lunedì 21 marzo 2011

How the banking Spectre is subverting democracy

[Appeal to all democratic institutions: Hey you! Do something, morons ! Idiots !]

Secretive Plan For a Global Currency
Excerpt from "The Global Economic Crisis: The Great Depression of the XXI Century"

Global Research, March 17, 2011

The following is an excerpt of a chapter by Ellen Brown from the new book by Global Research Publishers, "The Global Economic Crisis: The Great Depression of the XXI Century."

The Global
Economic Crisis

Michel Chossudovsky
Andrew Gavin Marshall (editors)

Help us get the word out, "like" the book on Facebook, comment, and share with friends!

By acting together to fulfill these pledges we will bring the world economy out of recession and prevent a crisis like this from recurring in the future. We are committed to take all necessary actions to restore the normal flow of credit through the financial system and ensure the soundness of systemically important institutions, implementing our policies in line with the agreed G20 framework for restoring lending and repairing the financial sector. We have agreed to support a general SDR allocation which will inject $250bn into the world economy and increase global liquidity.– G20 Communiqué, London, April 2, 2009

Towards a New Global Currency?

Is the Group of Twenty Countries (G20) envisaging the creation of a Global Central bank? Who or what would serve as this global central bank, cloaked with the power to issue the global currency and police monetary policy for all humanity? When the world’s central bankers met in Washington in September 2008 at the height of the financial meltdown, they discussed what body might be in a position to serve in that awesome and fearful role. A former governor of the Bank of England stated:

The answer might already be staring us in the face, in the form of the Bank for International Settlements (BIS)... The IMF tends to couch its warnings about economic problems in very diplomatic language, but the BIS is more independent and much better placed to deal with this if it is given the power to do so.[1]

And if the vision of a global currency outside government control was not enough to set off conspiracy theorists, putting the BIS in charge of it surely would be. The BIS has been scandal-ridden ever since it was branded with pro-Nazi leanings in the 1930s. Founded in Basel, Switzerland, in 1930, the BIS has been called “the most exclusive, secretive, and powerful supranational club in the world.” Charles Higham wrote in his book Trading with the Enemy that by the late 1930s, the BIS had assumed an openly pro-Nazi bias, a theme that was expanded on in a BBC Timewatch film titled “Banking with Hitler” broadcast in 1998.[2] In 1944, the American government backed a resolution at the Bretton Woods Conference calling for the liquidation of the BIS, following Czech accusations that it was laundering gold stolen by the Nazis from occupied Europe; but the central bankers succeeded in quietly snuffing out the American resolution.[3]

In Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our Time (1966), Dr. Carroll Quigley revealed the key role played in global finance by the BIS behind the scenes. Dr. Quigley was Professor of History at Georgetown University, where he was President Bill Clinton’s mentor. He was also an insider, groomed by the powerful clique he called “the international bankers.” His credibility is heightened by the fact that he actually espoused their goals. Quigley wrote:

I know of the operations of this network because I have studied it for twenty years and was permitted for two years, in the early 1960’s, to examine its papers and secret records. I have no aversion to it or to most of its aims and have, for much of my life, been close to it and to many of its instruments... In general my chief difference of opinion is that it wishes to remain unknown, and I believe its role in history is significant enough to be known...

The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, 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 private 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.[4]

The key to their success, said Quigley, was that the international bankers would control and manipulate the money system of a nation while letting it appear to be controlled by the government.

The statement echoed one made in the 18th century by the patriarch of what became the most powerful banking dynasty in the world. Mayer Amschel Bauer Rothschild is quoted as saying in 1791: “Allow me to issue and control a nation’s currency, and I care not who makes its laws.” Mayer’s five sons were sent to the major capitals of Europe – London, Paris, Vienna, Berlin and Naples – with the mission of establishing a banking system that would be outside government control. The economic and political systems of nations would be controlled not by citizens but by bankers, for the benefit of bankers.

Eventually, a privately-owned “central bank” was established in nearly every country. This central banking system has now gained control over the economies of the world. Central banks have the authority to print money in their respective countries, and it is from these banks that governments must borrow money to pay their debts and fund their operations. The result is a global economy in which not only industry but government itself runs on “credit” (or debt) created by a banking monopoly headed by a network of private central banks. At the top of this network is the BIS, the “central bank of central banks” in Basel.

Behind the Curtain

For many years the BIS kept a very low profile, operating behind the scenes in an abandoned hotel. It was here that decisions were reached to devalue or defend currencies, fix the price of gold, regulate offshore banking, and raise or lower short-term interest rates. In 1977, however, the BIS gave up its anonymity in exchange for more efficient headquarters. The new building has been described as “an eighteen story-high circular skyscraper that rises above the medieval city like some misplaced nuclear reactor.” It quickly became known as the “Tower of Basel.” Today the BIS has governmental immunity, pays no taxes, and has its own private police force.[5] It is, as Mayer Rothschild envisioned, above the law.

The BIS is now composed of 55 member nations, but the club that meets regularly in Basel is a much smaller group; and even within it, there is a hierarchy. In a 1983 article in Harper’s Magazine called “Ruling the World of Money,” Edward Jay Epstein wrote that where the real business gets done is in “a sort of inner club made up of the half dozen or so powerful central bankers who find themselves more or less in the same monetary boat” – those from Germany, the United States, Switzerland, Italy, Japan and England. Epstein said:

The prime value, which also seems to demarcate the inner club from the rest of the BIS members, is the firm belief that central banks should act independently of their home governments... A second and closely related belief of the inner club is that politicians should not be trusted to decide the fate of the international monetary system.[6]

In 1974, the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision was created by the central bank Governors of the Group of 10 nations (now expanded to twenty). The BIS provides the twelve-member Secretariat for the Committee. The Committee, in turn, sets the rules for banking globally, including capital requirements and reserve controls. In a 2003 article titled “The Bank for International Settlements Calls for Global Currency,” Joan Veon wrote:

The BIS is where all of the world’s central banks meet to analyze the global economy and determine what course of action they will take next to put more money in their pockets, since they control the amount of money in circulation and how much interest they are going to charge governments and banks for borrowing from them...

When you understand that the BIS pulls the strings of the world’s monetary system, you then understand that they have the ability to create a financial boom or bust in a country. If that country is not doing what the money lenders want, then all they have to do is sell its currency.[7]

The Controversial Basel Accords

The power of the BIS to make or break economies was demonstrated in 1988, when it issued a Basel Accord raising bank capital requirements from six percent to eight percent. By then, Japan had emerged as the world’s largest creditor; but Japan’s banks were less well capitalized than other major international banks. Raising the capital requirement forced them to cut back on lending, creating a recession in Japan like that suffered in the U.S. today. Property prices fell and loans went into default as the security for them shriveled up. A downward spiral followed, ending with the total bankruptcy of the banks. The banks had to be nationalized, although that word was not used in order to avoid criticism.[8]

Among other “collateral damage” produced by the Basel Accords was a spate of suicides among Indian farmers unable to get loans. The BIS capital adequacy standards required loans to private borrowers to be “risk-weighted,” with the degree of risk determined by private rating agencies; farmers and small business owners could not afford the agencies’ fees. Banks therefore assigned one hundred percent risk to the loans, and then resisted extending credit to these “high-risk” borrowers because more capital was required to cover the loans. When the conscience of the nation was aroused by the Indian suicides, the government, lamenting the neglect of farmers by commercial banks, established a policy of ending the “financial exclusion” of the weak; but this step had little real effect on lending practices, due largely to the strictures imposed by the BIS from abroad.[9]

Economist Henry C K Liu has analyzed how the Basel Accords have forced national banking systems “to march to the same tune, designed to serve the needs of highly sophisticated global financial markets, regardless of the developmental needs of their national economies.” He wrote:

National banking systems are suddenly thrown into the rigid arms of the Basel Capital Accord sponsored by the Bank of International Settlement (BIS), or to face the penalty of usurious risk premium in securing international interbank loans... National policies suddenly are subjected to profit incentives of private financial institutions, all members of a hierarchical system controlled and directed from the money center banks in New York. The result is to force national banking systems to privatize...

BIS regulations serve only the single purpose of strengthening the international private banking system, even at the peril of national economies... The IMF and the international banks regulated by the BIS are a team: the international banks lend recklessly to borrowers in emerging economies to create a foreign currency debt crisis, the IMF arrives as a carrier of monetary virus in the name of sound monetary policy, then the international banks come as vulture investors in the name of financial rescue to acquire national banks deemed capital inadequate and insolvent by the BIS.

Ironically, noted Liu, developing countries with their own natural resources did not actually need the foreign investment that trapped them in debt to outsiders: "Applying the State Theory of Money [which assumes that a sovereign nation has the power to issue its own money], any government can fund with its own currency all its domestic developmental needs to maintain full employment without inflation."[10]

When governments fall into the trap of accepting loans in foreign currencies, however, they become “debtor nations” subject to IMF and BIS regulation. They are forced to divert their production to exports, just to earn the foreign currency necessary to pay the interest on their loans. National banks deemed “capital inadequate” have to deal with strictures comparable to the “conditionalities” imposed by the IMF on debtor nations: “escalating capital requirement, loan write-offs and liquidation, and restructuring through selloffs, layoffs, downsizing, cost-cutting and freeze on capital spending.” Liu wrote:

Reversing the logic that a sound banking system should lead to full employment and developmental growth, BIS regulations demand high unemployment and developmental degradation in national economies as the fair price for a sound global private banking system.[11]

The Last Domino to Fall

While banks in developing nations were being penalized for falling short of the BIS capital requirements, large international banks managed to skirt the rules, although they actually carried enormous risk because of their derivative exposure. The mega-banks took advantage of a loophole that allowed for lower charges against capital for “off-balance sheet activities.” The banks got loans off their balance sheets by bundling them into securities and selling them off to investors, after separating the risk of default out from the loans and selling it off to yet other investors, using a form of derivative known as “credit default swaps.”

It was evidently not in the game plan, however, that U.S. banks should escape the regulatory net indefinitely. Complaints about the loopholes in Basel I prompted a new set of rules called Basel II, which based capital requirements for market risk on a “Value-at-Risk” accounting standard. The new rules were established in 2004, but they were not levied on U.S. banks until November 2007, the month after the Dow passed 14 000 to reach its all-time high. On November 1, 2007, the Office of the Controller of the Currency “approved a final rule implementing advanced approaches of the Basel II Capital Accord.”[12] On November 15, 2007, the Financial Accounting Standards Board or FASB, a private organization that sets U.S. accounting rules for the private sector, adopted FAS 157, the rule called “mark-to-market accounting.”[13] The effect on U.S. banks was similar to that of Basel I on Japanese banks: they have been struggling to survive ever since.[14]

The mark-to-market rule requires banks to adjust the value of their marketable securities to the “market price” of the security.[15] The rule has theoretical merit, but the problem is timing: it was imposed ex post facto, after the banks already had the hard-to-market assets on their books. Lenders that had been considered sufficiently well capitalized to make new loans suddenly found they were insolvent; at least, they would have been if they had tried to sell their assets, an assumption required by the new rule. Financial analyst John Berlau complained in October 2008:

Despite the credit crunch being described as the spread of the ‘American flu,’ the mark-to-market rules that are spreading it were hatched [as] part of the Basel II international rules for financial institutions. It’s just that the U.S. jumped into the really icy water last November when our Securities and Exchange Commission and bank regulators implemented FASB’s Financial Accounting Standard 157, which makes healthy banks and financial firms take a ‘loss’ in the capital they can lend even if a loan on their books is still performing, even when the ‘market price’ [of] an illiquid asset is that of the last fire sale by a highly leveraged bank. Late last month, similar rules went into effect in the European Union, playing a similar role in accelerating financial failures...

The crisis is often called a ‘market failure,’ and the term ‘mark-to-market’ seems to reinforce that. But the mark-to-market rules are profoundly anti-market and hinder the free-market function of price discovery... In this case, the accounting rules fail to allow the market players to hold on to an asset if they don’t like what the market is currently fetching, an important market action that affects price discovery in areas from agriculture to antiques.[16]

Imposing the mark-to-market rule on U.S. banks caused an instant credit freeze, which proceeded to take down the economies not only of the U.S. but of countries worldwide. In early April 2009, the mark-to-market rule was finally softened by the FASB; but critics said the modification did not go far enough, and it was done in response to pressure from politicians and bankers, not out of any fundamental change of heart or policies by the BIS or the FASB. Indeed, the BIS was warned as early as 2001 that its Basel II proposal was “procyclical,” meaning that in a downturn it would only serve to make matters worse. In a formal response to a Request for Comments by the Basel Committee for Banking Supervision, a group of economists stated:

Value-at-Risk can destabilize an economy and induce crashes when they would not otherwise occur... Perhaps our most serious concern is that these proposals, taken altogether, will enhance both the procyclicality of regulation and the susceptibility of the financial system to systemic crises, thus negating the central purpose of the whole exercise. Reconsider before it is too late.[17]

The BIS did not reconsider, however, even after seeing the devastation its regulations had caused; and that is where the conspiracy theorists came in. Why did the BIS sit idly by, they asked, as the global economy came crashing down? Was the goal to create so much economic havoc that the world would rush with relief into the waiting arms of a global economic policeman with its privately-created global currency?


[1] Andrew Gavin Marshall, “The Financial New World Order: Towards a Global Currency and World Government”, Global Research,, 6 April 2009. See also Chapter 17.

[2] Alfred Mendez, “The Network”, The World Central Bank: The Bank for International


[3] HubPages, “BIS – Bank of International Settlement: The Mother of All Central Banks”,, 2009.

[4] Carroll Quigley, Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our Time, 1966.

[5] HubPages, “BIS – Bank of International Settlement: The Mother of All Central Banks”,, 2009.

[6] Edward Jay Epstein, “Ruling the World of Money”, Harper’s Magazine, November 1983.

[7] Joan Veon, “The Bank for International Settlements Calls for Global Currency”, News

with Views, 26 August 2003.

[8] Peter Myers, “The 1988 Basle Accord – Destroyer of Japan’s Finance System”,, 9 September 2008.

[9] Nirmal Chandra, “Is Inclusive Growth Feasible in Neoliberal India?”,, September 2008.

[10] Henry C. K. Liu, “The BIS vs National Banks”, Asia Times,, 14 May 2002.

[11] Ibid.

[12] Comptroller of the Currency, “OCC Approves Basel II Capital Rule”, Comptroller of the Currency Release, 1 November 2007.

[13] Vinny Catalano, “FAS 157: Timing Is Everything”,, 18 March 2008.

[14] Bruce Wiseman, “The Financial Crisis: A look Behind the Wizard’s Curtain”, Canada Free Press, 19 March 2009.

[15] Ellen Brown, “Credit Where Credit Is Due”,, 11 January 2009.

[16] John Berlau, “The International Mark-to-Market Contagion”,, 10 October 2008.

[17] Jon Danielsson, et al., “An Academic Response to Basel II”, LSE Financial Markets Group Special Paper Series, May 2001.

Ellen Brown is a frequent contributor to Global Research. Global Research Articles by Ellen Brown

Community Currency Magazine 2-2011

Community Currency Magazine 2-2011

This magazine exists to serve the whole community of innovators, implementers and users of complementary currencies. Contributions of stories and material support are invited.

February 2011

domenica 20 marzo 2011

Marra: Bersani non capisce di economia

Von NotHaus is guilty but Bernanke is innocent?

New York Sun: Von NotHaus is guilty but Bernanke is innocent?


8:15p ET Sunday, March 20, 2011

Dear Friend of GATA and Gold (and Silver):

The New York Sun today editorializes brilliantly about the ironies in the conviction of Liberty Dollar founder Bernard von NotHaus. The editorial begins:

"Here is a thought experiment concerning two men who have issued money. One issued gold and silver coins that will today bring more in dollars than he charged for them. The other issued paper notes that are today worth but a fraction the gold or silver they were worth at the time they were issued. One man is facing the possibility of years in prison after a federal jury found his issuing of money to have been a crime. The other man is walking around free and being treated by the authorities with great deference. Which is which?"

The editorial, most likely written by Sun editor Seth Lipsky, is headlined "A 'Unique' Form of Terrorism" and can be found here:

CHRIS POWELL, Secretary/Treasurer
Gold Anti-Trust Action Committee Inc.

BNP-Paribas: le privilège honteux de battre monnaie

Le CAC 40 brise le pacte social

Bernard Maris, 12 Mars 2011 08:50

82.6 milliards de profits, le niveau de 2007 (96 milliards) sera bientôt rattrapé. La moitié partira en rente, en dividendes versés aux propriétaires, aux « marchés » si vous préférez, ces fameux marchés qui font trembler la Grèce. Deux tiers de cette moitié partira à l’étranger, car le CAC est possédé aux 2/3 par des étrangers. Les dividendes ont progressé de 13%, les salaires de 2%. Les salariés payent pour les rentiers.
Si vous regardez bien : Total surfe sur l’obligation de se déplacer en voiture, BNP sur celle d’avoir de l’argent, Sanofi sur le désir de se soigner. Ces gens ne fournissent pas un service, ils rackettent. Ils taxent une consommation obligatoire. C’est particulièrement vrai pour BNP-Paribas, qui possède le privilège honteux de battre monnaie, de fabriquer gratuitement l’argent qu’il vous vend cher, privilège autrefois réservé au Trésor Public.
Ou va cet argent ? Pour plus de la moitié, dans les poches des rentiers. Il est distribué en dividendes. A titre d’information : les dividendes du CAC ont augmenté de 13% depuis 2010, les salaires, eux, de 2%. Ces rentiers sont des français ? Non, des non-résidents, pour les 2/3. Ce n’est même pas de l’argent qui revient en France. Tout de même, ces grandes entreprises emploient beaucoup de monde ? Oui, 10% de la population active française ; mais elle ne créent pas d’emplois, elles en détruisent systématiquement. Les effectifs du CAC 50 dans l’hexagone ont baissé de 44000 employés entre 2005 et 2009, alors même que l’ensemble du secteur privé à créé, dans le même temps, 200000 emplois (1). Le CAC investit à fond dans les pays émergents : la croissance des pays émergents fait le CAC (les 2/3 du chiffre d’affaires sont en Chine, au Brésil et ailleurs) et réciproquement. On peut rêver en se disant que le CAC conserve ses sièges sociaux et ses centres de recherche en France... C’est même plus vrai. Les grosses entreprises (par exemple Renault en Chine) ont tendance à transférer et leur savoir faire et leur recherche. En plus, le maintien des sièges sociaux et des centres de recherche en France coûte cher à l’Etat : le crédit impôt recherche et la faiblesse de l’impôt sur les sociétés des entreprises du CAC est un cadeau qui les incite à demeurer sur place. Mais le cadeau fiscal (les entreprises du CAC payent 12% d’impôt en moyenne contre 26% pour l’ensemble des entreprises) fait que d’autres payent l’impôt pour elles... Qui ? Les PME, les salariés.
On songera que les entreprises du CAC sont des donneuses d’ordres et maintiennent en France un tissu économique et social de PME. Même pas vrai. Les sous-traitants se plaignent d’être très mal traités par les gros. Ils ne payent pas ou avec retard, piquent les brevets, piquent les meilleurs cadres, se servent des sous-traitants comme amortisseur en cas de baisse de la conjoncture. La culture industrielle française fait que les gros jouent contre les petits (ce qui n’est pas le cas de l’industrie allemande). C’est la culture des grandes écoles (pépinières pour le CAC), et elle n’est pas étrangère à ce mépris pour le PME-PMI. Le CAC tient les lobbys : lobby bancaire, Association française des entreprises privées. Certes, pour se défendre, les entreprises du CAC prétendre conserver « trop » de salariés en France (sic), enfin : trop eu égard à la part de leur chiffre d’affaire en France. Sauf qu’elles pompent allègrement tous les allègements de charges sociales.
Alors, qu’est ce qu’on fait ? On taxe Total, on taxe la BNP, très fort celle-là, on ne nationalise pas, ça coûte trop cher, mais on introduit des « golden share », des droits de veto publics dans les conseils d’administration, et on redéfinit la politique des salaires. Oui, mais si on taxe trop elles vont partir... Elles partent de toutes façons, elles partent déjà et se vendent aux plus offrants ! Et puis elles ne partiront pas : ni Total ni la BNP ne partiront. Ce sont des maîtres chanteurs.

(1) lire l’article de Yann Philippin dans Libé du 11/03/11

Elezioni Amministrative 2011

Elezioni Amministrative 2011

Il 15 e il 16 maggio 2011 si svolgeranno le elezioni Amministrative per l'elezione di sindaci e presidenti di provincia di numerosi amministrazioni locali. Il 29 maggio 2011 saranno previsti i ballottaggi per tutti coloro che non riusciranno a essere eletti al primo turno. Grande attesa per l'esito di queste elezioni, vero banco di prova dell'attuale maggioranza, dopo lo scandalo Ruby che ha coinvolto il primo ministro Silvio Berlusconi.

i Comuni con piu' di 15000 abitanti sono quei comuni che hanno un sistema elettorale a doppio turno con ballottaggi in caso un candidato non superi il 50 % dei voti totali.

Fra i Comuni piu' importanti interessati alle elezioni amministrative 2011 abbiamo Bologna, Milano, Torino, Napoli, Caserta, Salerno e Trieste.

Marco Saba, del Centro Studi Monetari, si candida a Torino per NO EURO con in programma l'emissione di "BIGLIETTI SOVRANI COMUNALI A CORSO LIBERO" per risollevare l'economia torinese e dell'intera regione del Piemonte. I BIGLIETTI SOVRANI, che verranno emessi direttamente dal Comune di Torino, andranno a sopperire alla scarsa circolazione dell'euro (privatizzato) nelle tasche dei cittadini. La garanzia diretta, liquida ed esigibile, è il signoraggio sovrano che i cittadini vantano nei confronti degli istituti privati di emissione. Si tratta di 1,5 milioni di euro a testa per ogni cittadino.

How to Save Yourself from Fed Money Creation

How to Save Yourself from Fed Money Creation


03/18/11 Tampa, Florida – Roger Wiegand of Trader Tracks Newsletter ominously notes that “With no fiat money to spread around and no takers for their specious bonds, bills and other paper, stock and credit markets as we know them now are finished. Then we’ll see some real, old-fashioned goods trading, black markets, expanding regional gangs and unbelievable backlash against the instigators. If you thought the 1850-1890 USA era was the Wild West, watch what comes next.”

Part of “what comes next” he gets from the book When Money Dies by Adam Fergesson, which is that “over 400 politicians were assassinated in the 1920-1921 Austrian-Weimar Germany hyperinflation. This is what happens when things go very desperate,” and that “history books tell us, have proven time and time again, this is what lies ahead under these circumstances.”

He calls it The New Abnormal, which seems perfectly appropriate to me because I know that things are going to get weird from here on out, as the Old Normal is dead, making the Old Abnormal the New Normal, which is just a hint of How Freaking Bizarre (HFB) things are going to get when things are weird enough right now!

In fact, to use an analogy, the economy is like a group of overpaid people, milking the government for every dollar and benefit they can get, on a chartered airplane that has been certified as “unsafe,” where one minute everybody is having fun, drunk as skunks, laughing and telling dirty jokes, and the next minute the plane is plunging out of the sky, out of fuel, one wing is in flames, the engines are dead, the entire electrical system is kaput, and, worst of all, the beverage cart is completely empty of cold beer and those little bottles of different kinds of tasty liquors. Uh-oh!

Naturally, everyone is shouting, “Help! Help! What can we do to save ourselves? Can we save ourselves, like the banks saved themselves, by having the Federal Reserve create enough new money, which increases the misery of the poor by making prices rise, and rise, and rise with every new dollar created by the foul Federal Reserve, so that we can make a huge, huge, HUGE pile of money on the ground to cushion our crash landing, thus saving ourselves?”

Well, I admit it’s not the best analogy I ever saw, and I anticipate a deluge of hate-mail over it, and I am sorry that I used it, and I only did it because I cannot suppress – Hahaha! – the Laugh Of Mogambo Scorn (LOMS) at any idiots who actually believe in the long-term possibility of a dysfunctional, government-centric economic system, based on a constantly-rising money supply based on a fiat currency and insane levels of fractional-reserve banking, especially one where total local, state and federal government spending has grown to – literally! – half of all spending in the Whole Freaking Country (WFD)! Half!

This dismal fact is made possible, remember, only by the evil Federal Reserve creating more and more and more money and credit to finance it all, and thus creating the resultant inflation in prices that literally destroys – piece by piece, bit by bit – those who cannot pay higher prices for food and energy, and more-or-less figuratively destroys everyone else.

Except, that is, those who happily own gold and silver, of course, as these wonderful metals have always reigned triumphant over all other investments when things get to this metastasized end-stage, which is the part where the rise in consumer prices goes exponential along with the creation of new money by the Federal Reserve going exponential as the deficit-spending needs of the federal government go, likewise, exponential, and everything gets, predictably, exponentially worse.

Well, Mr. Weigand, who has been watching all of this, apparently realized that it was foolish to get into a conversation with a paranoid whack-job like me, and offers that “It appears we are mostly safe until May or June when the ‘Sell In May And Go Away’ bell rings,” which I take to mean that we have a couple of months in which to accumulate as much gold, silver, oil, guns and ammo as we can.

And with a nice lead-time like that, what can you say except, “Whee! This investing stuff is easy!”

The Mogambo Guru
for The Daily Reckoning

Read more: How to Save Yourself from Fed Money Creation

‘Anonymous’ puts central banks on notice

‘Anonymous’ puts central banks on notice, demands Bernanke resign

By Stephen C. Webster
Raw Story, March 17th, 2011 -- 3:44 pm
81 Share2560 72 Share5 Share9837 Share233

Decentralized protest group "Anonymous" has encountered many foes in the past: Sarah Palin, PayPal, the Church of Scientology, MasterCard, the Westboro Baptists and even the governments of Egypt, Tunisia and Libya, to name a few.

But now, one of the group's members has issued a call for perhaps their most audacious campaign yet: civil disobedience against the private central banking system that underpins all the world's industrial economies.

In a little-noticed video published Sunday, one "Anonymous" calls for the dawning of "Operation Empire State Rebellion": a "relentless campaign of peaceful resistance" against organizations that participate in they termed the "control" of large populations through pieces of paper and bits of data.

They also called for US Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke's resignation.

It reamains to be seen whether this operation will succeed in drawing the support of other members of "Anonymous." It was also unclear what exactly they had planned, or even if they could prove to be more than mere annoyance to the world's banking cartels.

But then again, ostensibly the same group did take down MasterCard for a day.

However, as with most "Anonymous" operations, it was impossible to say whether this proposal came from a known member of the group, someone on its fringes or a source outside of "Anonymous" entirely.

Pentagon officials also said that "Anonymous" sought to interfere with communications at the Quantico, Virginia military base where Manning was being held.

The video below was published to YouTube on March 13, 2011.

Updated from a prior version for clarity.

venerdì 18 marzo 2011

Foreign bankers flee Tokyo

Foreign bankers flee Tokyo as nuclear crisis deepens

cnbc, 16 Mar 2011

By Nachum Kaplan and Denny Thomas

(Reuters) - Foreign bankers are fleeing Tokyo as Japan's nuclear crisis worsens, scrambling for commercial and charter flights out of the country and into other major cities in the region.

BNP Paribas , Standard Chartered and Morgan Stanley were among the banks whose staff have left since Friday's earthquake and tsunami, and now a nuclear plant disaster, according to industry sources with direct knowledge of the matter.

Expatriate staff at most foreign banks in Tokyo make up a small portion of the total, by some estimates less than 10 percent. But many are often in senior positions so their departure can have a significant impact.

And while Japan's investment banking market is famously tough, it's an essential place for large banks to be and can produce hefty fees.

"The foreign banker presence on the ground in Tokyo now is very thin and depending on how long it takes them to return there could be lasting implications of that," said one banker. "Every time there's a washout of foreigners in Japan they never quite return in the same numbers."

With bankers joining the growing exodus, private jet operators reported a surge in demand for evacuation flights which sent prices surging as much as a quarter. One jet operator said the cost of flying 14 people to Hong Kong from Tokyo was more than $160,000.

"I got a request yesterday to fly 14 people from Tokyo to Hong Kong, 5 hour 5 minutes trip. They did not care about price," said Jackie Wu, COO of Hong Kong Jet, a newly established private jet subsidiary of China's HNA Group.


Radiation leaking from a crippled nuclear power plant spread panic across the country, emptying out Tokyo's normally bustling streets. Scores of flights to the city were halted and embassies warned citizens to leave or avoid the region.

The Tokyo-based International Bankers Association (IBA), which represents 16 major investment banks, issued a statement on Tuesday saying that none of them had closed business or ordered evacuations.

"We are watching the situation as it unfolds, but right now, it's business as usual," Christopher Knight, Japan CEO for Standard Chartered, told Reuters on Wednesday, adding that his office was staffed and open.

Other banks, including Citigroup , J.P. Morgan and Morgan Stanley, also told Reuters that business was operating as usual.

While Japan markets remained open, and banks were indeed open, many financial professionals, particularly those from outside Japan, were doing everything they could to get out of the country.

IFR, a Thomson Reuters publication, spoke with 14 bankers from the bond syndicate and equities desks of Citigroup, J.P. Morgan, Deutsche Bank , Morgan Stanley, Bank of America-Merrill Lynch and BNP Paribas who had fled for the safety of Hong Kong, Singapore and Seoul through the week or were trying to get out.

Foreign bankers choosing to remain in Tokyo and Japanese bankers said that it was anything but business as usual at the moment with communications patchy, rolling blackouts, thinly-manned desks and so many people looking to leave.

"It's been almost impossible to get hold of investors since the quake hit," said one syndicate banker at a U.S. house from the safety of Hong Kong.

While the banks were not officially relocating people, they were accommodating employees and their families who wanted to leave.

"At the end of the day, it's the employees choice whether they flee or stay back," a banker at a European investment bank said. Asked who was taking up the option to leave, he said: "Who isn't? Everyone is trying to get out. Wouldn't you?"


Several bankers compared the situation to the outbreak of SARS in 2003. Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) emerged in southern China in 2002, swept through Guangdong province and Hong Kong before spreading globally in 2003. It infected some 8,000 people and killed around 800, which prompted hordes of foreign professionals to leave Hong Kong.

Morgan Stanley had moved its credit team out of Tokyo, a person with knowledge of the matter told IFR. Morgan Stanley's spokesman denied the bank had moved any staff out of Japan.

BNP Paribas has moved about 10 people away from Japan for business continuity purposes out of a staff of about 900, according to the bank's spokesman, Daniel Boyd.

A number of senior Standard Chartered staff left Japan on Saturday morning for Hong Kong and Singapore, a person with direct knowledge of the situation said.

"We have contingency plans and if the situation changes this may involve moving some staff to other locations as needed to ensure business continuity," a Citi spokesman said.

A J.P. Morgan spokeswoman said "no business, teams or desks had been relocated" out of Japan.

The low foreign banker presence in Tokyo has also been exacerbated by many bankers on business trips abroad not returning to Tokyo. "If you're a Japan banker that's just done a trip to Mumbai, you can bet they're calling their home base to see if they can stay a while longer," another banker told Reuters.

(Additional reporting by Jonathan Rogers; Stephen Aldred, Elzio Barreto, Kelvin Soh and Haruya Ida; Editing by Michael Flaherty and Lincoln Feast)

Copyright 2011 Reuters

Casa popolare della Polverini: 130 euro al mese

Corriere della Sera
Lazio: Inchiesta dell'«Espresso» sulla governatrice

La casa popolare della Polverini:
«A 130 euro al mese»

Sull'Aventino per 15 anni per 5 stanze

Lazio: Inchiesta dell'«Espresso» sulla governatrice

La casa popolare della Polverini:
«A 130 euro al mese»

Sull'Aventino per 15 anni per 5 stanze

Renata Polverini (Eidon)
Renata Polverini (Eidon)
ROMA - Anche Renata Polverini finisce al centro di «affittopoli». La governatrice del Lazio proprio l'altro ieri aveva istituito una «commissione ispettiva» sull'Ater (l'azienda dell'edilizia popolare) di Roma. Obiettivo: fare luce su eventuali abusi e favoritismi nei contratti di affitto e di vendita delle case pubbliche. Da settimane il centrodestra accusa la vecchia giunta Veltroni di aver svenduto case ad amici e amici di amici. Ma ieri, appena 24 ore dopo l'annuncio della linea dura, Renata Polverini si è ritrovata a sua volta sotto accusa. Tirata in ballo da un'inchiesta pubblicata sul sito internet de l'Espresso.

Secondo la ricostruzione del settimanale (suffragata da certificati anagrafici), l'ex sindacalista per 15 anni, fino al 2004, ha avuto la propria residenza insieme al marito Massimo Cavicchioli in una casa dell'Ater in via Bramante, all'Aventino, quartiere extra lusso, usufruendo di un canone ultra-popolare: circa 130 euro al mese per 4 vani più bagno e cucina. E ancora oggi, sostiene il giornale, Cavicchioli risulta residente nell'appartamento.
Renata Polverini, cercata tramite la propria portavoce, ha preferito non commentare: «Domani (oggi per chi legge, ndr) forse parlerà di questa storia». La governatrice - secondo la ricostruzione de l'Espresso - dal settembre del 2004 abita e ha la propria residenza in un elegante appartamento a San Saba, altra zona extra lusso in pieno centro della Capitale. Si tratta di una casa acquistata nel 2002 dallo Ior: nove stanze, due box e tre balconi, pagata appena 272 mila euro (somma con la quale all'epoca a Roma si acquistavano sul mercato al massimo 70-75 metri fuori dal centro). E sempre nello stesso stabile aveva poi comprato nel 2004, quando ancora era residente nella casa Ater, un altro appartamento gemello, stavolta a 666 mila euro (valore sempre di molto inferiore rispetto ai prezzi di mercato), di proprietà di una società in affari con la Santa sede.

Non solo. Da inquilina delle case popolari, ricostruisce il settimanale, Renata Polverini, mentre stava scalando i vertici del sindacato Ugl fino a diventarne leader, dal 2001 era stata protagonista di una girandola di compravendite immobiliari (compreso un appartamento al Torrino ex Inpdap acquistato alle condizioni riservate agli inquilini, anche se lei non lo era), cessioni e donazioni con un vorticoso giro di centinaia di migliaia di euro. Insomma un tenore di vita ben diverso da quello che si richiede come requisito per usufruire dei canoni agevolati delle abitazioni popolari riservate a persone con redditi bassi e senza casa.
Ancora oggi sul citofono della casa di via Bramante si leggono tre cognomi: Polverini R.- Cavicchioli M. - Berardi (è la famiglia della suocera defunta della governatrice). «Non abitano più qui da tempo», dicono però gli altri inquilini. L'appartamento, a quanto pare, è vuoto. «Se le notizie riportate dall'Espresso fossero confermate, sarebbero molto gravi. Ci auguriamo che Renata Polverini faccia chiarezza al più presto», è il commento di Vincenzo Maruccio, dell'Italia dei Valori.

Paolo Foschi
18 marzo 2011

giovedì 17 marzo 2011

Banca Rothschild, pratica di finanziamento

Cara Banca Rothschild,

vorremmo richiedere un finanziamento di 4,5 milioni di euro offrendo a garanzia tre certificati nominativi dei diritti di signoraggio firmati LEVI-SABA-LA BANCA (Franco Levi, Marco Saba, Nadia La Banca). Ogni certificato vale 1,5 milioni di euro calcolati al 17 marzo 2011, anniversario dell'unificazione italiana voluta da Karl Rothschild nell'800 per consolidare i debiti degli stati-regioni.

I certificati, liquidi ed esigibili, vi permetteranno (salvo indicazioni diverse della window guidance di Mandraghi), di effettuare delle false scritture contabili creando la liquidità che ci necessita per iniziare un sistema di monete regionali dove la vostra banca potrebbe funzionare come sistema di clearing.

In pratica, è una start-up, un tentativo di evtare la soluzione molto più drastica della nazionalizzazione del sistema bancario e di emissione monetaria come invece auspicato recentemente dal nostro ministro gay Tremonti.

Vi preghiamo (proprio così) di confermarci una data ed un'ora per discutere la cosa, nel frattempo oggi, 17 marzo 2011, organizziamo un sit-in davanti alla vostra sede milanese con cartelli, megafoni e petofoni, per accelerare la pratica.

Cordiali saluti,


Nostri recapiti:
cell 340 5006545


Mandraghi è il prestigiatore d'ultima istanza

Indirizzo del luogo della manifestazione:
Via Santa Radegonda, 8, 20121 Milano, Italy +39 02 724431

mercoledì 16 marzo 2011

Big banks investigated over LIBOR rate manipulation

Big banks investigated over LIBOR rate manipulation


By Brooke Masters, Patrick Jenkins, and Justin Baer
Financial Times, London
Tuesday, March 15, 2011

Regulators in the United States, Japan, and UK are investigating whether some of the biggest banks conspired to "manipulate" the benchmark interest rate used to calculate the cost of billions of dollars of debt.

The investigation centres on the panel of 16 banks that help the British Bankers' Association set the London interbank offered rate, or Libor -- the estimated cost of borrowing for banks between each other.

In particular, the investigation was looking at how Libor was set for US dollars during 2006 to 2008, immediately before and during the financial crisis, people familiar with the probes said.

The probe came to light on Tuesday when the Swiss bank UBS disclosed in its annual report that it had received subpoenas from three US agencies and an information demand from the Japanese Financial Supervisory Agency.

The bank said the regulators were focusing on "whether there were improper attempts by UBS, either acting on its own or together with others, to manipulate Libor rates at certain times."

All the panel members are believed to have received at least an informal request for information -- an earlier stage in an investigative process before a subpoena.

Witnesses had been interviewed by investigators from the US Securities and Exchange Commission, the Department of Justice, and the UK's Financial Services Authority, people familiar with the probe said.

The inquiry has been under way for some months. At least one bank received its initial request for information in October, people familiar with the matter said.

The BBA produces Libor rates for 10 currencies using eight to 20 contributor banks. The contributors submit the rates at which they think they could borrow on the open market. Outlying submissions are tossed out and the reported rate is the mean of the middle values.

Critics of the process for setting Libor -- which is used as a reference rate for about $350,000bn in financial products -- have long claimed it is antiquated and lacking in transparency. Commentators complained bitterly during the financial crisis that the rates were distorted because they believed weaker banks were unwilling to admit higher borrowing costs.

UBS declined to comment beyond its disclosure. The regulators declined to comment. The other banks on the panel at the time covered by the probe either declined to comment or spokesmen could not be reached.

They are: Bank of America, Barclays, Citigroup, Credit Suisse, Deutsche Bank, HSBC, JPMorgan Chase, Lloyds, Rabobank, Royal Bank of Canada, Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi, Norinchukin Bank, Royal Bank of Scotland, and West LB.

HBOS, which has since merged with Lloyds, was also a member.

The BBA said: "We are committed to retaining the reputation and integrity of BBA Libor, which continues to be the authoritative benchmark of the wholesale money market. It has a straightforward and unambiguous calculation method, which excludes any rates which are significant outliers. It is fully transparent -- all of the data inputted by the contributor banks is publicly available, as is our methodology."

lunedì 14 marzo 2011

CAGW Reacts to GAO’s Dollar Coin Endorsement

CAGW Reacts to GAO’s Dollar Coin Endorsement

WASHINGTON--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Citizens Against Government Waste CAGW concurred with today's Government Accountability Office’s (GAO) report on the substantial benefits of discontinuing $1 notes in favor of $1 coins. This money-saving idea has been touted by CAGW in its annually-updated Prime Cuts database for years. According to the GAO, phasing out the $1 note and increasing circulation of the $1 coin would save taxpayers an average of $184 million annually and a total of $5.5 billion over the next 30 years. The GAO has published four previous reports on the benefits of the $1 coin, in 1990, 1993, 1995 and 2000, twice recommending the elimination of the $1 note to ensure the success of the coin.

“Eliminating the $1 bill in favor of the $1 coin should be an easy decision for elected officials in Washington, who are looking everywhere for ways to reduce the record deficit and debt”

Most of the cost savings associated with coins comes from their comparative durability. The Bureau of Engraving and Printing produces approximately 3.4 billion $1 bills each year, each of which costs 4.2 cents to manufacture and lasts 40 months. By comparison, the $1 coin costs between 12 and 20 cents but has a lifespan of 30 years or more. The $1 coin also saves money because it is cheaper to handle and process. Mass transit agencies have found that processing $1 coins costs 83 percent less than processing $1 bills. Other benefits include savings on the processing of money by banks and businesses. Coins cost 30 cents per thousand pieces to process at Federal Reserve Banks, compared to 75 cents per thousand for $1 notes. Large-scale private-sector users reap even more savings. Coins are also much more difficult to counterfeit.

The GAO report points out that “Over the last 47 years, Australia, Canada, France, Japan, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Russia, Spain, and the UK, among others, have replaced lower-denomination notes with coins… Canadian officials later determined that the Canadian government saved $450 million (Canadian) between 1987 and 1991."

The Federal Reserve and the U.S. Mint are already required by law to remove barriers to the $1 coin’s circulation. However, the Federal Reserve issues the United States’ paper currency and doesn’t like the competition from the $1 coin, which is issued by the Mint. The Fed’s leaders have instituted regulations and red tape that restrict access to $1 coins for banks, businesses, and individual Americans. These interferences have resulted in the continued circulation of $1 notes, nullifying nearly all of the cost reductions $1 coins would otherwise cause. Conversely, countries in Europe have achieved currency production savings by substituting coins for bills on their lowest-denominated currencies.

“Eliminating the $1 bill in favor of the $1 coin should be an easy decision for elected officials in Washington, who are looking everywhere for ways to reduce the record deficit and debt," said CAGW President Tom Schatz. "The U.S. is supposed to be the economic model for the entire world, yet on this issue we are way behind other nations. Implementing GAO's recommendation will not eliminate a single program or raise taxes by a single penny. Taxpayers should fully embrace this concept. GAO said that the transition requires Congress to 'take the lead' on this issue, and CAGW will continue lead the way to make sure that this long overdue proposal is finally adopted."

Citizens Against Government Waste is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization dedicated to eliminating waste, fraud, mismanagement and abuse in government.


Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW)
Leslie K. Paige, 202-467-5334
Luke Gelber, 202-467-5318

Pseudo-Comunisti in difesa del Signoraggio bancario

Gli USA: il Signoraggio esiste, riprendiamocelo

La Stampa, 14/03/2011 - IL CASO

"Fragile e costoso: addio al più famoso dei biglietti verdi"

Raccomandazione della Corte dei Conti Usa: meglio la moneta



Banconote addio, il dollaro sarà solo in moneta. Il biglietto verde di taglio più piccolo rischia di diventare l’ultima vittima della crisi che gli Usa tentano con una certa fatica di lasciarsi alle spalle. Alle prese con un debito crescente e con bilanci in profondo rosso, le autorità americane sono pronte a mandare in pensione il più piccolo dei biglietti verdi per sostituirlo definitivamente con la moneta di equivalente valore. L’epocale cambiamento si tradurrebbe in un risparmio di 5,5 miliardi di dollari nel giro di 30 anni, secondo il Government Accountability Office, il braccio investigativo e di revisione contabile del Congresso americano.

Le monete infatti godono di vita più lunga (in media 30 anni) e per questo non occorrerebbe la ristampa. Secondo il Gao, ogni anno il governo guadagnerebbe 184 milioni di dollari derivanti dalla differenza tra il valore nominale dei «coin» e il valore di produzione (NdR: il signoraggio). Del resto si tratta di una strada già percorsa da Canada e Regno Unito: «Ci hanno riferito che questo passaggio è stato fondamentale per il successo della propria crescita», spiega il Gao. Misure simili sono state intraprese anche in Giappone e Australia, mentre in Europa, con l’avvento della moneta unica, si è puntato da subito sul metallo anziché sulla carta. La transizione non sarà però indolore, come spiega il dossier commissionato da alcuni senatori, visto che per i primi quattro anni il governo dovrà fare i conti con perdite causate dall’aumento dei costi di produzione delle monete.

Il pensionamento del minore dei biglietti verdi, inoltre, spaventa le aziende, preoccupate di incorrere in spese elevate per ricostituire le riserve liquide. Tuttavia le perplessità non sembrano oggi rappresentare un ostacolo per il «coin» da un dollaro, che, pur essendo presente sul mercato da anni (dal 1979 al 2009 ne sono sbarcati 4,2 miliardi), non è mai riuscito a mettere a segno con successo la successione sulla banconota, sempre rimasta in circolazione. A segnare le sorti del dollaro di carta, però, potrebbe essere il ritiro forzato dal mercato. La transizione deve avvenire seguendo precisi accorgimenti. Per ogni dollaro di carta in circolazione ne devono essere prodotti in media 3 1,5 in metallo. «La gente tiene spesso le monete fuori dal portafogli», prosegue il Gao.

Ciò significa che serviranno più «coin» per mantenere i volumi di circolazione corrente, ma questo potrebbe anche tradursi in una maggiore propensione alla spesa, visto che il consumatore presta minore attenzione alle monetine. Un dibattito, questo, in voga in Europa con l’avvento dell’euro. Ma il fattore economico non è il solo: in Usa la scomparsa del biglietto verde da un dollaro segnerebbe la fine di una tradizione secolare, oltre che la sparizione di George Washington dalle tasche dei cittadini.

sabato 12 marzo 2011

L'invasione delle Opa


L'invasione delle Opa

Dopo Bulgari, gli stranieri puntano su Edison e Fonsai.

di Ulisse Spinnato Vega

Più che una montagna, Piazza Affari sembra una collinetta che chiunque è in grado di scalare. Il caso della maison Bulgari, finita in mano ai francesi di Lvmh malgrado abbia rispettato i buoni fondamentali economici, è solo l'ultimo di una lunga serie. I brand italiani volati di recente all'estero cominciano a diventare davvero tanti (basti citare Ferré, Fendi, Pucci, Valentino, Gucci, Bottega Veneta, ma anche Fastweb, Standa e Coin). Tuttavia, scorribande e Opa (Offerta pubblica d'acquisto) straniere potrebbero ripetersi molto presto in seno all'asfittico listino milanese. E i nomi di cui si chiacchiera, anche solo a livello informale, sono da far tremare i polsi.
POSSIBILI SCALATE . «Mi aspetto a breve notizie relative ad altre acquisizioni o possibili scalate di società italiane da parte di gruppi stranieri», ha rivelato a Fabrizio Zampieri, analista finanziario e socio ordinario di Assoconsulenza. «Qualche esempio? Si parla di Generali e Mediobanca, dove le partecipazioni straniere nei capitali sociali dovrebbero aumentare». Poi Zampieri ha citato senza precisare il caso di «una società sportiva situata in Centro Italia» (il pensiero corre all'Opa di Thomas Richard DiBenedetto sulla As Roma). E ha chiosato: «Insomma, molte aziende “modello” del nostro listino potrebbero adottare presto altre lingue all'interno dei consigli d'amministrazione».

Dal caso Ligresti alla vicenda Edison

L'economista, che insegna all'Università Isfoa, di Lugano ha aggiunto: «Non dimentichiamo che tante altre società presenti in Borsa Italia hanno molte quote, seppure non maggioritarie ma ugualmente influenti, di capitali stranieri all'interno dell'assetto. Parliamo di Juventus, Unicredit, Finmeccanica, STMicroelectronics, Alitalia, Cariparma o Banca nazionale del lavoro. Il governo italiano sembra voler evitare questo mercanteggiare sulle nostre imprese, ma c'è poco da fare: il mondo è sempre più globalizzato e gli equilibri si stanno spostando verso nuove aree geopolitiche e Paesi che hanno ottimi fondamentali economici e demografici o una grande abbondanza di liquidità».
GROUPAMA E LA GALASSIA LIGRESTI. Sussura un altro analista che, teoricamente, «anche Telecom è scalabile». Ma di quali Opa in Borsa si parla invece apertamente? Tra gli assicurativi, tiene banco il caso Ligresti con Premafin e Fonsai: anche qui gli appetiti sono di marca francese (Groupama) ma i paletti della Consob potrebbero scoraggiare il gruppo assicurativo parigino.
Poi c'è, tra gli energetici, la vicenda Edison con la possibile intesa tra il gigante transalpino Edf e la milanese A2A. L'ennesima probabile Opa francese, stavolta, ha causato parecchi malumori anche a livello politico. E il governo potrebbe aver ottenuto in queste ore il congelamento per un anno dello spin-off che avrebbe condotto l'azienda di Foro Buonaparte nelle fauci del colosso statale d'Oltralpe.

La debolezza di Borsa Italia

Eugenio Benetazzo, il guru dei trader indipendenti che molti definiscono il «Grillo dell'economia» ha azzardato: «Ci sono almeno tre società di interesse strategico che sono scalabili, ma preferisco non fare nomi. Per quanto riguarda Bulgari, mi stupisco come non sia accaduto prima, visto il boom in Oriente e le grandi prospettive di consumo per i beni di lusso».
«In generale», ha aggiunto Benetazzo, «Borsa Italia adesso è insignificante per dimensione su scala planetaria e ha perso l'originaria vocazione di consentire alle piccole e medie imprese (Pmi) l'accesso ai capitali. Era questa la logica che soggiaceva alla quotazione in Borsa: evitare l'indebitamento a medio e lungo termine e poter contare su capitali freschi sgravati di oneri finanziari. La governance politica dovrebbe puntare a rafforzare tale principio e dare maggiore accessibilità ai processi di quotazione».
LE CARENZA NELLE PMI. L'esperto, autore con David Parenzo di L'Europa s'è rotta (Sperling&Kupfer) ha chiuso: «Il sistema manca invece di supporto, tutela e garanzie. Poi c'è anche una carenza di competenza manageriale nelle Pmi che vedono la Borsa come una minaccia. Tuttavia, il listino dovrebbe avere nuovi segmenti dedicati alle piccole e medie imprese che in questo momento di difficoltà strutturale hanno bisogno di acquisire risorse fresche. Non dimentichiamo che con Basilea III, il nuovo accordo sui requisiti minimi di capitale, la situazione si farà ancora più dura».

Giovedì, 10 Marzo 2011


by Barry Chamish

On Feb. 18, Israel's Prime Minister along with his Foreign and Defence Ministers hatched a plot to keep Libyan strongmen Muamar Ghaddafi in
power and his opponents dead or wounded. The big three would use Israeli taxpayers' money to hire mercenaries to slaughter any Libyan who wanted a
new leader.

(ANSAmed) - ROME, MARCH 1 - With approval from the government in Tel
Aviv, an Israeli security firm is responsible for sending groups of African mercenaries to Libya
to fight the protestors who have been calling for the fall of the Gaddafi
regime for the last two weeks, reports Al Jazeera's website, citing a source in
the Israeli press. The journalist from Israeli daily Yediot Ahronot, who
prefers to remain anonymous, said that according to speculation in the security
sector, Israel looks at Libya from a strategic perspective and in terms of
security. The fall of Gaddafi would open the door for an Islamic regime in
Libya, accordingto speculation. In a meeting on February 18, Prime Minister Netanyahu, Defence
Minister Barak and Foreign Minister Lieberman decided to recruit African
mercenaries to fight alongside Gaddafi, according to the journalist. During the
meeting, they decided to let General Israel Zef, the director of security firm
Global CST, which is active in many African countries, to make a group of
paramilitary mercenaries from Guinea, Nigeria, Central Africa, Mali, Senegal,
Darfur and Southern Sudan available to Abdullah Assinousi, one of the heads of
Libya's intelligence agency.

In just a few weeks, Libya was crawling with guns for hire, many without knowledge that their paychecks originated at the Bank of Israel. How could Israel
justify the ongoing massacre of Libyan civilians by its hired guns? Because Ghaddafi's defeat would mean an Islamist government, though it's anybody's guess
if that is even the case. Meanwhile in Israel, the police shot 15 Jews at Havat Gilad with experimental crowd-control bullets, while most of the population was too shell-shocked
by never-ending poverty and debt to even care. Would they care if they knew their taxes were paying hundreds of mercenaries $300 to $2000 bucks a day to shoot Libyans?
Nah, not when there's the mortgage to be paid and children to feed. Israelis are too worn down and out to care that their government is risking huge international censure for
prolonging the Libyan civil war.

Gaddafi is said to have lured some 25,000 mercenaries to quash a popular revolt
against his regime.
The head of the Libyan Human Rights League Ali Zeidan says Chad is leading this
group of foreign fighters including citizens from Niger, Mali, Zimbabwe and
Liberia who are being paid between $300 and $2,000 a day.
While most of these governments have denied their nationals are fighting as
mercenaries in Libya, Mali officials have confirmed hundreds of young Tuaregs
from Mali and Niger have been recruited by Gaddafi.

There may be more to Israel's support than just the fear of radical Islam taking control of Libya. Fifteen years ago, I interviewed a family of Libyan Jews living in southern Israel,
who claimed that Ghaddafi's mother was Jewish and he was their cousin. Since the protests of Libya turned into a civil war, thanks in part to Israel, interest in Ghaddafi's Jewish cousins has been revived by the local media:

As Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi fights desperately to cling to
power, killing thousands of his countrymen in the process, more and
more bizarre stories about his connections to Israel are coming to
light. According to a Tel Aviv-based organization of Jews of Libyan descent,
in 2007 the Gaddafi regime offered a large sum of money for the
formation of a "Libyan political party" to run in Israel's 2009
Knesset elections. Last week we reported on Gaddafi's suspected Jewish heritage, citing
an Israeli television interview last year with an Israeli Jew of
Libyan descent who claims to be Gaddafi's cousin.

Is it possible that the expensive and insane risks Israel is taking over Ghaddafi is, at least partly, just a family affair?


The Barry Chamish Page

Why I gratefully accept donations and why you might want to donate:
A 95-minute movie with 10 minutes of ads and a small popcorn costs $20. If you enjoy my articles for at least 2 hours this year, and you donate $20, you already received more entertainment than you did from the movie. The other 100+ hours of enjoyment you receive here is FREE.
Subscribers ($5 or $10/mo) and donors of $50 or more this year will receive weekly emails of exclusive world information upon request.
You have the immense moral satisfaction of aiding a poor dumb writer who seeks to inform, entertain and amuse you.
Without contributions, this work of mine would come to a crashing halt. Off the top of my head, the following have made significant contributions:
Baruch, Tova, Steven, Marc, Aliza, Ron, Karen, Bernard, Herman, Ari, Cindy, Jim, Marilyn, Peter, Christie, David, Lynn, Fred, Howard, Michael, Brenda and more. Thanks to them I manage to squeeze by...barely. Some months it's close right to the last day of the month. I appreciate and remember each contributor. Without you, there wouldn't be me.

Barry Chamish
POB 840157
Saint Augustine, FL 32080 USA


I have a radio show with a good listening audience. If you have something newsworthy to tell the world, contact me and I'll bend over backwards to put you on the air.

Listen to my radio show:


My new book, THE conPROMISED LAND can be ordered direct from the publisher

venerdì 11 marzo 2011

signoraggio in tutte le lingue

diritto di signoraggio



κρατικά έσοδα από τη νομισματοκοπή


derecho de señoreaje





förändring i reservvalutafonden

Santander CEO faces three-month ban

By Simon Kennedy, MarketWatch

LONDON (MarketWatch) — Alfredo Saenz, chief executive of Spanish lender Banco Santander, has reportedly been banned from working as a banker for three months following a long-running investigation into his attempts to recover loans made by Banesto SA.

The case dates all the way back to 1994, when Saenz was chairman of Banesto /quotes/comstock/06x!e:bto (ES:BTO 6.43, -0.10, -1.55%) , which is now controlled by Santander /quotes/comstock/06x!e:san (ES:SAN 8.13, -0.04, -0.47%) /quotes/comstock/13*!std/quotes/nls/std (STD 11.19, -0.05, -0.45%) .


Alfredo Saenz, chief executive of Spain's top lender Santander.

The legal saga will go at least one more round, however, as Santander said Saenz intends to immediately appeal the ruling — a process that could take two to four years, according to a Santander spokesman.

The Supreme Court ruled that Saenz should be arrested and suspended from holding any position in banking for three months, but as he doesn’t have a prior criminal record, he is unlikely to actually be arrested, Dow Jones Newswires reported, citing a court spokesman.

Shares of Santander fell 1.4% Thursday, while Spain’s IBEX 35 index dropped 1.2%.

Saenz is appealing the ruling made by Spain’s Supreme Court to the country’s Constitutional Court and will also ask the Provincial High Court of Barcelona to suspend execution of the sentence, pending his appeals, Santander said.

The bank added that its board is standing behind Saenz and that he will remain as CEO.

Spanish newspaper El Mundo reported in January that Saenz would face a ban as part of his sentence.

Saenz was reportedly accused of making false accusations against Banesto’s debtors as he tried to recover loans made by the bank.

Simon Kennedy is the City correspondent for MarketWatch in London.