominantes están reducidas a la condición de gerentes o administradores de una máquina descontrolada que en cualquier momento puede sufrir graves averías.
La crisis actual del capitalismo, aunque conserva elementos de sus crisis tradicionales, es mucho más radical, profunda, multifacética y generalizada que todas las anteriores.
La legitimidad del poder y la disciplina reproductora del gran capital están siendo erosionadas sin ningún otro control que no sea la crisis de las fuerzas alternativas y, dentro de ella, por la propia crisis del socialismo que existió, la crisis de las izquierdas y la crisis de desarrollo de la teoría marxista que tanto nos han afectado.
Esos y otros factores hacen época y conforman un mundo muy especial, que tiene similitudes y raíces comunes con el que le tocó analizar a Marx y a Engels –y más tarde a Lenin y a sus continuadores, pero también notables y decisivas diferencias respecto a esos estadios del capitalismo y del imperialismo y respecto al mundo en que le tocó na vivir y sufrir a la izquierda marxista durante la mayor parte del siglo XX.
El nuevo orden proclamado es más brutal y devastador que el viejo.
“En el mundo sin alma que se nos obliga a aceptar como único posible -nos dice Eduardo Galeano-, no hay pueblos, sino mercados; no hay ciudadanos, sino consumidores; no hay naciones, sino empresas; no hay ciudades, sino aglomeraciones; no hay relaciones humanas, sino competencias mercantiles.
(“Medios de Incomunicación”, revista América Nuestra No.6).
Este mundo, además, todavía no considera a la mujer como ser humano, agrava la opresión de género con su proceso de feminización de la pobreza y de la fuerza de trabajo, potencia después del fin de la guerra fría las guerras nacionalistas e inter-étnicas, instrumenta las guerras preventivas de reconquista del planeta, multiplica el racismo y la xenofobia, reproduce viejas y nuevas modalidades de adulto-centrismo, implanta fábricas de pobreza, exclusión social e indigencia desde los gobiernos sustentadores de los llamados programas de ajustes, contamina el ambiente y destruye la naturaleza, comprometiendo la vida de los seres nacidos y por nacer.
Propicia que las ciencias, incluidas las ciencias médicas, sean secuestradas por el gran capital y convertidas en instrumentos de lucro y factores de alto riesgo para la vida humana.
Aliena en forma más brutal la conciencia de los seres humanos, convierte los devaluados Estados nacionales en fuente de delincuencia y máquinas generadoras de corrupción; promueve el individualismo, degrada la solidaridad humana y robotiza las mentes de los más débiles.
Transforma a los seres humanos en objetos y a los ciudadanos en clientes.
Convierte los servicios de salud y educación en escenarios de lucro y en fuentes caras a inaccesibles para gran parte de la humanidad.
El mundo que nos pretenden imponer no quiere saber de utopías (entendidas como sueños realizables) y hace lo indecible por clausurar la necesidad de fuerzas de izquierda, de fuerzas transformadoras y de alternativas populares.
Y no se trata solamente de difusión de la ya bastante vapuleada tesis de Fukuyama sobre el supuesto fin de la historia y la victoria definitiva del capitalismo, sino además de otras más sofisticadas como la que nos quisieron anunciar una sociedad post-capitalista impulsada por la revolución del conocimiento, que supuestamente provocaría la superación por evolución de la contradicción entre el trabajo y el capital.
Los autores de esta tesis nos aconsejaron en forma vehemente que corriéramos detrás de ese globalismo neoliberal “bienhechor” y nos insertáramos en él, aceptando complacidamente lo que el propio Galeano define como fundamentalismo de la libertad del dinero (¡y del mercado!), totalitarismo de la igualación cultural (impuesto por la TV made in USA) y el monólogo del poder, profusamente divulgado a través de las innovaciones electrónicas.
¡Estuvieron empecinadamente empeñados en hacer las veces de ladrones de sueños evidentemente realizables y sumamente necesarios! Pero por suerte sus logros en ese orden fueron solo parciales puesto que no todos(as), Los(as) revolucionarios(as) nos tragamos esos cuentos y los pueblos, especialmente los de nuestra América, resistieron la ofensiva de la globalización neoliberal hasta recuperar parcialmente la ofensiva.
Globalización fracturada: causas y efectos.
En el mundo actual, los procesos de globalización financiera, comercial, tecnológica, comunicacional, cultural, ambiental y política coexisten con las profundas y crecientes desigualdades, injusticias y divisiones entre países y entre las diferentes clases, sectores y grupos sociales que los conforman; coexisten con las agresiones imperialistas y con mantenimiento de formas coloniales de dominación. Coexisten y las agravan.
Además, el Estado-nación ha ido perdiendo importancia como instancia política, dado que ya le resulta mucho más difícil controlar acontecimientos financieros, tecnológicos, medioambientales, comerciales, etc., los cuales sobrepasan las fronteras establecidas. Pero, a su vez, esa realidad está acompañada de enormes tensiones, choques y confrontaciones nacionalistas, inter-étnicas y religiosas, motivadas por la voluntad de preservar y afirmar identidades propias ante una igualación absurda y despótica y ante la supremacía agobiante de los EE.UU.
Francisco R. Sagosti y Gregorio Arévalo definen así el presente orden mundial:
“Somos testigos de un Orden Global Fracturado; un orden que es global pero no integrado; que pone a cada uno de nosotros en contacto con todos, pero que al mismo tiempo mantiene profundos abismos entre individuos y grupos de personas; que genera enormes oportunidades de progreso, y a la vez segrega a una gran parte de la humanidad y le impide el acceso a sus beneficios. (América Latina en el Nuevo Orden Global Fracturado; Perspectivas y Estrategias. Sagosti en colaboración con Arévalo).
A esto hay que agregarle que se trata de una realidad global fraccionada y bloquificada en favor de los tres principales centros del sistema capitalista mundial (EE.UU., Alemania y Japón), hegemonizada por las grandes corporaciones transnacionales y manipuladas contra los países dependientes y las clases y sectores dominados.
El tránsito hacia este tipo de globalización ha sido el resultado de una combinación de factores: 1) de un nivel superior de la trans-nacionalización del capital iniciada hace decenios en la fase imperialista del capitalismo... 2) de la creación de grandes capitales flotantes (sin mercados rentables en sus puntos de origen) y la consiguiente financierización del sistema... 3) del avance extraordinario de la revolución científico-tecnológica y del tránsito hacia un nuevo patrón de acumulación basado en la micro-electrónica y la informática y el progresivo reemplazo del patrón industrial... 4) y de la unilateralidad del dominio del gran capital a consecuencia del derrumbe del llamado socialismo real.
Ese tránsito tiene lugar en el marco de las relaciones de producción y distribución capitalistas, y es manipulado desde arriba para favorecer a los países centrales sobre los periféricos y a las cúpulas sociales sobre las mayorías populares en el interior de los mismos.
“Estamos -como señala con mucha precisión el sacerdote jesuita, investigador y actual Rector de la Universidad Centroamericana de Nicaragua, Xavier Gorostiaga- ante un cambio de época dominado por una revolución conservadora global, pretendiendo la inevitabilidad de una globalización homogénea y neoliberal del mercado mundial... Una globalización elitista, concentradora y centralizadora de la riqueza, tecnología, poder militar y político como nunca antes en la historia de la Humanidad”.
(EL DESARROLLO GEOCULTURAL, Ponencia presentada en el Seminario para la Paz, Zaragoza, España; marzo de 1995).
El “fundamentalismo neoliberal”, el “discurso único” pretendió constituirse en la doctrina motorizadora de ese proceso de globalización fracturada, bloquificada y manipulada.
Y las mismas políticas impulsadas bajo el mismo patrón dogmático neoliberal provocaron los mismos problemas en el Norte y en el Sur, en el Centro y en la Periferia: exclusión, desempleo, pobreza y feminización de la pobreza; desprotección social vía discriminación clasista, racismo y xenofobia; protección de la rentabilidad financiera a costa de las inversiones productivas y de la prolongación del estancamiento... Sólo que en dimensiones y profundidades distintas, en detrimento de los países del “tercer” y “cuarto” mundo. Y cuando ocasionalmente se registra crecimiento económico, esté se ha hecho sin generar nuevos empleos ni reducir pobreza, a base del incremento de la productividad destinado a beneficiar fundamentalmente a los magnates del gran capital.
Esa mundialización, esa globalización, tal y como se ha presentado no pudo ser ignorada. Pero tampoco aceptada sin resistencia, sin propuestas alternativas, sin luchas por nuevos cambios estructurales profundos que impliquen contraponerle la globalización desde abajo, para beneficio de los de abajo, de todos los excluidos y discriminados, y de toda la humanidad y de sus dos géneros, excluida solamente la poderosa minoría super-millonaria (a derrotar) que atenta contra su actual existencia y contra su vida futura.
Y esta necesidad no sólo mantuvo la vigencia de la utopía revolucionaria, sino que nutrió progresivamente su proceso de renovación y recreación, y nos emplazó a asumirlo en su verdadera acepción: como proyecto de vida y dignificación de la inmensa mayoría de los seres humanos que habitamos este planeta ¡como sueño realizable!
El Capitalismo actual y la revolución del conocimiento.
No hay que negar que en los últimos decenios se han producido significativos y trascendentes avances y mutaciones en la esfera del conocimiento y especialmente en las diversas ramas de la ciencia y la técnica aplicables a la producción y distribución de bienes y servicios. Ellos ha sido producto del trabajo, del ingenio, de la inteligencia y la capacidad creadora de los seres humanos, y debería convertirse en patrimonio colectivo de la humanidad.
Tampoco hay que negar el tremendo impacto de esos cambios dentro del actual orden mundial capitalista, en el proceso de globalización en marcha y sobre todos los sujetos sociales y tendencias que conforman la sociedad mundial.
Pero es preciso situarlos bien y evaluarlos y caracterizarlos mejor, para poder abordarlos y enfrentarlos con certeza desde la óptica de los intereses populares y de toda la humanidad oprimida, discriminada, perjudicada y excluida.
La llamada “revolución del conocimiento” que ha acompañado la globalización descrita ha sido secuestrada por los grandes centros de decisión del capitalismo mundial y puesta al servicio de sus corporaciones transnacionales.
Esa revolución no anda por un lado y el capitalismo por otro. Tampoco ella, por sí misma, ha podido ni puede superar el orden capitalista.
Ella, por el contrario, tiene diseños, apropiaciones y usos específicos que en la actualidad responden a los intereses del gran capital y se oponen a los anhelos cardinales de la humanidad, contribuyendo a provocar, al finalizar el siglo, una crisis realmente civilizatoria.
Esta nueva crisis se expresa como crisis del capitalismo nacional y de sus Estado-naciones, como crisis de la civilización industrial y del desarrollo tecnológico, como crisis medioambiental y ecológica, y como crisis de existencia de una gran parte de la humanidad, con altísimos riesgos para las futuras generaciones a consecuencia de la expansión del hambre, la contaminación, el agotamiento de recursos vitales y el calentamiento del planeta.
Con una crisis de esa envergadura por delante, hubiera sido sencillamente suicida asumir la tesis del fin de las utopías y de los sueños revolucionarios. Equivalía al auto-aniquilamiento colectivo el sugerido abandono del combate por la emancipación y el bienestar material y espiritual de la humanidad.
Y ese fue precisamente uno de los propósitos del discurso único y de la uniformidad de la cultura propiciada por los que incluso se atrevieron a avanzar la tesis de la existencia de “países inviables” y “poblaciones superfluas” .
Conocimiento, Productividad y Propiedad.
La globalización desde arriba y para los de arriba ha estado acompañada del tránsito del patrón industrial al patrón micro-electrónico e informático capitalista. Ambos procesos coexisten. El primero emerge y el segundo declina. Los dos armonizan y coligen y ambos subordinan patrones de acumulación y relaciones de producción más atrasadas y se enmarcan dentro del predominio de la propiedad capitalista altamente concentrada.
El hecho de que la microelectrónica, la informática, la robótica y la biotecnología vayan tomando preeminencia en el mundo capitalista desarrollado, no quiere decir que los sectores productivos tradicionales hayan dejado de existir (siderurgia, petróleo, industria química, petroquímica y motores de combustión interna). Mucho menos que la agricultura de subsistencia, la agricultura extensiva, las relaciones precapitalistas, el comercio atrasado, la artesanía hayan desaparecido de la faz de la Tierra.
El proceso de mutación es desigual y contradictorio, aunque es claro que la progresiva superación de la época que comenzó con la invención de la máquina de vapor y con la conformación de las clases fundamentales de la sociedad burguesa, está en franco proceso de sustitución por innovaciones de mucho más productividad dentro de la hegemonía de la propiedad privada capitalista y la potenciación de los imperialismos; lo que lejos de superar la médula de los aportes de Marx, Engels y Lenin a las ciencias sociales renuevan su actualidad, sobretodo si se asumen desde su propia dialéctica permanentemente superadora y creativa..
El fordismo decae y el capitalismo de los microchips emerge, pero siempre capitalismo Las formas y las técnicas de organización y gestión sufren transformaciones tan radicales como las bases científicas y tecnológicas de la nueva producción, distribución y servicios. El papel del tiempo de trabajo sufre drásticas variaciones al compás de la progresión de la productividad. A las viejas contradicciones se superponen otras nuevas.
Nada de esto, sin embargo, implica desaparición o suplantación del capitalismo por evolución ni conversión del mismo en post-capitalismo bajo el impulso de la “revolución del conocimiento” . Más bien se trata de un proceso mediante el cual el capitalismo de la microelectrónica, la informática y la biotecnología va sobreponiéndose y suplantando áreas del capitalismo industrial y hegemonizando al sistema en su conjunto.
Si bien no es un tema nuevo la importancia de la progresión con la productividad en relación con el modo de propiedad, sí lo es la dimensión alcanzada por ella y otros fenómenos nuevos que la acompañan.
El propio Carlos Marx se adelantó en ese aspecto a los nuevos teóricos, tipo Peter Drucker, que tratan de distorsionar el actual impacto de la revolución científico-técnica en el incremento de la productividad y de usarlo para negar la esencia capitalista de la sociedad post-moderna.
Marx vio aproximarse un nivel de productividad en el que el tiempo de trabajo directo desaparece como algo infinitamente pequeño en relación con el producto.
En ese proceso vio al ser humano-productor convertirse progresivamente en un regulador del proceso de producción y vaticinó el empequeñecimiento del robo del tiempo del trabajo ajeno, aunque no así el robo del producto del mismo.
Hace más unos 150 años en sus Grundrisse, hablando de un futuro previsible, C.Marx anunció lo siguiente:
“El plustrabajo de la masa ha dejado de ser condición para el desarrollo de la riqueza social, así como el no trabajo de unos pocos ha cesado de serlo para el desarrollo de los poderes generales del intelecto.”
“Ciento cuarenta años después que fuera escrita -nos enfatizó en 1995 el filósofo francés Lucién Sève- esta voz profética de los Grundrisse, ¿no hemos llegado justamente a ese punto? Con la irrupción sin precedentes de la ciencia en la producción ¿no estamos viviendo la reducción drástica del tiempo de trabajo necesario, aunque cabeza abajo , es decir, preso de las lógicas capitalistas de la desocupación masiva, de la contratación aleatoria del trabajo, del trabajo precario, del despido precoz, al tiempo que surgen por doquier condiciones tales como los requerimientos de superación de la dicotomía esclavizante tiempo libre/tiempo de trabajo, de la reducción mercantil de la fuerza del saber y del trabajo; en síntesis, los precursores de una nueva era de la organización social y de la existencia personal?” (La Cuestión de Comunismo, Lucién Sève ACTUAL MARX, Edición de la Casa Bertold Brecht, septiembre 1995).
Nuevos fenómenos y más desigualdades y opresión.
No podía, naturalmente, prever Marx el inmenso auge de los servicios ni la altísima concentración de la propiedad y la omnipresencia de la información que se registra hoy en la dinámica capitalista. Tampoco podía entonces vaticinar el actual frenesí de este sistema en la conversión del mayor número de asalariados posibles en trabajadores independientes con contratos puntuales, liberándose el capital de las llamadas cargas sociales y del mismo salario.
Menos aún podía Marx vislumbrar la compleja red de transacciones, movimientos masivos y rápidos, especulación en múltiples mercados y monedas, variedad de inversiones e instrumentos que exhibe un capital especulativo globalizado, con vida propia y relativamente independizado de la producción de bienes y servicios.
Esos procesos determinan que ahora pase a primer plano, junto al problema de la propiedad y del dominio de clase, el de las regulaciones en su conjunto y el carácter intrínsecamente alienado del capitalismo: la inversión de las relaciones entre las personas y las cosas, la primacía de la producción de bienes y servicios por sobre el desarrollo de los seres humanos, y la conversión de sus relaciones en competencias mercantiles.
En ese contexto es engañoso hablar de post-capitalismo. Se trata más bien de un capitalismo más sofisticado y al mismo tiempo más feroz y devastador, que lleva a niveles más dramáticos la dinámica excluyente y genocida de la llamada Civilización de la Copa de Champagne de que nos habla Xavier Gorostiaga, Rector de la Universidad Centroamericana de Nicaragua: lo ancho para una minoría cada vez más pequeña, lo estrecho para una mayoría en constante expansión.
Las propias cifras del Informe de Naciones Unidas, Desarrollo Humano 1994, citadas entonces por Gorostiaga, revelan:
-Que el 20% más rico de la humanidad controla el 83% de los ingresos del mundo y el 20% más pobre sobrevive con el 1.4 por ciento de los ingresos (mil millones de personas reciben un dólar diario y tres mil millones reciben poco más de dos dólares diarios).
-Que del 1960 al 1993 el 20% más rico duplicó sus ingresos respecto a los ingresos del 20% más pobre (30 veces más en 1960 y 61 veces más en 1993).
-Según Forbes Magazine, 358 personas tienen individualmente capitales acumulados del orden de los US$762 billones (miles de millones), lo que equivale al ingreso per cápita de 2,400 millones de pobres, equivalente al 45% de la población mundial. De 1987 a 1994 el número de super-millonarios se incrementó en 140%.
-Los países altamente desarrollados cuentan con el 20% de la población mundial y controlan el 86% del Producto Interno Bruto (PIB), el 82% de los mercados, el 68% de las inversiones y el 74% de las líneas telefónicas.
-La riqueza de sólo tres países súper-ricos es superior al PIB de los 48 países más pobres.
-Mientras los países ricos gastan 12 mil millones de dólares en perfume cada caño y 17 mil millones en alimentos para animales domésticos, existen en la actualidad 900 millones de personas al borde de la muerte por hambre.
-Los 7 países más ricos del mundo (miembros del G7) tienen 685 millones de habitantes con un PIB de 20 millones de millones de dólares, mientras 181 países con 5 mil millones de habitantes tienen un PIB de 10 millones de millones de dólares, una deuda externa de 2 millones de millones y pagan anualmente en servicios el equivalente al 25% de sus exportaciones.
-El mundo de hoy tiene el 60% de la disponibilidad del agua que tenía en 1970 y cuenta con 2.3 mil millones más de habitantes.
Todo esto en los últimos 13 años ha evolucionado dramáticamente para peor.
Y está aconteciendo en la llamada sociedad del conocimiento, bajo control de los grandes propietarios del gran capital y en el marco de la opresión histórica del género femenino por el masculino, de la “razas superiores” sobre las “inferiores”, de los adultos sobre los(as) jóvenes y niños(as), y de los depredadores del ambiente.
Sociedad que no ha pasado a ser post-capitalista, sino más capitalista y siempre patriarcal; esto es, con capital más moderno, más apropiador del conocimiento, más concentrado, más perverso, más caníbal (esto último para -como dice Pérez Esquivel- no faltarle el respeto a los salvajes) y con nuevas capacidades para reproducir la opresión de género.
Los problemas viejos, los viejos renovados y los problemas nuevos del viejo y del nuevo capitalismo se entremezclan para engendrar un cuadro en el que el avance tecno-científico se mezcla con la tragedia y los dramáticos problemas clasistas con los trágicos problemas globales, que van más allá de los propiamente clasistas, porque atentan contra la existencia misma de la humanidad, del presente y, más aún, del futuro. Pero sin separarse de ellos.
“Desarrollo” deshumanizante.
La teoría clásica no pudo prever el hecho de que el desarrollo humano, por el carácter deshumanizante del desarrollo capitalista, tropezara incluso con umbrales de viabilidad económicos, sociales, ecológicos y antropológicos puestos de manifiesto en los últimos 60 años.
La llamada revolución biomédica comienza incluso a trastocar la condición humana vía los cambios en la constitución genética, el destino sanitario, la actividad neuronal y el parentesco biológico.
¿Hay que comprometerse con la vía de la terapia germinal que modificará la especie humana en toda su descendencia? , pregunta el filósofo francés Lucién Sève en el ensayo ya citado.
Estos nuevos problemas, ecológicos, biomédicos, económicos, antropológicos junto a la nueva relevancia y dimensiones del problema de género y las nuevas expresiones de la xenofobia y el racismo- aunque pueden ser abordados desde un marxismo renovado, no tienen respuestas en el análisis clasista tradicional.
El tema de la revolución biomédica y el tema ecológico no son estrictamente problemas clasistas, pero la primera, dentro de su inmensidad prospectiva, está siendo manipulada por el negocio y por definidos intereses y objetivos de la clase dominante, mientras es claro que muchos problemas ecológicos son productos del capitalismo y de su hegemonía de clase.
En la medida el capital penetra mucho más en actividades como la investigación, la salud, la información, la cultura, la educación, la diversión,... engendra más allá de la explotación de la fuerza de trabajo formas inéditas de enajenación y una alienación más profunda de la vida social e individual, cuyo carácter de clase no transforman a las víctimas en clases, pero sí en contingentes humanos oprimidos o afectados.
La cuestión de clase y problemas más allá de las clases.
La propia dinámica del gran capital y los efectos de la estrategia neoliberal alteran la composición de la clase obrera, imponen más movilidad social y amplían el sujeto social antipoder y anticapitalista, obligando a renovar el análisis clasista tradicional. Y esto tiene sus peculiaridades en el centro y en la periferia del capitalismo, registrándose en nuestro sub-continente una gran movilidad y reestructuración social y nuevos contingentes humanos excluidos, lo que obliga ha replantear y enriquecer la expresión de la contradicción capital-trabajo y el tema de los sujetos de la revolución-, que siempre en la periferia del capitalismo ha tenido su peculiaridad diferenciada y que ahora asume nuevas y mutantes modalidades
La expansión y nueva dinámica del capitalismo en crisis afecta más las relaciones con finalidades y regulaciones antropológicas esenciales que al status del sistema de relaciones de producción y distribución.
Los asalariados/as no sólo son agredidos como tales, sino que ellos y otras capas sociales son además agredidos más profundamente como autores desarraigados y alienados en sus propias personas, y en el choque interpersonal potenciado por los nuevos niveles de racismo, de opresión de la mujer, subordinación y discriminación de la niñez y la juventud y por la devastadora la crisis medioambiental.
Ya se ha dicho que la lucha de clases tiene primacía sobre las clases. Ahora es mucho más evidente que la lógica de clase es más vasta que la existencia de clase y por eso hay problemas post-clases o más allá de las clases que no admiten postergación, pero que no podrán ser superados sino se termina con la sociedad de clases.
Ahora hay que pensar de manera no clásica el propio análisis en términos de clase y eso no es negar a Marx y a Lenin, sino proceder como ellos lo hicieron en su tiempo. El capital altamente concentrado, excluyente y depredador ha generado un sepulturero mucho más amplio y diverso que el proletariado industrial y que la alianza obrero campesina. Las rebeldías populares del presente incluyen nuevos actores y modalidades inéditas.
Lo nuevo en las alternativas revolucionarias y en el socialismo.
La lucha de clases en el sentido tradicional no solo no se ha agotado sino que se ha ampliado y recrudecido, pero ahora además su papel nacional e internacional pasa por su profunda renovación, ampliación y radicalización hacia luchas nuevas con sujetos nuevos y viejos que oponen su universalismo civilizador y su creación heroica al particularismo deshumanizante, cruel y cínico del gran capital, para dar inicio a la revolución y dignificación de los/as de abajo. Y esa revolución y dignificación es hoy impensable si la visión clasista (debidamente enriquecida) no es impregnada de la lucha por emancipación de la mujer, por la asunción del ambientalismo revolucionario, por el combate al adulto-centrismo, al racismo, a la opresión nacional y la conquista de la liberación del trabajo frente al capital y la emancipación multiétnica y multicultural. Y viceversa.
La victoria de esas alternativas, las cuales pasan por un desmonte del capitalismo neoliberal y un conjunto de transformaciones pos-neoliberales, sí sería post-capitalismo y éste no podría ser otra cosa que el tránsito hacia un socialismo verdadero e integral, muy distinto al que sucumbió en la URSS y el Este europeo. Hacia un socialismo integral, participativo, autogestionado, capaz de superar persistentemente el mercado y el Estado y la burocracia, repleto de libertades y forjador de seres humanos no egoístas sino profundamente solidarios.
Revolución transformadora en lugar de “revolución” conservadora y reemplazo de la apropiación ilegítima del conocimiento por elites sociales, políticas e intelectuales por su puesta en servicio al progreso de toda la humanidad.
La sociedad humana ha llegado a tales niveles de riesgos de existencia, que o se le pone fin al capitalismo y se le reemplaza por el socialismo, o reinará la neo-barbarie con incontenibles ímpetus de caos. Lo dicho al respecto por Rosa Luxemburgo a principio del Siglo XX (“socialismo o barbarie”) se ha quedado corto. Y el socialismo tiene aun más razón de ser como negación de la súper-barbarie capitalista y de la degeneración burocrática de los procesos de orientación socialista en el siglo pasado, de los que colapsaron, de los que están en crisis y de los que han auspiciado la restauración capitalista en nombre de un “socialismo de mercado” funcional a la globalización neoliberal.
De ahí la urgencia, en vía de concreción, de la refundación de las alternativas anticapitalistas y de los socialismos capaces de superar el orden mundial dominante.
Mayo 2009, Santo Domingo, RD.
Cambios en el capitalismo, en el imperialismo y en las alternativas revolucionarias.
Por Narciso Isa Conde
El final del siglo XX coincidió con el paso a una nueva época, con el establecimiento de un orden mundial diferente, con importantes cambios al interior del capitalismo y la existencia de un planeta sensiblemente alterado.
En esta mutación no sólo intervino el extraordinario impacto del derrumbe del llamado socialismo real euro-oriental.
El cambio de época y el nuevo ordenamiento mundial guardó relación también con otros factores que necesariamente deben ser tenidos en cuenta para que la necesaria metamorfosis de las fuerzas revolucionarias pueda servir para contrarrestar la que han tenido y sigue teniendo lugar en el seno del sistema capitalista mundial a la entrada de este tercer milenio; y, sobre todo, para que ella pueda dar lugar a la recuperación de su poder transformador, vía la superación de la crisis de crecimiento y de construcción que la ha venido afectando en los últimos decenios.
Esto no puede hacerse- y así lo indica la actual experiencia de nuestra América, erigida en continente de la esperanza y vanguardia de la lucha actual contra el neoliberalismo- nueva modalidad del capitalismo- sin acompañarnos en forma preeminente de los inmensos e imprescindibles aportes de los(as) fundadores del socialismo científico y de sus grandes continuadores en el mundo y el continente, y sin trascenderlos y enriquecerlos desde la permanencia de sus esencias en relación a los cambios reales, apelando además a otras valiosas fuentes inspiración articuladas a nuestras historias y a nuestras culturas, como las cosmovisiones indígenas, el socialismo indo-americano de José Carlos Mariategui, la audacia intelectual y la obra teórica de Ernesto-Che-Guevara, el pensamiento social avanzado de nuestros próceres, los nuevos aportes a teoría de género, la teología de la liberación…
Nueva época.
El siglo XX, antes de espirar, abrió el proceso hacia una época diferente a la que se inició en 1917.
La Revolución Bolchevique, cuyo 90 aniversario se conmemoró recientemente, incorporó desde la segunda década del siglo XX un proceso de profundas convulsiones sociales y trascendentales luchas políticas; lo abrió a una intensa dinámica de enfrentamientos entre la necesidad de transitar al socialismo y el interés de salvar y reciclar el capitalismo.
Ese proceso dio lugar al mundo bipolar y a una época en la que los regímenes de orientación socialista y las izquierdas logramos avances tan espectaculares que proclamamos la transición del capitalismo al socialismo a escala mundial, sin reparar en que el excesivo entusiasmo mezclado con el dogma no permitían ver en su real dimensión, analizar en toda su profundidad y superar los fenómenos que erosionaban la reciente experiencia socialistas.
Influyeron además en las fallas registradas en ese período, el menosprecio y el desconocimiento de las modificaciones que experimentaba en capitalismo a consecuencia de la tercera y cuarta olas revolución científico-técnica, de una mayor trans-nacionalización del capital, de un proceso de reestructuración profunda sobre la marcha y de la progresiva adopción y configuración de una estrategia de dominación integral (ideológica, política, cultural, social, económica y militar), evidentemente destinada a garantizar la hegemonía dentro de la transición sistémica, la cual responde al nombre de estrategia neoliberal.
El derrumbe del socialismo real en Europa oriental clausuró una época dentro de este siglo declinante y abrió paso a otra que ya venía gestándose, que si bien reduce enormemente la significación del enfrentamiento entre los dos sistemas anteriormente conformados, pone sobre la palestra mundial, mucho más crudamente que antes, la crisis integral del sistema capitalista mundial en el marco de su transición a un nuevo patrón de acumulación y dominación, y pone en movimiento a nuevos sujetos político-sociales objetivamente enfrentados a esa dominación y a los riesgos que ella acarrea para la existencia misma de la humanidad y del ecosistema planetario.
De un mundo compartido entre el tránsito al socialismo y el capitalismo, se pasó a un dominio casi incompartido, dominado por el capitalismo neoliberal.
Del mundo bipolar en el plano político-militar, se pasó a un mundo unipolar bajo hegemonía estadounidense.
De un proceso de relativa internacionalización del mercado (con un proteccionismo muy difundido), de una cierta mundialización de las relaciones, las comunicaciones, las inversiones y el crédito, se pasó a una extraordinaria globalización fraccionada, manipulada y dominada (con proteccionismos mucho más concentrados en sus centros desarrollados) por los países del capitalismo altamente subdesarrollado (Europa Occidental, Japón y Estados Unidos), y por consiguiente, en detrimento de la inmensa mayoría de los países de capitalismo periférico-dependiente.
De un capitalismo que superó al liberalismo de la fase de la libre competencia a través del capitalismo monopolista de Estado y la trans-nacionalización, se ha pasado a un capitalismo que retoma como falacia la libre competencia y el liberalismo para concentrar más, dominar más mercados, imponer la dictadura de los oligopolios y monopolios, derrumbar las barreras proteccionistas de los países dependientes y apabullar a los países y las fuerzas productivas más débiles.
De la concepción del Estado Benefactor, ideado por Ford y Keyness, se pasó al auge del neoliberalismo y al desmonte de la protección y las conquistas sociales en grados e intensidades variadas.
Más polarización.
En esta nueva etapa, la dinámica expansiva del capitalismo neoliberal presentó dos vertientes: su desarrollo a profundidad en los países imperialistas (con una orientación que va desde las tecnologías de punta y el boom de la informática, la micro-electrónica, la robótica , la biotecnología y la biomédica- apuntando a la cooptación de los adelantos relacionados con la física cuántica y el genoma humano- hasta los nuevos fetiches de esa tecnología destinados a enajenar a los seres humanos a través de apabullantes aparatos de comunicación, desinformación y manipulación de las conciencias individual y colectiva) y la incorporación y el control acelerado y salvaje de territorios de Africa, Asia y América Latina, que si bien estaban subordinados al sistema, se mantenían distantes de sus nuevas formas de existencia, vida y reproducción. Esto último potencia y profundiza los desniveles Norte-Sur y agrava las desigualdades y contradicciones planetarias.
El contrasentido de ese proceso consistió en que su avance ha tenido que hacerse a costa de una exclusión, una marginación y un empobrecimiento mayores, que afectan a centenares de millones de seres humanos, y en que su proceso de reestructuración, aunque acrecienta la movilidad social y alteran viejos sujetos sociales explotados, coloca objetivamente en su contra un abanico social inmenso y diverso, y provoca, a través de nuevos cambios en la división social, sexual, generacional, tecnológica y ambiental del trabajo, nuevos y pujantes movimientos sociales que con sus luchas y reclamos impactan el ámbito mundial. Esto pone además al rojo vivo la crisis de participación y la deslegitimación de las superestructuras políticas, jurídicas e ideológicas del sistema dominante; fenómeno que en el caso de América Latina y el Caribe ha estado en la base de la decadencia del neoliberalismo y de la nueva ola de cambios, situándose a la vanguardia de la búsqueda de nuevas alternativas aun presentándose serios déficit en los procesos de conformación de las nuevas vanguardias revolucionarias.
La democracia capitalista neo-liberalizada habla tanto de democracia y aporta tan poco en esa materia, que emerge como contrapartida un reclamo de participación, de democratización y de poder de decisión que, junto al clamor por el derecho a comer y a vivir, al reclamo de autodeterminación nacional, a la emergencia de la rebeldía femenina y de la reivindicación de un ambiente sano y una ecología equilibrada, tiende en perspectiva a poner en un serio aprieto al sistema dominante y a convertir la necesidad de la nueva revolución social, política y cultural en posibilidad real.
Profundización de la crisis y la vigencia de un orden dominante más brutal
Las cúpulas dominantes están reducidas a la condición de gerentes o administradores de una máquina descontrolada que en cualquier momento puede sufrir graves averías.
La crisis actual del capitalismo, aunque conserva elementos de sus crisis tradicionales, es mucho más radical, profunda, multifacética y generalizada que todas las anteriores.
La legitimidad del poder y la disciplina reproductora del gran capital están siendo erosionadas sin ningún otro control que no sea la crisis de las fuerzas alternativas y, dentro de ella, por la propia crisis del socialismo que existió, la crisis de las izquierdas y la crisis de desarrollo de la teoría marxista que tanto nos han afectado.
Esos y otros factores hacen época y conforman un mundo muy especial, que tiene similitudes y raíces comunes con el que le tocó analizar a Marx y a Engels –y más tarde a Lenin y a sus continuadores, pero también notables y decisivas diferencias respecto a esos estadios del capitalismo y del imperialismo y respecto al mundo en que le tocó na vivir y sufrir a la izquierda marxista durante la mayor parte del siglo XX.
El nuevo orden proclamado es más brutal y devastador que el viejo.
“En el mundo sin alma que se nos obliga a aceptar como único posible -nos dice Eduardo Galeano-, no hay pueblos, sino mercados; no hay ciudadanos, sino consumidores; no hay naciones, sino empresas; no hay ciudades, sino aglomeraciones; no hay relaciones humanas, sino competencias mercantiles.
(“Medios de Incomunicación”, revista América Nuestra No.6).
Este mundo, además, todavía no considera a la mujer como ser humano, agrava la opresión de género con su proceso de feminización de la pobreza y de la fuerza de trabajo, potencia después del fin de la guerra fría las guerras nacionalistas e inter-étnicas, instrumenta las guerras preventivas de reconquista del planeta, multiplica el racismo y la xenofobia, reproduce viejas y nuevas modalidades de adulto-centrismo, implanta fábricas de pobreza, exclusión social e indigencia desde los gobiernos sustentadores de los llamados programas de ajustes, contamina el ambiente y destruye la naturaleza, comprometiendo la vida de los seres nacidos y por nacer.
Propicia que las ciencias, incluidas las ciencias médicas, sean secuestradas por el gran capital y convertidas en instrumentos de lucro y factores de alto riesgo para la vida humana.
Aliena en forma más brutal la conciencia de los seres humanos, convierte los devaluados Estados nacionales en fuente de delincuencia y máquinas generadoras de corrupción; promueve el individualismo, degrada la solidaridad humana y robotiza las mentes de los más débiles.
Transforma a los seres humanos en objetos y a los ciudadanos en clientes.
Convierte los servicios de salud y educación en escenarios de lucro y en fuentes caras a inaccesibles para gran parte de la humanidad.
El mundo que nos pretenden imponer no quiere saber de utopías (entendidas como sueños realizables) y hace lo indecible por clausurar la necesidad de fuerzas de izquierda, de fuerzas transformadoras y de alternativas populares.
Y no se trata solamente de difusión de la ya bastante vapuleada tesis de Fukuyama sobre el supuesto fin de la historia y la victoria definitiva del capitalismo, sino además de otras más sofisticadas como la que nos quisieron anunciar una sociedad post-capitalista impulsada por la revolución del conocimiento, que supuestamente provocaría la superación por evolución de la contradicción entre el trabajo y el capital.
Los autores de esta tesis nos aconsejaron en forma vehemente que corriéramos detrás de ese globalismo neoliberal “bienhechor” y nos insertáramos en él, aceptando complacidamente lo que el propio Galeano define como fundamentalismo de la libertad del dinero (¡y del mercado!), totalitarismo de la igualación cultural (impuesto por la TV made in USA) y el monólogo del poder, profusamente divulgado a través de las innovaciones electrónicas.
¡Estuvieron empecinadamente empeñados en hacer las veces de ladrones de sueños evidentemente realizables y sumamente necesarios! Pero por suerte sus logros en ese orden fueron solo parciales puesto que no todos(as), Los(as) revolucionarios(as) nos tragamos esos cuentos y los pueblos, especialmente los de nuestra América, resistieron la ofensiva de la globalización neoliberal hasta recuperar parcialmente la ofensiva.
Globalización fracturada: causas y efectos.
En el mundo actual, los procesos de globalización financiera, comercial, tecnológica, comunicacional, cultural, ambiental y política coexisten con las profundas y crecientes desigualdades, injusticias y divisiones entre países y entre las diferentes clases, sectores y grupos sociales que los conforman; coexisten con las agresiones imperialistas y con mantenimiento de formas coloniales de dominación. Coexisten y las agravan.
Además, el Estado-nación ha ido perdiendo importancia como instancia política, dado que ya le resulta mucho más difícil controlar acontecimientos financieros, tecnológicos, medioambientales, comerciales, etc., los cuales sobrepasan las fronteras establecidas. Pero, a su vez, esa realidad está acompañada de enormes tensiones, choques y confrontaciones nacionalistas, inter-étnicas y religiosas, motivadas por la voluntad de preservar y afirmar identidades propias ante una igualación absurda y despótica y ante la supremacía agobiante de los EE.UU.
Francisco R. Sagosti y Gregorio Arévalo definen así el presente orden mundial:
“Somos testigos de un Orden Global Fracturado; un orden que es global pero no integrado; que pone a cada uno de nosotros en contacto con todos, pero que al mismo tiempo mantiene profundos abismos entre individuos y grupos de personas; que genera enormes oportunidades de progreso, y a la vez segrega a una gran parte de la humanidad y le impide el acceso a sus beneficios. (América Latina en el Nuevo Orden Global Fracturado; Perspectivas y Estrategias. Sagosti en colaboración con Arévalo).
A esto hay que agregarle que se trata de una realidad global fraccionada y bloquificada en favor de los tres principales centros del sistema capitalista mundial (EE.UU., Alemania y Japón), hegemonizada por las grandes corporaciones transnacionales y manipuladas contra los países dependientes y las clases y sectores dominados.
El tránsito hacia este tipo de globalización ha sido el resultado de una combinación de factores: 1) de un nivel superior de la trans-nacionalización del capital iniciada hace decenios en la fase imperialista del capitalismo... 2) de la creación de grandes capitales flotantes (sin mercados rentables en sus puntos de origen) y la consiguiente financierización del sistema... 3) del avance extraordinario de la revolución científico-tecnológica y del tránsito hacia un nuevo patrón de acumulación basado en la micro-electrónica y la informática y el progresivo reemplazo del patrón industrial... 4) y de la unilateralidad del dominio del gran capital a consecuencia del derrumbe del llamado socialismo real.
Ese tránsito tiene lugar en el marco de las relaciones de producción y distribución capitalistas, y es manipulado desde arriba para favorecer a los países centrales sobre los periféricos y a las cúpulas sociales sobre las mayorías populares en el interior de los mismos.
“Estamos -como señala con mucha precisión el sacerdote jesuita, investigador y actual Rector de la Universidad Centroamericana de Nicaragua, Xavier Gorostiaga- ante un cambio de época dominado por una revolución conservadora global, pretendiendo la inevitabilidad de una globalización homogénea y neoliberal del mercado mundial... Una globalización elitista, concentradora y centralizadora de la riqueza, tecnología, poder militar y político como nunca antes en la historia de la Humanidad”.
(EL DESARROLLO GEOCULTURAL, Ponencia presentada en el Seminario para la Paz, Zaragoza, España; marzo de 1995).
El “fundamentalismo neoliberal”, el “discurso único” pretendió constituirse en la doctrina motorizadora de ese proceso de globalización fracturada, bloquificada y manipulada.
Y las mismas políticas impulsadas bajo el mismo patrón dogmático neoliberal provocaron los mismos problemas en el Norte y en el Sur, en el Centro y en la Periferia: exclusión, desempleo, pobreza y feminización de la pobreza; desprotección social vía discriminación clasista, racismo y xenofobia; protección de la rentabilidad financiera a costa de las inversiones productivas y de la prolongación del estancamiento... Sólo que en dimensiones y profundidades distintas, en detrimento de los países del “tercer” y “cuarto” mundo. Y cuando ocasionalmente se registra crecimiento económico, esté se ha hecho sin generar nuevos empleos ni reducir pobreza, a base del incremento de la productividad destinado a beneficiar fundamentalmente a los magnates del gran capital.
Esa mundialización, esa globalización, tal y como se ha presentado no pudo ser ignorada. Pero tampoco aceptada sin resistencia, sin propuestas alternativas, sin luchas por nuevos cambios estructurales profundos que impliquen contraponerle la globalización desde abajo, para beneficio de los de abajo, de todos los excluidos y discriminados, y de toda la humanidad y de sus dos géneros, excluida solamente la poderosa minoría super-millonaria (a derrotar) que atenta contra su actual existencia y contra su vida futura.
Y esta necesidad no sólo mantuvo la vigencia de la utopía revolucionaria, sino que nutrió progresivamente su proceso de renovación y recreación, y nos emplazó a asumirlo en su verdadera acepción: como proyecto de vida y dignificación de la inmensa mayoría de los seres humanos que habitamos este planeta ¡como sueño realizable!
El Capitalismo actual y la revolución del conocimiento.
No hay que negar que en los últimos decenios se han producido significativos y trascendentes avances y mutaciones en la esfera del conocimiento y especialmente en las diversas ramas de la ciencia y la técnica aplicables a la producción y distribución de bienes y servicios. Ellos ha sido producto del trabajo, del ingenio, de la inteligencia y la capacidad creadora de los seres humanos, y debería convertirse en patrimonio colectivo de la humanidad.
Tampoco hay que negar el tremendo impacto de esos cambios dentro del actual orden mundial capitalista, en el proceso de globalización en marcha y sobre todos los sujetos sociales y tendencias que conforman la sociedad mundial.
Pero es preciso situarlos bien y evaluarlos y caracterizarlos mejor, para poder abordarlos y enfrentarlos con certeza desde la óptica de los intereses populares y de toda la humanidad oprimida, discriminada, perjudicada y excluida.
La llamada “revolución del conocimiento” que ha acompañado la globalización descrita ha sido secuestrada por los grandes centros de decisión del capitalismo mundial y puesta al servicio de sus corporaciones transnacionales.
Esa revolución no anda por un lado y el capitalismo por otro. Tampoco ella, por sí misma, ha podido ni puede superar el orden capitalista.
Ella, por el contrario, tiene diseños, apropiaciones y usos específicos que en la actualidad responden a los intereses del gran capital y se oponen a los anhelos cardinales de la humanidad, contribuyendo a provocar, al finalizar el siglo, una crisis realmente civilizatoria.
Esta nueva crisis se expresa como crisis del capitalismo nacional y de sus Estado-naciones, como crisis de la civilización industrial y del desarrollo tecnológico, como crisis medioambiental y ecológica, y como crisis de existencia de una gran parte de la humanidad, con altísimos riesgos para las futuras generaciones a consecuencia de la expansión del hambre, la contaminación, el agotamiento de recursos vitales y el calentamiento del planeta.
Con una crisis de esa envergadura por delante, hubiera sido sencillamente suicida asumir la tesis del fin de las utopías y de los sueños revolucionarios. Equivalía al auto-aniquilamiento colectivo el sugerido abandono del combate por la emancipación y el bienestar material y espiritual de la humanidad.
Y ese fue precisamente uno de los propósitos del discurso único y de la uniformidad de la cultura propiciada por los que incluso se atrevieron a avanzar la tesis de la existencia de “países inviables” y “poblaciones superfluas” .
Conocimiento, Productividad y Propiedad.
La globalización desde arriba y para los de arriba ha estado acompañada del tránsito del patrón industrial al patrón micro-electrónico e informático capitalista. Ambos procesos coexisten. El primero emerge y el segundo declina. Los dos armonizan y coligen y ambos subordinan patrones de acumulación y relaciones de producción más atrasadas y se enmarcan dentro del predominio de la propiedad capitalista altamente concentrada.
El hecho de que la microelectrónica, la informática, la robótica y la biotecnología vayan tomando preeminencia en el mundo capitalista desarrollado, no quiere decir que los sectores productivos tradicionales hayan dejado de existir (siderurgia, petróleo, industria química, petroquímica y motores de combustión interna). Mucho menos que la agricultura de subsistencia, la agricultura extensiva, las relaciones precapitalistas, el comercio atrasado, la artesanía hayan desaparecido de la faz de la Tierra.
El proceso de mutación es desigual y contradictorio, aunque es claro que la progresiva superación de la época que comenzó con la invención de la máquina de vapor y con la conformación de las clases fundamentales de la sociedad burguesa, está en franco proceso de sustitución por innovaciones de mucho más productividad dentro de la hegemonía de la propiedad privada capitalista y la potenciación de los imperialismos; lo que lejos de superar la médula de los aportes de Marx, Engels y Lenin a las ciencias sociales renuevan su actualidad, sobretodo si se asumen desde su propia dialéctica permanentemente superadora y creativa..
El fordismo decae y el capitalismo de los microchips emerge, pero siempre capitalismo Las formas y las técnicas de organización y gestión sufren transformaciones tan radicales como las bases científicas y tecnológicas de la nueva producción, distribución y servicios. El papel del tiempo de trabajo sufre drásticas variaciones al compás de la progresión de la productividad. A las viejas contradicciones se superponen otras nuevas.
Nada de esto, sin embargo, implica desaparición o suplantación del capitalismo por evolución ni conversión del mismo en post-capitalismo bajo el impulso de la “revolución del conocimiento” . Más bien se trata de un proceso mediante el cual el capitalismo de la microelectrónica, la informática y la biotecnología va sobreponiéndose y suplantando áreas del capitalismo industrial y hegemonizando al sistema en su conjunto.
Si bien no es un tema nuevo la importancia de la progresión con la productividad en relación con el modo de propiedad, sí lo es la dimensión alcanzada por ella y otros fenómenos nuevos que la acompañan.
El propio Carlos Marx se adelantó en ese aspecto a los nuevos teóricos, tipo Peter Drucker, que tratan de distorsionar el actual impacto de la revolución científico-técnica en el incremento de la productividad y de usarlo para negar la esencia capitalista de la sociedad post-moderna.
Marx vio aproximarse un nivel de productividad en el que el tiempo de trabajo directo desaparece como algo infinitamente pequeño en relación con el producto.
En ese proceso vio al ser humano-productor convertirse progresivamente en un regulador del proceso de producción y vaticinó el empequeñecimiento del robo del tiempo del trabajo ajeno, aunque no así el robo del producto del mismo.
Hace más unos 150 años en sus Grundrisse, hablando de un futuro previsible, C.Marx anunció lo siguiente:
“El plustrabajo de la masa ha dejado de ser condición para el desarrollo de la riqueza social, así como el no trabajo de unos pocos ha cesado de serlo para el desarrollo de los poderes generales del intelecto.”
“Ciento cuarenta años después que fuera escrita -nos enfatizó en 1995 el filósofo francés Lucién Sève- esta voz profética de los Grundrisse, ¿no hemos llegado justamente a ese punto? Con la irrupción sin precedentes de la ciencia en la producción ¿no estamos viviendo la reducción drástica del tiempo de trabajo necesario, aunque cabeza abajo , es decir, preso de las lógicas capitalistas de la desocupación masiva, de la contratación aleatoria del trabajo, del trabajo precario, del despido precoz, al tiempo que surgen por doquier condiciones tales como los requerimientos de superación de la dicotomía esclavizante tiempo libre/tiempo de trabajo, de la reducción mercantil de la fuerza del saber y del trabajo; en síntesis, los precursores de una nueva era de la organización social y de la existencia personal?” (La Cuestión de Comunismo, Lucién Sève ACTUAL MARX, Edición de la Casa Bertold Brecht, septiembre 1995).
Nuevos fenómenos y más desigualdades y opresión.
No podía, naturalmente, prever Marx el inmenso auge de los servicios ni la altísima concentración de la propiedad y la omnipresencia de la información que se registra hoy en la dinámica capitalista. Tampoco podía entonces vaticinar el actual frenesí de este sistema en la conversión del mayor número de asalariados posibles en trabajadores independientes con contratos puntuales, liberándose el capital de las llamadas cargas sociales y del mismo salario.
Menos aún podía Marx vislumbrar la compleja red de transacciones, movimientos masivos y rápidos, especulación en múltiples mercados y monedas, variedad de inversiones e instrumentos que exhibe un capital especulativo globalizado, con vida propia y relativamente independizado de la producción de bienes y servicios.
Esos procesos determinan que ahora pase a primer plano, junto al problema de la propiedad y del dominio de clase, el de las regulaciones en su conjunto y el carácter intrínsecamente alienado del capitalismo: la inversión de las relaciones entre las personas y las cosas, la primacía de la producción de bienes y servicios por sobre el desarrollo de los seres humanos, y la conversión de sus relaciones en competencias mercantiles.
En ese contexto es engañoso hablar de post-capitalismo. Se trata más bien de un capitalismo más sofisticado y al mismo tiempo más feroz y devastador, que lleva a niveles más dramáticos la dinámica excluyente y genocida de la llamada Civilización de la Copa de Champagne de que nos habla Xavier Gorostiaga, Rector de la Universidad Centroamericana de Nicaragua: lo ancho para una minoría cada vez más pequeña, lo estrecho para una mayoría en constante expansión.
Las propias cifras del Informe de Naciones Unidas, Desarrollo Humano 1994, citadas entonces por Gorostiaga, revelan:
-Que el 20% más rico de la humanidad controla el 83% de los ingresos del mundo y el 20% más pobre sobrevive con el 1.4 por ciento de los ingresos (mil millones de personas reciben un dólar diario y tres mil millones reciben poco más de dos dólares diarios).
-Que del 1960 al 1993 el 20% más rico duplicó sus ingresos respecto a los ingresos del 20% más pobre (30 veces más en 1960 y 61 veces más en 1993).
-Según Forbes Magazine, 358 personas tienen individualmente capitales acumulados del orden de los US$762 billones (miles de millones), lo que equivale al ingreso per cápita de 2,400 millones de pobres, equivalente al 45% de la población mundial. De 1987 a 1994 el número de super-millonarios se incrementó en 140%.
-Los países altamente desarrollados cuentan con el 20% de la población mundial y controlan el 86% del Producto Interno Bruto (PIB), el 82% de los mercados, el 68% de las inversiones y el 74% de las líneas telefónicas.
-La riqueza de sólo tres países súper-ricos es superior al PIB de los 48 países más pobres.
-Mientras los países ricos gastan 12 mil millones de dólares en perfume cada caño y 17 mil millones en alimentos para animales domésticos, existen en la actualidad 900 millones de personas al borde de la muerte por hambre.
-Los 7 países más ricos del mundo (miembros del G7) tienen 685 millones de habitantes con un PIB de 20 millones de millones de dólares, mientras 181 países con 5 mil millones de habitantes tienen un PIB de 10 millones de millones de dólares, una deuda externa de 2 millones de millones y pagan anualmente en servicios el equivalente al 25% de sus exportaciones.
-El mundo de hoy tiene el 60% de la disponibilidad del agua que tenía en 1970 y cuenta con 2.3 mil millones más de habitantes.
Todo esto en los últimos 13 años ha evolucionado dramáticamente para peor.
Y está aconteciendo en la llamada sociedad del conocimiento, bajo control de los grandes propietarios del gran capital y en el marco de la opresión histórica del género femenino por el masculino, de la “razas superiores” sobre las “inferiores”, de los adultos sobre los(as) jóvenes y niños(as), y de los depredadores del ambiente.
Sociedad que no ha pasado a ser post-capitalista, sino más capitalista y siempre patriarcal; esto es, con capital más moderno, más apropiador del conocimiento, más concentrado, más perverso, más caníbal (esto último para -como dice Pérez Esquivel- no faltarle el respeto a los salvajes) y con nuevas capacidades para reproducir la opresión de género.
Los problemas viejos, los viejos renovados y los problemas nuevos del viejo y del nuevo capitalismo se entremezclan para engendrar un cuadro en el que el avance tecno-científico se mezcla con la tragedia y los dramáticos problemas clasistas con los trágicos problemas globales, que van más allá de los propiamente clasistas, porque atentan contra la existencia misma de la humanidad, del presente y, más aún, del futuro. Pero sin separarse de ellos.
“Desarrollo” deshumanizante.
La teoría clásica no pudo prever el hecho de que el desarrollo humano, por el carácter deshumanizante del desarrollo capitalista, tropezara incluso con umbrales de viabilidad económicos, sociales, ecológicos y antropológicos puestos de manifiesto en los últimos 60 años.
La llamada revolución biomédica comienza incluso a trastocar la condición humana vía los cambios en la constitución genética, el destino sanitario, la actividad neuronal y el parentesco biológico.
¿Hay que comprometerse con la vía de la terapia germinal que modificará la especie humana en toda su descendencia? , pregunta el filósofo francés Lucién Sève en el ensayo ya citado.
Estos nuevos problemas, ecológicos, biomédicos, económicos, antropológicos junto a la nueva relevancia y dimensiones del problema de género y las nuevas expresiones de la xenofobia y el racismo- aunque pueden ser abordados desde un marxismo renovado, no tienen respuestas en el análisis clasista tradicional.
El tema de la revolución biomédica y el tema ecológico no son estrictamente problemas clasistas, pero la primera, dentro de su inmensidad prospectiva, está siendo manipulada por el negocio y por definidos intereses y objetivos de la clase dominante, mientras es claro que muchos problemas ecológicos son productos del capitalismo y de su hegemonía de clase.
En la medida el capital penetra mucho más en actividades como la investigación, la salud, la información, la cultura, la educación, la diversión,... engendra más allá de la explotación de la fuerza de trabajo formas inéditas de enajenación y una alienación más profunda de la vida social e individual, cuyo carácter de clase no transforman a las víctimas en clases, pero sí en contingentes humanos oprimidos o afectados.
La cuestión de clase y problemas más allá de las clases.
La propia dinámica del gran capital y los efectos de la estrategia neoliberal alteran la composición de la clase obrera, imponen más movilidad social y amplían el sujeto social antipoder y anticapitalista, obligando a renovar el análisis clasista tradicional. Y esto tiene sus peculiaridades en el centro y en la periferia del capitalismo, registrándose en nuestro sub-continente una gran movilidad y reestructuración social y nuevos contingentes humanos excluidos, lo que obliga ha replantear y enriquecer la expresión de la contradicción capital-trabajo y el tema de los sujetos de la revolución-, que siempre en la periferia del capitalismo ha tenido su peculiaridad diferenciada y que ahora asume nuevas y mutantes modalidades
La expansión y nueva dinámica del capitalismo en crisis afecta más las relaciones con finalidades y regulaciones antropológicas esenciales que al status del sistema de relaciones de producción y distribución.
Los asalariados/as no sólo son agredidos como tales, sino que ellos y otras capas sociales son además agredidos más profundamente como autores desarraigados y alienados en sus propias personas, y en el choque interpersonal potenciado por los nuevos niveles de racismo, de opresión de la mujer, subordinación y discriminación de la niñez y la juventud y por la devastadora la crisis medioambiental.
Ya se ha dicho que la lucha de clases tiene primacía sobre las clases. Ahora es mucho más evidente que la lógica de clase es más vasta que la existencia de clase y por eso hay problemas post-clases o más allá de las clases que no admiten postergación, pero que no podrán ser superados sino se termina con la sociedad de clases.
Ahora hay que pensar de manera no clásica el propio análisis en términos de clase y eso no es negar a Marx y a Lenin, sino proceder como ellos lo hicieron en su tiempo. El capital altamente concentrado, excluyente y depredador ha generado un sepulturero mucho más amplio y diverso que el proletariado industrial y que la alianza obrero campesina. Las rebeldías populares del presente incluyen nuevos actores y modalidades inéditas.
Lo nuevo en las alternativas revolucionarias y en el socialismo.
La lucha de clases en el sentido tradicional no solo no se ha agotado sino que se ha ampliado y recrudecido, pero ahora además su papel nacional e internacional pasa por su profunda renovación, ampliación y radicalización hacia luchas nuevas con sujetos nuevos y viejos que oponen su universalismo civilizador y su creación heroica al particularismo deshumanizante, cruel y cínico del gran capital, para dar inicio a la revolución y dignificación de los/as de abajo. Y esa revolución y dignificación es hoy impensable si la visión clasista (debidamente enriquecida) no es impregnada de la lucha por emancipación de la mujer, por la asunción del ambientalismo revolucionario, por el combate al adulto-centrismo, al racismo, a la opresión nacional y la conquista de la liberación del trabajo frente al capital y la emancipación multiétnica y multicultural. Y viceversa.
La victoria de esas alternativas, las cuales pasan por un desmonte del capitalismo neoliberal y un conjunto de transformaciones pos-neoliberales, sí sería post-capitalismo y éste no podría ser otra cosa que el tránsito hacia un socialismo verdadero e integral, muy distinto al que sucumbió en la URSS y el Este europeo. Hacia un socialismo integral, participativo, autogestionado, capaz de superar persistentemente el mercado y el Estado y la burocracia, repleto de libertades y forjador de seres humanos no egoístas sino profundamente solidarios.
Revolución transformadora en lugar de “revolución” conservadora y reemplazo de la apropiación ilegítima del conocimiento por elites sociales, políticas e intelectuales por su puesta en servicio al progreso de toda la humanidad.
La sociedad humana ha llegado a tales niveles de riesgos de existencia, que o se le pone fin al capitalismo y se le reemplaza por el socialismo, o reinará la neo-barbarie con incontenibles ímpetus de caos. Lo dicho al respecto por Rosa Luxemburgo a principio del Siglo XX (“socialismo o barbarie”) se ha quedado corto. Y el socialismo tiene aun más razón de ser como negación de la súper-barbarie capitalista y de la degeneración burocrática de los procesos de orientación socialista en el siglo pasado, de los que colapsaron, de los que están en crisis y de los que han auspiciado la restauración capitalista en nombre de un “socialismo de mercado” funcional a la globalización neoliberal.
De ahí la urgencia, en vía de concreción, de la refundación de las alternativas anticapitalistas y de los socialismos capaces de superar el orden mundial dominante.
Mayo 2009, Santo Domingo, RD.
jueves 1 de mayo de 2008
International Forecaster WeeklyThe Forces of Order Just Create More Chaos
Posted: April 30 2008
Please add us to your social networkReddit Digg StumbleUpon Yahoo! MyWeb Del.icio.us Technorati Seed NewsVine Rss Feed FaceBook What is this?
"a review of strategies, issues with the gold standard, the importance of cheap credit to game the world economic system, oil lubricates world economic system, and the overall impact on the rest of us"
For the benefit of our subscribers, we thought at this juncture that it would be a good idea to review some long-term elitist strategies that have been implemented by the Illuminati as part of their evil plan to destroy our economy and our sovereignty for purposes of moving us toward globalism, free trade and a one-world government.
Many things are starting to come together as we review what has occurred since Nixon took us totally off the gold standard in 1971. This was the end of our golden era of growth that started shortly after WWII and ended that dreadful day in 1971 when we were sold down the river by the same man who soiled our reputation worldwide with the Watergate scandal. During this golden era, everyone was prospering and making good money, including our vastly growing middle class, but the transnational corporations of the military-industrial complex were especially prosperous.
The owners of these huge corporations used their gargantuan profits to power their plans for world government by setting up subversive trusts and foundations, by donating to major universities to gain influence over our youth, by funding their pet projects at these universities to control the path of technology and innovation and most notoriously by purchasing and funding the best politicians and the best enemies that money could buy. This enabled these arrogant sociopaths to run our country from the shadows while our Illuminist-created enemies made their benefactors rich by waging cold wars and hot wars alike to put us in a perpetual struggle for perpetual peace and democracy so that these evil elitists could make perpetual and rapacious profits.
Also during this era of growth and prosperity, inflation was kept very mild, in the 2% to 3% range, in order to support our growth (and yes, those were both official and actual inflation figures from the good old days when we at least got some truth out of our government instead of the non-stop, pathological lying we have been forced to suffer from our reprobate government officials for the past three decades). This mild inflation was the result of our adherence to a watered down version of our original gold standard that kept our money supply in check until Nixon nixed the redemption of dollars held by foreign nations in exchange for our gold, thus completely removing us from the gold standard.
But if you want to create a world economy to pave the way for world government, you need lots and lots of money and credit, and the partial gold standard was making it impossible to sufficiently increase the money supply for this purpose. That is because a lot of those new dollars would have made their way into the dollar Forex reserves of foreigners who, for various reasons such as hedging against the inflation resulting from the increased supply of money, would have attempted to redeem a goodly portion thereof for the only real money, gold, and that would have quickly drained us of our gold reserves over a very short period of time as the elitists discovered from their London Gold Poole debacle in the late 1960's. Their attempt by use of this London Gold Poole to suppress the price of gold to cover up their mishandling of the US and UK economies by flooding the market with bullion (some of which may have come from Fort Knox) resulted in a bank holiday for London banks that had been drained of their gold by voracious demand, thus creating the real potential for a run on the banks.
Based on the foregoing, the elitists reasoned correctly that the removal of the remnants of our gold standard had the potential to create a shortage of gold and the price of gold would then have quickly risen in value as a result, which in turn would have set the inflationary alarm bells off, thus warning of the coming devaluation of the dollar and its potential fall from reserve status. In this manner, without gold backing it, the dollar might have collapsed under the weight of its vast increase in supply to power a world economy, so the elitists had to come up with a reason, other than gold-backing, for people around the world both to want, and to keep up a high demand for, the dollar.
The Illuminati had to make sure that the dollar remained the reserve currency of the world, thus preserving their power, wealth and influence until they were ready to make their big moves toward world government. So, under orders from their Illuminist masters, Kissinger and Nixon took us totally off the gold standard, and instead backed the dollar with oil, which was much more plentiful and which had a far greater overall pool of value that could not be exhausted as quickly as might have occurred with the comparatively tiny gold market. This was done by getting Saudi Arabia to agree to accept only dollars in exchange for their oil. In return, the US agreed to back and provide security for the unpopular and autocratic regimes of the Saudis, and this oil-for-dollars regimen was later adopted by OPEC nations as well, many of whom have pegged their currencies to the dollar.
Immediately after we made this stupid move from gold-backing to oil-backing, the money supply via the Fed and the Treasury exploded in the early 1970's to the very levels of insanity that we are experiencing today, remaining between 8% and 16% until 1985 before being tapered off to zero growth around 1993 after which the money supply exploded again to cover over the real estate debacle and recession of that time and to fund new initiatives for globalization and free trade, such as the WTO, NAFTA and CAFTA. Despite the size of the oil market, the new explosion of dollars being pumped out prodigiously by the Fed to fund the kickoff of free trade, globalization, off-shoring and outsourcing in earnest in the 1970's led to rampant inflation that peaked out around 14% in 1980-1981 (note that we are currently over 12% by 1980 inflation standards and rising) until Paul Volcker put an end to it with double digit interest rates that sent us reeling into an ensuing recession. This rampant increase in money supply meant a devaluation of the dollar and the cheap oil was being paid for with ever-more-debauched dollars. So in 1973, OPEC started an embargo, using the support of western powers for Israel during the Yom Kippur War as an excuse or justification to force prices up, as much to make up for the loss in value of the dollar as for revenge, just as they are doing today, but with a little more diplomacy in lieu of an outright embargo.
The whole reason for the Yom Kippur War may have had as much to do with low oil prices as it did with revenge for the 1967 Six Day War. This increase in oil prices actually backfired and was very problematic for OPEC and the elitists because the higher oil prices attracted local oil producers, often referred to as wildcatters, due to the fact that the price of oil had risen above the cost of production for companies working on a smaller scale. These smaller companies could now profitably compete with the foreign oil, and they went after our extraordinarily abundant domestic oil reserves to supply the markets. We have enough oil in Alaska, North Dakota, Montana, Texas, Colorado, Wyoming and the Gulf of Mexico to keep our country flush with oil for many decades without importing a single drop of foreign oil, much of it recoverable for only $16 per barrel.
The reason these local producers were problematic to the elitists was because prior to this development, the Illuminati were able to keep inflation under wraps at home by exporting much of the rampaging supply of debauched dollars overseas in return for foreign oil, as well as for foreign exports of goods, most notably from Japan, which helped create the bubble that destroyed the Japanese economy almost two decades ago. Thus, we quite literally were exporting our inflation to other countries by burgeoning their domestic supply of dollars, and we began doing this all over again since the start of the Clinton Administration via globalization, free trade, off-shoring, outsourcing, trade for foreign oil and illegal immigration. Just ask China and Japan with roughly a trillion each of dollar forex, OPEC countries with hundreds of billions of dollar forex each, and Mexico whose residents receive many billions of dollars every year from illegal Mexican aliens working here in the US. These local oil producers in the 1970's and 1980's were redirecting many of those oil dollars away from the OPEC countries and back into our domestic economy, thus powering inflation at home to rampant levels which also lead indirectly to the S&L crisis of the late 1970's and throughout the 1980's by destroying the value of mortgages held by banks as interest rates started to rise to combat the growing rate of inflation.
So what did the Illuminati do to stop all this domestic oil production from powering inflation? First, Volcker pushed interest rates up into double digits, increasing the cost of loans, which are so necessary in the oil business, thus increasing the cost of production to levels that ruined many smaller concerns. After that, the elitists had their big oil companies and commodities traders drive the price of oil down to below the cost of local production for smaller operators, and even for some of the larger ones for that matter. This ruined the smaller producers who lacked the staying power of the big oil companies. To this day, these smaller producers are afraid to tap our domestic reserves without some kind of guaranty from our government of a floor for oil prices to be set at about $25 per barrel. After peaking at $37 per barrel in 1980, oil dropped to as low as $15 dollars per barrel in 1986 and 1988 and all the way down to $12 per barrel in 1998. This is why, to this day, among various other reasons, much of our domestic oil remains untapped. This is also why many of the drilling and extraction techniques that are finally giving domestic producers access to otherwise tough-to-get oil reserves in recent years were not researched and developed decades ago.
So as you can see, the whole bio-fuel scheme is a total scam to enrich subsidized, elitist bio-fuel producers and to drive up food prices so that large elitist food-related corporations like Monsanto can make filthy rich profits on account of food shortages, subsidies and improper allocations of farmland and food crops while around the world people starve, have food riots and cry out in hunger. Many in our Congress still will not acknowledge their error in approving bio-fuel legislation because they have big political and economic stakes in ethanol and other bio-fuels. These miscreants are an absolute disgrace. Bio-fuels are inefficient, are damaging to engines and are totally unnecessary. Give the small guys a floor of $25 per barrel and we'll have all the oil we need for decades without importing a single drop of foreign oil. The fact that this did not happen decades ago tells you all you need to know about where your current and past Congresses and Presidential Administrations stand or have stood. They are traitors and cretins of the highest order with precious few exceptions. They are nothing but a pathetic bunch of conniving, elitist bootlickers. The incumbents must all be voted out of office, except for Ron Paul, in order to put a stop to this madness. Otherwise, you will be forced, like our Founding Fathers, to do it the hard way. Prices for food and fuel will not come down unless you, the US citizen, demand in no uncertain terms that your government make them come down.
The elitists had yet another problem with their scheme to institute world government. They had to cover up the extensive damage being done to our economy by globalization, free trade, off-shoring, outsourcing and illegal immigration, all of which they used to break the backs of the unions so they could lower their labor and production costs and increase their profits by moving offshore and utilizing slave labor.
They had to cover up our negative GDP which has been that way on average since 1990 despite what official statistics say, as well as problems with rampant inflation and unemployment, all direct outgrowths of their globalization and free trade efforts. The solution was a many pronged approach and has backfired in their faces.
First, they started making up outright lies about official economic statistics, which we refer to as "hedonics." This system of outright lying, which has always been a problem to some extent, has accelerated since the end of the Reagan Administration. As an example, official inflation is currently one third of actual inflation. Not a single shred of truth escapes from Washington, D.C. Next, using the 1987 Market Crash that they caused as their excuse, the Illuminati had President Reagan issue an Executive Order creating the President's Working Group on Financial Markets, the purpose for which is restore order to markets in times of emergency. Instead, they use this cabal to rig markets around the world on a 24/7 basis, which is totally and completely illegal. That is why Bernanke always claims that this group meets only informally on occasion for discussions or brain-storming on problems as they arise. He knows darn well that their nefarious activities are totally illegal and criminal in nature.
But what does he care, as substantial evidence indicates that he may have conspired with JP Morgan, the SEC, the Treasury and other Federal Reserve officers to defraud Bear Stearns stockholders and employees as well as American taxpayers out of billions of dollars, not to mention profits made on insider trading on puts and shorts placed on Bear Stearns stock under circumstances that could not possibly have been more obvious. The PWG, also referred to as the Plunge Protection Team, or PPT, covers up market damage, or causes market damage, as the case may be, to cover up the impact of Illuminist schemes on the overall economy and on financial markets. Items go up that should be going down, and items go down that should be going up. When you see that, and it is obvious for anyone with even a rudimentary knowledge of markets, that is the PPT in action ripping off the public with insider trading and market manipulation to cover up the extensive damage done by the Illuminati to our economy and financial system as described above.
Another cover-up method is the use of the money supply, controlled by the Fed, to create asset bubbles to make everyone feel wealthy when in fact they are being pauperized. The dot.com scam of worthless stocks, the false, speculative real estate bubble powered by fraud and the subprime scam of worthless, falsely-rated derivatives are perfect examples. So is hyperinflation from an out-of-control money supply as the middle class is bled dry by the elitists courtesy of the nongovernmental, privately owned Fed.
And to cover up the negative GDP, they repealed Glass-Steagall with the passage of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act in 1999 to power up the financial industry with a profligate money supply from the Fed so banks could screw dupe clients with incestuous financial subsidiary arrangements and make false profits in fees, commissions and spreads creating financial instruments such as toxic waste that is worthless because there are no markets for securitizations of fraud-laden assets and credit default swaps and interest rate swaps with hundreds of trillions in notional principal that are worthless because collateral to secure counterparty liability under these derivatives is almost nonexistent.
But boy, those fees and commissions sure drove the financial sector from 4% of GDP to 8% of GDP, thereby covering over the negative GDP with fees and commissions for producing worthless assets that now threaten the worldwide financial system and that have added nothing of any real or lasting value to our economy. This is where they really blew it. Most large banks are now insolvent as a direct result of these many fraudulent schemes that have bled all transparency, trust and confidence from the markets, resulting in a credit-crunch that will not go away but which worsens instead with each passing day. And with the Fed now considering a pause, they are about to get even more insolvent as their spreads decrease and their bonds get creamed from the loss of anticipation of further rate cuts, not to mention accelerating loan defaults in all categories as interest rates work their way back up.
The elitists are now faced with wars they are losing badly and that will bankrupt our country. They are faced with food riots around the globe, which will not endear them to anyone. They have created a ludicrous national debt via profligate government spending with an equally ludicrous trade deficit to match as our country has been transformed in a matter of a few decades from the world's greatest creditor nation to the world's greatest debtor nation.
They have created tens of trillions in entitlements that cannot possibly be paid without reducing benefits or raising taxes. They have driven oil to levels that will decimate the entire world economy, including their own companies, despite abundant domestic reserves of oil. They have caused bubble after bubble that have each popped and now they are out of assets to falsely inflate, so people are starting to realize that they have been had and want to do something about it, which may well lead to revolution. They have created hundreds of trillions in derivatives that no one understands and that have virtually no collateralization, threatening the entire world financial system.
They have ruined all confidence and trust in the financial system with scheme after fraudulent scheme, to the point where banks no longer want to, or are able to, be banks, creating a credit-crunch that worsens and threatens to annihilate bank capital at an ever-increasing pace. They have inflated the people of our country out of their wealth, and these hapless, beggared citizens have nothing left to spend to drive the US economy which is now doomed to a catastrophic failure that will lead to a hyperinflationary recession followed by a deflationary depression the likes of which has never been seen before in the annals of US history. They have destroyed the real estate industry and have put millions of people, both US citizens and illegal aliens alike, out of work, further exacerbating the faltering economy. They have plans to nationalize all the financial losses from the fraud and profligacy of Wall Street which will turn us into the next Weimar Republic. After all that, they have the nerve, the unmitigated gall, to suggest putting the Fed in charge of the entire US financial system when the Fed is the root cause of virtually every problem we have with our financial system.
While all this transpires, the President and our Congress stand by picking their noses. The older elitists got overly anxious and tried to do too much too fast because they wanted to see their plans succeed during their lifetimes. Their own pride and impatience has been their downfall, and now they are about to see their plans ruined for decades instead by some of the most bumbling, clueless and arrogant henchmen we could imagine, if they are not sooner torn to shreds by the angry, fuming, broke, hungry masses. We hope they enjoy the monstrosity they have created. It will eat them alive. They wanted to create order out of chaos, but all they will get is the latter.
Please add us to your social network
Posted: April 30 2008
Please add us to your social networkReddit Digg StumbleUpon Yahoo! MyWeb Del.icio.us Technorati Seed NewsVine Rss Feed FaceBook What is this?
"a review of strategies, issues with the gold standard, the importance of cheap credit to game the world economic system, oil lubricates world economic system, and the overall impact on the rest of us"
For the benefit of our subscribers, we thought at this juncture that it would be a good idea to review some long-term elitist strategies that have been implemented by the Illuminati as part of their evil plan to destroy our economy and our sovereignty for purposes of moving us toward globalism, free trade and a one-world government.
Many things are starting to come together as we review what has occurred since Nixon took us totally off the gold standard in 1971. This was the end of our golden era of growth that started shortly after WWII and ended that dreadful day in 1971 when we were sold down the river by the same man who soiled our reputation worldwide with the Watergate scandal. During this golden era, everyone was prospering and making good money, including our vastly growing middle class, but the transnational corporations of the military-industrial complex were especially prosperous.
The owners of these huge corporations used their gargantuan profits to power their plans for world government by setting up subversive trusts and foundations, by donating to major universities to gain influence over our youth, by funding their pet projects at these universities to control the path of technology and innovation and most notoriously by purchasing and funding the best politicians and the best enemies that money could buy. This enabled these arrogant sociopaths to run our country from the shadows while our Illuminist-created enemies made their benefactors rich by waging cold wars and hot wars alike to put us in a perpetual struggle for perpetual peace and democracy so that these evil elitists could make perpetual and rapacious profits.
Also during this era of growth and prosperity, inflation was kept very mild, in the 2% to 3% range, in order to support our growth (and yes, those were both official and actual inflation figures from the good old days when we at least got some truth out of our government instead of the non-stop, pathological lying we have been forced to suffer from our reprobate government officials for the past three decades). This mild inflation was the result of our adherence to a watered down version of our original gold standard that kept our money supply in check until Nixon nixed the redemption of dollars held by foreign nations in exchange for our gold, thus completely removing us from the gold standard.
But if you want to create a world economy to pave the way for world government, you need lots and lots of money and credit, and the partial gold standard was making it impossible to sufficiently increase the money supply for this purpose. That is because a lot of those new dollars would have made their way into the dollar Forex reserves of foreigners who, for various reasons such as hedging against the inflation resulting from the increased supply of money, would have attempted to redeem a goodly portion thereof for the only real money, gold, and that would have quickly drained us of our gold reserves over a very short period of time as the elitists discovered from their London Gold Poole debacle in the late 1960's. Their attempt by use of this London Gold Poole to suppress the price of gold to cover up their mishandling of the US and UK economies by flooding the market with bullion (some of which may have come from Fort Knox) resulted in a bank holiday for London banks that had been drained of their gold by voracious demand, thus creating the real potential for a run on the banks.
Based on the foregoing, the elitists reasoned correctly that the removal of the remnants of our gold standard had the potential to create a shortage of gold and the price of gold would then have quickly risen in value as a result, which in turn would have set the inflationary alarm bells off, thus warning of the coming devaluation of the dollar and its potential fall from reserve status. In this manner, without gold backing it, the dollar might have collapsed under the weight of its vast increase in supply to power a world economy, so the elitists had to come up with a reason, other than gold-backing, for people around the world both to want, and to keep up a high demand for, the dollar.
The Illuminati had to make sure that the dollar remained the reserve currency of the world, thus preserving their power, wealth and influence until they were ready to make their big moves toward world government. So, under orders from their Illuminist masters, Kissinger and Nixon took us totally off the gold standard, and instead backed the dollar with oil, which was much more plentiful and which had a far greater overall pool of value that could not be exhausted as quickly as might have occurred with the comparatively tiny gold market. This was done by getting Saudi Arabia to agree to accept only dollars in exchange for their oil. In return, the US agreed to back and provide security for the unpopular and autocratic regimes of the Saudis, and this oil-for-dollars regimen was later adopted by OPEC nations as well, many of whom have pegged their currencies to the dollar.
Immediately after we made this stupid move from gold-backing to oil-backing, the money supply via the Fed and the Treasury exploded in the early 1970's to the very levels of insanity that we are experiencing today, remaining between 8% and 16% until 1985 before being tapered off to zero growth around 1993 after which the money supply exploded again to cover over the real estate debacle and recession of that time and to fund new initiatives for globalization and free trade, such as the WTO, NAFTA and CAFTA. Despite the size of the oil market, the new explosion of dollars being pumped out prodigiously by the Fed to fund the kickoff of free trade, globalization, off-shoring and outsourcing in earnest in the 1970's led to rampant inflation that peaked out around 14% in 1980-1981 (note that we are currently over 12% by 1980 inflation standards and rising) until Paul Volcker put an end to it with double digit interest rates that sent us reeling into an ensuing recession. This rampant increase in money supply meant a devaluation of the dollar and the cheap oil was being paid for with ever-more-debauched dollars. So in 1973, OPEC started an embargo, using the support of western powers for Israel during the Yom Kippur War as an excuse or justification to force prices up, as much to make up for the loss in value of the dollar as for revenge, just as they are doing today, but with a little more diplomacy in lieu of an outright embargo.
The whole reason for the Yom Kippur War may have had as much to do with low oil prices as it did with revenge for the 1967 Six Day War. This increase in oil prices actually backfired and was very problematic for OPEC and the elitists because the higher oil prices attracted local oil producers, often referred to as wildcatters, due to the fact that the price of oil had risen above the cost of production for companies working on a smaller scale. These smaller companies could now profitably compete with the foreign oil, and they went after our extraordinarily abundant domestic oil reserves to supply the markets. We have enough oil in Alaska, North Dakota, Montana, Texas, Colorado, Wyoming and the Gulf of Mexico to keep our country flush with oil for many decades without importing a single drop of foreign oil, much of it recoverable for only $16 per barrel.
The reason these local producers were problematic to the elitists was because prior to this development, the Illuminati were able to keep inflation under wraps at home by exporting much of the rampaging supply of debauched dollars overseas in return for foreign oil, as well as for foreign exports of goods, most notably from Japan, which helped create the bubble that destroyed the Japanese economy almost two decades ago. Thus, we quite literally were exporting our inflation to other countries by burgeoning their domestic supply of dollars, and we began doing this all over again since the start of the Clinton Administration via globalization, free trade, off-shoring, outsourcing, trade for foreign oil and illegal immigration. Just ask China and Japan with roughly a trillion each of dollar forex, OPEC countries with hundreds of billions of dollar forex each, and Mexico whose residents receive many billions of dollars every year from illegal Mexican aliens working here in the US. These local oil producers in the 1970's and 1980's were redirecting many of those oil dollars away from the OPEC countries and back into our domestic economy, thus powering inflation at home to rampant levels which also lead indirectly to the S&L crisis of the late 1970's and throughout the 1980's by destroying the value of mortgages held by banks as interest rates started to rise to combat the growing rate of inflation.
So what did the Illuminati do to stop all this domestic oil production from powering inflation? First, Volcker pushed interest rates up into double digits, increasing the cost of loans, which are so necessary in the oil business, thus increasing the cost of production to levels that ruined many smaller concerns. After that, the elitists had their big oil companies and commodities traders drive the price of oil down to below the cost of local production for smaller operators, and even for some of the larger ones for that matter. This ruined the smaller producers who lacked the staying power of the big oil companies. To this day, these smaller producers are afraid to tap our domestic reserves without some kind of guaranty from our government of a floor for oil prices to be set at about $25 per barrel. After peaking at $37 per barrel in 1980, oil dropped to as low as $15 dollars per barrel in 1986 and 1988 and all the way down to $12 per barrel in 1998. This is why, to this day, among various other reasons, much of our domestic oil remains untapped. This is also why many of the drilling and extraction techniques that are finally giving domestic producers access to otherwise tough-to-get oil reserves in recent years were not researched and developed decades ago.
So as you can see, the whole bio-fuel scheme is a total scam to enrich subsidized, elitist bio-fuel producers and to drive up food prices so that large elitist food-related corporations like Monsanto can make filthy rich profits on account of food shortages, subsidies and improper allocations of farmland and food crops while around the world people starve, have food riots and cry out in hunger. Many in our Congress still will not acknowledge their error in approving bio-fuel legislation because they have big political and economic stakes in ethanol and other bio-fuels. These miscreants are an absolute disgrace. Bio-fuels are inefficient, are damaging to engines and are totally unnecessary. Give the small guys a floor of $25 per barrel and we'll have all the oil we need for decades without importing a single drop of foreign oil. The fact that this did not happen decades ago tells you all you need to know about where your current and past Congresses and Presidential Administrations stand or have stood. They are traitors and cretins of the highest order with precious few exceptions. They are nothing but a pathetic bunch of conniving, elitist bootlickers. The incumbents must all be voted out of office, except for Ron Paul, in order to put a stop to this madness. Otherwise, you will be forced, like our Founding Fathers, to do it the hard way. Prices for food and fuel will not come down unless you, the US citizen, demand in no uncertain terms that your government make them come down.
The elitists had yet another problem with their scheme to institute world government. They had to cover up the extensive damage being done to our economy by globalization, free trade, off-shoring, outsourcing and illegal immigration, all of which they used to break the backs of the unions so they could lower their labor and production costs and increase their profits by moving offshore and utilizing slave labor.
They had to cover up our negative GDP which has been that way on average since 1990 despite what official statistics say, as well as problems with rampant inflation and unemployment, all direct outgrowths of their globalization and free trade efforts. The solution was a many pronged approach and has backfired in their faces.
First, they started making up outright lies about official economic statistics, which we refer to as "hedonics." This system of outright lying, which has always been a problem to some extent, has accelerated since the end of the Reagan Administration. As an example, official inflation is currently one third of actual inflation. Not a single shred of truth escapes from Washington, D.C. Next, using the 1987 Market Crash that they caused as their excuse, the Illuminati had President Reagan issue an Executive Order creating the President's Working Group on Financial Markets, the purpose for which is restore order to markets in times of emergency. Instead, they use this cabal to rig markets around the world on a 24/7 basis, which is totally and completely illegal. That is why Bernanke always claims that this group meets only informally on occasion for discussions or brain-storming on problems as they arise. He knows darn well that their nefarious activities are totally illegal and criminal in nature.
But what does he care, as substantial evidence indicates that he may have conspired with JP Morgan, the SEC, the Treasury and other Federal Reserve officers to defraud Bear Stearns stockholders and employees as well as American taxpayers out of billions of dollars, not to mention profits made on insider trading on puts and shorts placed on Bear Stearns stock under circumstances that could not possibly have been more obvious. The PWG, also referred to as the Plunge Protection Team, or PPT, covers up market damage, or causes market damage, as the case may be, to cover up the impact of Illuminist schemes on the overall economy and on financial markets. Items go up that should be going down, and items go down that should be going up. When you see that, and it is obvious for anyone with even a rudimentary knowledge of markets, that is the PPT in action ripping off the public with insider trading and market manipulation to cover up the extensive damage done by the Illuminati to our economy and financial system as described above.
Another cover-up method is the use of the money supply, controlled by the Fed, to create asset bubbles to make everyone feel wealthy when in fact they are being pauperized. The dot.com scam of worthless stocks, the false, speculative real estate bubble powered by fraud and the subprime scam of worthless, falsely-rated derivatives are perfect examples. So is hyperinflation from an out-of-control money supply as the middle class is bled dry by the elitists courtesy of the nongovernmental, privately owned Fed.
And to cover up the negative GDP, they repealed Glass-Steagall with the passage of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act in 1999 to power up the financial industry with a profligate money supply from the Fed so banks could screw dupe clients with incestuous financial subsidiary arrangements and make false profits in fees, commissions and spreads creating financial instruments such as toxic waste that is worthless because there are no markets for securitizations of fraud-laden assets and credit default swaps and interest rate swaps with hundreds of trillions in notional principal that are worthless because collateral to secure counterparty liability under these derivatives is almost nonexistent.
But boy, those fees and commissions sure drove the financial sector from 4% of GDP to 8% of GDP, thereby covering over the negative GDP with fees and commissions for producing worthless assets that now threaten the worldwide financial system and that have added nothing of any real or lasting value to our economy. This is where they really blew it. Most large banks are now insolvent as a direct result of these many fraudulent schemes that have bled all transparency, trust and confidence from the markets, resulting in a credit-crunch that will not go away but which worsens instead with each passing day. And with the Fed now considering a pause, they are about to get even more insolvent as their spreads decrease and their bonds get creamed from the loss of anticipation of further rate cuts, not to mention accelerating loan defaults in all categories as interest rates work their way back up.
The elitists are now faced with wars they are losing badly and that will bankrupt our country. They are faced with food riots around the globe, which will not endear them to anyone. They have created a ludicrous national debt via profligate government spending with an equally ludicrous trade deficit to match as our country has been transformed in a matter of a few decades from the world's greatest creditor nation to the world's greatest debtor nation.
They have created tens of trillions in entitlements that cannot possibly be paid without reducing benefits or raising taxes. They have driven oil to levels that will decimate the entire world economy, including their own companies, despite abundant domestic reserves of oil. They have caused bubble after bubble that have each popped and now they are out of assets to falsely inflate, so people are starting to realize that they have been had and want to do something about it, which may well lead to revolution. They have created hundreds of trillions in derivatives that no one understands and that have virtually no collateralization, threatening the entire world financial system.
They have ruined all confidence and trust in the financial system with scheme after fraudulent scheme, to the point where banks no longer want to, or are able to, be banks, creating a credit-crunch that worsens and threatens to annihilate bank capital at an ever-increasing pace. They have inflated the people of our country out of their wealth, and these hapless, beggared citizens have nothing left to spend to drive the US economy which is now doomed to a catastrophic failure that will lead to a hyperinflationary recession followed by a deflationary depression the likes of which has never been seen before in the annals of US history. They have destroyed the real estate industry and have put millions of people, both US citizens and illegal aliens alike, out of work, further exacerbating the faltering economy. They have plans to nationalize all the financial losses from the fraud and profligacy of Wall Street which will turn us into the next Weimar Republic. After all that, they have the nerve, the unmitigated gall, to suggest putting the Fed in charge of the entire US financial system when the Fed is the root cause of virtually every problem we have with our financial system.
While all this transpires, the President and our Congress stand by picking their noses. The older elitists got overly anxious and tried to do too much too fast because they wanted to see their plans succeed during their lifetimes. Their own pride and impatience has been their downfall, and now they are about to see their plans ruined for decades instead by some of the most bumbling, clueless and arrogant henchmen we could imagine, if they are not sooner torn to shreds by the angry, fuming, broke, hungry masses. We hope they enjoy the monstrosity they have created. It will eat them alive. They wanted to create order out of chaos, but all they will get is the latter.
Please add us to your social network
Suscribirse a:
Entradas (Atom)
