Majorityrights News > Category: White Left Ethno-Nationalist Alliance

Protesters attend a demonstration against alleged slavery in Libya, at Sergels torg in Stockholm, Sweden, 25 November 2017. [Claudio Bresciani/EPA/EFE]/ Euractiv

Voice of Europe, “Asylum seekers cost Sweden 347 billion euros during their lifetimes”, 6 June 2018:

Svenska Dagbladet journalist, Per Gudmundsson, writes that the net costs of the average refugee are higher than expected. Gudmondsson bases his opinion on a financial report that was published by Sweden’s ESO research institution earlier this week.

Gudmundsson says some immigrant groups are even more costly due to integration failures and labour costs. Therefore, the costs of a refugee or asylum seeker are higher than the previously thought, 291,000 euros (3 million crowns) during their lifetimes.

“The actual costs are higher because no direct costs have been calculated, for example, the cost of subsidised employment,” he says.

Sweden’s migrant population has grown from 690,000 in 2015 to 830,000 in 2017. The ESO report states that “Refugees who immigrate today, are expected to live 58.3 years in Sweden on average”.

During these years, an asylum seeker with an average integration potential is expected to represent a net cost to Sweden’s public finances of 7,184 euros on average per year.”

If you multiply 7,184 euros per refugee x 58.3 (average lifetime) the costs per refugee will be 418,827 euros during their lifetime in Sweden.

By multiplying this with the total number of refugees, we get the total costs for all refugees during their lifetimes:

418,827 x 830,000 = 347 billion euros or 3,580 billion Swedish crowns.

According to the report, The 58.3 years, is about the group that immigrated recently, it is unclear if this varies considerably.

Gudmundsson says this is an inefficient use of funds, which could have had a greater impact in homelands of the refugees.

Related:

Voice of Europe, “Hundreds of thousands of Swedish pensioners live in poverty, according to recent report”, 5 June 2018:

A new report published by the Swedish Pensions Agency shows that as many as 245,000 people of over the age of 65 are below the poverty threshold.

In comparison with the rest of the Nordic countries, Sweden has the highest proportion of poor pensioners (or as the Pension Agency calls it, pensioners with a “relatively low financial standard”).

In the press release, the agency wrote that “the main reason why older people do not reach the upper limit of a relatively low economic standard is that they do not have, or are not entitled to, maximum housing allowance and/or elderly support”.

Of the 245,000 people who were below the limit of relatively low economic standard in 2017, 162,000 were women.

“Women, single individuals, and the oldest in the age group over 65 are those that are at the greatest risk of falling below the income threshold for relatively low economic standards. The main reason for this is a combination of low income-based pensions and low housing costs,” says chief Pensions Agency analyst, Ole Stettergren.

Always quick to maintain the balance between our part as Whites, our fault as it were, in aiding or abetting the destruction of our borders and bounds, which I attribute to a general pattern of our penchant for anti-social, anti-relativist, right wing reaction to Jewish union and anti-White coalitions in hyperbolic abuse and misrepresentation of left concepts against us - i.e., which for us means hyperbolic liberalization of our social bounds - to which we react into kinds of objectivism and liberalism to seek “pure warrant” against this jaded sophist rhetoric against us ...and as I am always vigilant and diligent to maintain that heuristic as one of two poles to the blight against the human ecology of our ethnonational, White/European, group systemic homeo/stasis - the other pole being those most adept at taking advantage - of the attendant susceptibility, disingenuousness among those treacherous among our kind, who’d take the pay-off or seek to advance themselves under the airs of “objectivity’ and liberalism; “openness” to others (who somehow pay); or, those who naively see that “objectivism” as the voice of purity and the road to redemption for original sin or whatever kind of guilt they think they need to be freed-from that their relative interests might otherwise call to consciousness - including a consciousness of the threat to their interests by that group who’ve made a religion of placing the ethnocentric management of their group systemic homeostasis, placing it above all others on earth ...so practiced are they that they would resort, and have, to all manner of war - as their Mossad says, by deception - Manichean trickery in order to thwart upstart adversarial groups; they have practiced these strategies for ages - the YKW being responsible for the Christianity that would disarm us as a group (all non-Jews, finally, into the “undifferentiated Gentile other” as GW observes), to have us not recognize ourselves a group, to have us believe that we all are the same in the eyes of the poor, sacrificed, literally Jewish god that we are supposed to worship; laying down our arms even against the Muslims, whose Abrahamic religion they’ve also spawned, setting it to war against us where we might not yield to Abrahamism; setting up its imams as compradors in Asia as well, where the Asians may also see through their monotheistic, Abrahamic hoax; and want instead a religion of their people, serving their relative ethnonational interests.

I’m talking of course about the YKW - and here I want to go beyond my normal hypothesis that they are one of two major poles to the plight against our social systemic group maintenance as White/European peoples…. I want to identify, albeit in abstract form, the nine power and influence niches that they’ve come to wield hegemony within, with particular culmination following the 2008 subprime crisis and bail-out - among the largest ever thefts known to man.

This was the grand sweep of the boom/bust cycle. That is when they made “the left” as the enemy into a constant in their media and controlled opposition; that is when they devised the concept and got behind a re-branded right wing coalition centered on (((paleoconservatism))) called the “Alt-Right” and Zionist Trump with their clean break agenda ...and they are trying assiduously to ingratiate themselves with the White right now - can you imagine that (((Frame Games))) is proposing to JF the “White pill” (silver lining) that White right wingers can join in with Jews to take advantage of the bust cycle and gentrify places like Detroit with them - we can live with blacks again! stir up their resentment, jealousy and hostility, put ourselves amidst their violence and sexual imposition on our treasure - What a White pill (for Jews like Frame Game, I guess)!

In this episode of JF Gariepy’s “Public Space”, called “What is to come”, Gariepy’s talk with (((Frame Games))) goes through a solemn tour of how White dispossession plays out in five examples, including, Detroit, Washington D.C., Rhodesia, Haiti and of course, Iran!

That’s right, not only does (((Frame Games))) propose that despite the catastrophic results in places of White dispossession such as Detroit, that there remains “a white pill” (cause for optimism), that is the possibility for Whites and Jews to take advantage of lowered property value to gentrify these places - of course, Whites and Jews can “gentrify” Iran too .... Donald Trump can put a Trump tower hotel there lol - The Trump Taj Mahal-Tehran!

He can have Madonna, (((Barbara Streisand))), Kanye West and (((Roseanne Barr))) as opening night entertainment….

As you should have heard me say many many times by now - but as the darlings of White advocacy continue to refuse to hear - the decades of anti White social coalition advocacy followed by the YKW cashing-in on the 2008 boom/bust, has created a situation with the YKW being on top of seven nine niches - whereof they want to cultivate an alliance with reactionary Whites into a rightist elitist alliance - paleocons permutated into an “alt right” to divert them into conceiving of the enemy as “the left” and its social unionization, its “social justice warriors” as the enemy, diverting attention to the stereotypes of the undergraduate students and teachers that they trained and backed in anti-White activism with misrepresentation of social philosophy through their long march through the academic institution to hegemony there.

Why, after all, would they want to encourage social group organization and unionization with an aim toward “social justice”, especially for people that they’ve screwed so horribly in order to get on top of these nine niches; and why would they want to call attention and have them raise consciousness of Jewish nepotism, exploitation, abuse and genocide even, from these perches in tandem with right wing/liberal traitors? They wouldn’t want-to; and now that the useful idiots of their “left coalitions” have hit upon the intersection where it calls attention to the nine power and influence niches wielded by Jewish interests to vast destruction of others, consciousness of which might threaten them with social unionization and coalition building, with social justice warriors indeed, arrayed against them to bring them down, to righteously secure reparation for some measure of compensation for their vast crime ...that is when they want to promote the right, anti-social, objective “facts” for their “merit’ in coming into these power and influence niches; but if selling the Whites on that materialistic objectivism doesn’t work, their paleoconservatism prescribes cultural fellowship with them through Abrahamic worship of the King of the Jews.

They need to maintain the falsehoods that they’ve promulgated, distortions and misrepresentations of post modernity, incommensurate cultures, social constructionism, left unionization, hermeneutics, diversity, multiculturalism, marginals etc., all represent “the left” - a cooler sounding “synonym” for “liberalism” as something to be against ....diverting from the fact that a White left would be a union, and thus by definition the antithesis of liberalism, i.e., NOT open to non-Whites and those who’d facilitate scabbing of them, that the concept is perfectly conducive to ethno-nationalism and the national scale; and with that, most of all, it is conducive to accountability to the full groups of White/ ethnonationals, including to disincentive those marginals who would be inclined to facilitate scabbery, incentivizing rather, their loyalty; but especially it is conducive to a vigilance on accountability of our elites, or, our would-be elites, those in position to do the most damage by betraying our group interests; also a vigilance on those elites of non-White groups who are most capable of preying upon susceptibilities of those among us who would betray us; further, a vigilance against those non-Whites with the biopower to impose scabbing on us, the “lowly” kind of non-White that we are not supposed to be concerned about compared to the real “problem” - “leftism”. But “the” left that they and their right wing lackeys dutifully talk about, nerd themselves away from, is a universalized coalition of any facile groups that will ultimately serve only one union, YKW against the goyim firstly, viz., ordinary White people and their would-be White left union(s).

No, no, this is anti-nature, they say. (((Hayek))) told Margarete Thatcher to say that there is “no such thing as society”.... and some boomers cleaned-up, made good money in the disarray. With confirmation bias, these boomer types are the types to go along with and train those in the millennial internet bubbles that “the left is the problem, that objectivism, scientism and Hitler are the answer.”

They didn’t tell Margaret that it is not only a problem that the unions have a propensity to be all too powerful, and they need accountability of themselves, at their parameters with the rest of society’s interests, but that the problem was that these unions were not a union of the people, the White people, but rather in protection of obsolete businesses and business practices.

It is not that unions are wrong, leftism is “anti-nature” and that pure objectivism (whether its naive White variant or is disingenuous YKW prescription) and the invisible hand is correct, but rather that social organization is something that needs to be conducted with the true sophistication, but not overly complicated understanding, of White post modern philosophy.

Toward a promotion of that sophistication and understanding of what we are up against, lets take a more specific, though still abstract enlisting of the power and influence niches that the YKW have hegemony in - from whence they lord themselves over and confuse the ordinary goyim; and wield as a power source to bribe the disingenuous un-conscientious White of middling intelligence, or to flatter others, a JF Gariepy, or what-have-you.

For the sake of White left activism and union organization for social justice warring against the nine niches of elite YKW hegemony; to hold accountable those right wingers complicit with them, taking the deracinating pay-off in whatever form, usually objectivism or Christianity, and for our coalition partners, certain non-White unions we may ally with, it would be helpful to have an acronym ready-to-hand for easy recall to guide attention to the power centers we need to position ourselves against and eventually maneuver against.

By analogy, there is an acrynomal sentence which allows one to easily remember the nine planets:

My (Mercury)
Very (Venus)
Elegant (Earth)
Mother (Mars)
Just (Jupiter)
Served (Saturn)
Us (Uranus)
Nine (Neptune)
Pizzas (Pluto)

Another acrynomal sentence might be proposed to facilitate quick recall of the seven nine choke points of YKW power:

My Religiously Polite Mother Always Buys Courtley Assistance to Negotiate Good Organized Union Coalitions

Media

My (Media - which has extended from times of Judeo-Christian bible (as Bowery observed) to Internet choke points and advanced interactive and mobile technology - e.g., to be used in cyber warfare).

Religion

Religiously (Religion - The Abrahamic religions beginning with the monotheistic Judaism and “evangelizing” its monothestic, imperialistic Noahide law through Christianity and Islam).

Politics

Polite (Politics, usually backing both/all “legitimate”, “opposing sides” in a political system, so that they can play them off one another to their favor generally, but not lose in serving their interests, either way - irrespective of who wins an election, e.g., Trump or Clinton).

Mother (Money: finance, perhaps the mother of all capacity to buy people off in a desperate, neo-liberal, no account anti-ethnonationalist union system - whether buying off right wingers and having them oppose White unions and other anti-Jewish supremacist unions in coalitions, or funding anti-White coalitions straight out; financing unprofitable but psychologically destructive anti-racist/race mixing media; or to fund law careers and coerce political careers to change the laws, as in the case of “disparate impact”) ...etc. anywhere where there are poor, desperate people, perhaps threatened with loss of livelihood, property, freedom and life, they might easily be bought off as opposed to taking the side of their own whose patterned merits are jaded, dubious - made basely selfish and unsympathetic for the decades, and centuries even, of liberal and right wing destruction, for absence a true moral order in service of their homeostatic systemic interests, their accountable, participatory place therein).

Money

In finance, the boom-bust cycle they’ve marshaled with “democratic socialist outreach” - like Fannie Mae (low interest, risky loans required to be given to blacks; while investment mediums of “guaranteed insurance of these loans” were sold on top of them!)/ followed by “objectivist austerity” through Reagan, Thatcher and following through the 2008 bail-out (the biggest theft in history), getting behind coalitions with right wing, recently “alt-right” propaganda against “the left” - which might otherwise ensconce consciousness to see them in their power niches, and provide for activism against them, to marshal social organizational power to do something about their niche occupation and its abuse.

Related Story: Orthodox Jewish boys go secular, reap compound fortune in another Jewish tradition - loan sharking.

Academics

Always (Academics: as (((Frame Games))) has acknowledged and my experience bears-out, the YKW are always determined to have hegemony in academics, since that’s where top-down power and influence is established; as demonstrated through their nepotistic, unmerited hegemony at Harvard and other Ivy league colleges. The Ivy league colleges are the gate way to the professions, political and public influence. The big academic business of selling talk to undergraduates is a way to connect empathically with youthful anxieties and aspirations, to direct them by selling them on talk that serves YKW interests, creating phony “movements” and ‘rebellions”, “social justice activism” (if only against Whites) that they can be a part of…

Business

Buys (Business, international and domestic - in this part of the cycle, securing US real estate with Russian (((mafia))) money bailing out Trump’s domestic assets and helping him to advance to the presidency. US domestic (((business))) has emerged as a “concern” to bolster (((conservative))) backing of Trump in order to garner bible belt, evangelical sympathy for the Zionist agenda and its operation clean break implementation in Iran) ... Plenty of other shady (((business))), ranging from H1b Visas, cheap business loans for Indians to buy-up convenience stores and motels, in order to gain Indian connection and cooperation ...then there is the off-shore money laundering schemes through shell companies revealed in the Panama Papers, etc.

Related Story: The Sackler Family, Pushers of Opioids, profiteers on created addiction in vulnerable peoples.

Related story: 3 of Them Defraud London Olympics Investors of £80 million.

Attorneys

Law & Courts

Courtly Assistance (Courts and Attorneys - to influence law and its implementation, as in the example of “Brown vs.Board of Education”, “Disparate Impact”, the “Civil Rights Act”, the “Rumford Fair Housing Act”). Even Trump had his kosher legal mentorship and advocacy against “the” left, in the person of attorney Roy Cohn.

So where do NGO’s - like The Jewish Community Relationship Council - and Unions (including make shift “unions”/ and coalitions thereof) - fit in? hmmm ...we’re going to have to add that in; should have long ago:

NGO’s

Coalitions anti-White: King and Levison, N.A.A.C.P.

Negotiate Good Organized (NG0’s)

Union Coalitions (Social group organizations - literal or make shift unions and coalitions thereof - liberal social groups, liberal in the sense of denying and scabbing White social unionization. These are social communitarian groups primarily devised by Jewish interests in coalition building of anti-White organization).

Unions

“Norman Finkelstein: Outrage over Israeli Massacre Shows Power of Nonviolent Palestinian Resistance”

Democracy Now!, 16 May 2018:

The United States is refusing to criticize Israel after Israeli forces shot dead at least 61 unarmed Palestinian protesters taking part in the Great March of Return in Gaza Monday, May 14th. More than 2,700 Palestinians were injured. At the United Nations, U.S. Ambassador Nikki Haley has blocked a call for an international investigation into Israel’s actions. On Tuesday, she repeatedly blamed the violence on Hamas while praising Israel for showing restraint. During her remarks, Nikki Haley refused to place any blame on Israel. She later walked out of the Security Council chamber when the Palestinian ambassador to the U.N., Riyad Mansour, addressed the council. Since Palestinian protests began on March 30, Israel forces have killed at least 112 Palestinians and injured more than 12,000. On Tuesday, the chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court said she was closely following the situation in Gaza and would “take any action warranted” to prosecute crimes. Meanwhile, the UN human rights office has condemned the “appalling deadly violence” by Israeli security forces in Gaza. For more, we speak with Norman Finkelstein, author and scholar whose most recent book is titled “Gaza: An Inquest into Its Martyrdom.”

Norman Finkelstein:

“The world is expressing outrage because the protest was non-violent and Israel had no pretext to justify its attacks.”

   
U.S. Ambassador to The UN, Nikki Haley, praised Israel for showing restraint.


UN human rights spokesperson Rupert Colville:

“Lethal force may only be used as a measure of last, not a first resort, and only when there is an immediate threat to life or serious injury. An attempt to approach, or crossing, or damaging the “green line” fence do not amount to a threat to life or serous injury and are not sufficient grounds for the use of live ammunition.”

It’s clear that (((Frame Games))), an (((interloper))) on White advocacy, is playing a (((frame game))) in which he is trying to say that Jewish abuse of “social sciences” (viz., against Whites) is an inherent problem of these disciplines (and the answer is right wing scientism against this social “left”) when in fact the problem is not inherent in these disciplines, the problem is inherent in the Jewish abuse of these disciplines. This disingenuous angle that he is taking in order to encourage right wing reaction and identity among Whites follows my hypothesis of what the YKW are trying to do - make “the left”, i.e. a proper sense of social unionization/organization of non Jewish groups, particularly Whites, against them, into “the problem”, the “enemy” - now that they have hegemony in the 8 power niches:

1) Money 2) Religion 3) Academia 4) Media (mutating into control of internet choke points and additional tech interactive control) 5) Business/international business 6) Politics 7) Law & Courts [* add NGO’s and perhaps military tech and cyberwarfare] adding: 8) Organized Crime.

That is, they don’t want you to do any of that lefty social organizing and unionizing now that they are on top; they don’t want you to realize that that lefty organizing of their group interests was largely how they attained hegemonic power - they want you to believe that lefty organizing is your problem; that they got to where they are through objective right wing merit, through pure objective science - lol.

Anti-Racism is anti-social classification (unionization being one form thereof, ehtno-nationalism another, and these forms can overlap), it is Cartesian, it is not innocent, it is hurting and it is killing people.

It blocks accountability to social historical capital and the social systemic patterns of human ecology.

Right wingers are usually reacting to a system - and people - that they don’t want to be a part of; often quite rightly so.

In the case of Jews, however, their right wing advocacy is motivated by not wanting You goyim to be a part of a coherent, unionized social system.

Nevertheless, Frame Games is assimilating some of the better talking points and concerns of White advocacy; and in his attempt to ingratiate himself to White right wing reaction, he is providing some insights that we can use; such as this horror:

Frame Games: (In the Jewish academic world he came into) “I was encouraged to put the threatening line of inquiry, my love of science and biology aside and to study law instead.

But one of the things that first shocked me on my red pill journey was a class in Constitutional Law. I thought I’d left biology behind…

Then we got to the section on the 1964 Civil Rights Act...

And how THE EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE has been re-interpreted away from equal to where any White over representation is considered prima facie evidence of racial discrimination.

A lot of people think of affirmative action being the exception to the equal protection clause…. if you only knew how deep it goes…

Are you guys familiar with “disparate impact”? .....a legal doctrine

“Disparate Impact is probably the most evil and disgusting piece of distoriionary nuclear fall-out in American jurisprudence.

What it says is that:

If there are racially neutral laws on the books or racially neutral practices at any corporation or government agency, if they have the effect of creating disparate impact on different groups - that is, if there are racial differences that emerge even where they are racially neutral by law, by practice, by custom, then it is presumed as prima facie evidence of racial discrimination and allows anybody to launch a civil rights law-suit against you with TREBLE -

A law suit against you with Treble damages - that means three times damages from whatever you suffered.

So, Disparate Impact means that no matter what you do, if you are a company, you are a solo practitioner, if you are a government agency, no matter what you do, if racial differences emerge you are liable unless you can prove, that is, the burden of proof is on you to show that you are PROACTIVELY DISCRIMINATING (for blacks/browns and against Whites, against Asians too, really, as they have to score 400 points higher than blacks on SAT’s to get the same university slots).

This is a common law doctrine.”

Ellen Brown on rising interest %

OpEdNews, “Fox in the Hen House: Why Interest Rates Are Rising”, 23 April 2018:

On March 31st the Federal Reserve raised its benchmark interest rate for the sixth time in three years and signaled its intention to raise rates twice more in 2018, aiming for a fed funds target of 3.5% by 2020. LIBOR (the London Interbank Offered Rate) has risen even faster than the fed funds rate, up to 2.3% from just 0.3% 2-1/2 years ago. LIBOR is set in London by private agreement of the biggest banks, and the interest on $3.5 trillion globally is linked to it, including $1.2 trillion in consumer mortgages.

Alarmed commentators warn that global debt levels have reached $233 trillion, more than three times global GDP; and that much of that debt is at variable rates pegged either to the Fed’s interbank lending rate or to LIBOR. Raising rates further could push governments, businesses and homeowners over the edge. In its Global Financial Stability report in April 2017, the International Moneteray Fund warned projected interest rises could throw 22% of US corporations into default.

Then there is the US federal debt, which has more than doubled since the 2008 financial crisis, shooting up from $9.4 trillion in mid-2008 to over $21 trillion in April 2018. Adding to that debt burden, the Fed has announced that it will be dumping its government bonds acquired through quantitative easing at the rate of $600 billion annually. It will sell $2.7 trillion in federal securities at the rate of $50 billion monthly beginning in October. Along with a government budget deficit of $1.2 trillion, that’s nearly $2 trillion in new government debt that will need financing annually.

If the Fed follows through with its plans, projections are that by 2027, US taxpayers will owe $1 trillion annually just in interest on the federal debt. That is enough to fund President Trump’s original trillion dollar infrastructure plan every year. And it is a direct transfer of wealth from the middle class to the wealthy investors holding most of the bonds. Where will this money come from? Even crippling taxes, wholesale privatization of public assets, and elimination of social services will not cover the bill.

With so much at stake, why is the Fed increasing interest rates and adding to government debt levels? Its proffered justifications don’t pass the smell test.

“Faith-Based” Monetary Policy

In setting interest rates, the Fed relies on a policy tool called the “Phillips curve,” which allegedly shows that as the economy nears full employment, prices rise. The presumption is that workers with good job prospects will demand higher wages, driving prices up. But the Phillips curve has proven virtually useless in predicting inflation, according to the Fed’s own data. Former Fed Chairman Janet Yellen has admitted that the data fails to support the thesis, and so has Fed Governor Lael Brainard. Minneapolis Fed President Neel Kashkari calls the continued reliance on the Phillips curve “faith-based” monetary policy. But the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC), which sets monetary policy, is undeterred.

“Full employment” is considered to be 4.7% unemployment. When unemployment drops below that, alarm bells sound and the Fed marches into action. The official unemployment figure ignores the great mass of discouraged unemployed who are no longer looking for work, and it includes people working part-time or well below capacity. But the Fed follows models and numbers, and as of April 2018, the official unemployment rate had dropped to 4.3%. Based on its Phillips curve projections, the FOMC is therefore taking steps to aggressively tighten the money supply.

The notion that shrinking the money supply will prevent inflation is based on another controversial model, the monetarist dictum that “inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon”: inflation is always caused by “too much money chasing too few goods.” That can happen, and it is called “demand-pull” inflation. But much more common historically is “cost-push” inflation: prices go up because producers’ costs go up. And a major producer cost is the cost of borrowing money. Merchants and manufacturers must borrow in order to pay wages before their products are sold, to build factories, buy equipment and expand. Rather than lowering price inflation, the predictable result of increased interest rates will be to drive consumer prices up, slowing markets and increasing unemployment—another Great Recession. Increasing interest rates is supposed to cool an “overheated” economy by slowing loan growth, but lending is not growing today. Economist Steve Keen has shown that at about 150% private debt to GDP, countries and their populations do not take on more debt. Rather, they pay down their debts, contracting the money supply; and that is where we are now.

The Fed’s reliance on the Phillips curve does not withstand scrutiny. But rather than abandoning the model, the Fed cites “transitory factors” to explain away inconsistencies in the data. In a December 2017 article in The Hill, Tate Lacey observed that the Fed has been using this excuse ever since 2012, citing one “transitory factor” after another, from temporary movements in oil prices, to declining import prices and dollar strength, to falling energy prices, to changes in wireless plans and prescription drugs. The excuse is wearing thin.

The Fed also claims that the effects of its monetary policies lag behind the reported data, making the current rate hikes necessary to prevent problems in the future. But as Lacey observes, GDP is not a lagging indicator, and it shows that the Fed’s policy is failing. Over the last two years, leading up to and continuing through the Fed’s tightening cycle, nominal GDP growth averaged just over 3%; while in the two prior years, nominal GDP grew at more than 4%. Thus “the most reliable indicator of the stance of monetary policy, nominal GDP, is already showing the contractionary impact of the Fed’s policy decisions,” says Lacey, “signaling that its plan will result in further monetary tightening, or worse, even recession.”

Follow the Money

If the Phillips curve, the inflation rate and loan growth don’t explain the push for higher interest rates, what does? The answer was suggested in an April 12th Bloomberg article by Yalman Onaran, titled “Surging LIBOR, Once a Red Flag, Is Now a Cash Machine for Banks.” He wrote:

“The largest U.S. lenders could each make at least $1 billion in additional pretax profit in 2018 from a jump in the London interbank offered rate for dollars, based on data disclosed by the companies. That’s because customers who take out loans are forced to pay more as Libor rises while the banks’ own cost of credit has mostly held steady.”

During the 2008 crisis, high LIBOR rates meant capital markets were frozen, since the banks’ borrowing rates were too high for them to turn a profit. But US banks are not dependent on the short-term overseas markets the way they were a decade ago. They are funding much of their operations through deposits, and the average rate paid by the largest US banks on their deposits climbed only about 0.1% last year, despite a 0.75% rise in the fed funds rate. Most banks don’t reveal how much of their lending is at variable rates or is indexed to LIBOR, but Oneran comments:

JPMorgan Chase & Co., the biggest U.S. bank, said in its 2017 annual report that $122 billion of wholesale loans were at variable rates. Assuming those were all indexed to Libor, the 1.19 percentage-point increase in the rate in the past year would mean $1.45 billion in additional income.

Raising the fed funds rate can be the same sort of cash cow for US banks. According to a December 2016 Wall Street Journal article titled “Banks’ Interest-Rate Dreams Coming True”:

“While struggling with ultralow interest rates, major banks have also been publishing regular updates on how well they would do if interest rates suddenly surged upward… Bank of America ... says a 1-percentage-point rise in short-term rates would add $3.29 billion. . . . [A] back-of-the-envelope calculation suggests an incremental $2.9 billion of extra pretax income in 2017, or 11.5% of the bank’s expected 2016 pretax profit ...”

As observed in an April 12 article on Seeking Alpha:

“About half of mortgages are ... adjusting rate mortgages [ARMs] with trigger points that allow for automatic rate increases, often at much more than the official rate rise. ...

“One can see why the financial sector is keen for rate rises as they have mined the economy with exploding rate loans and need the consumer to get caught in the minefield.

“Even a modest rise in interest rates will send large flows of money to the banking sector. This will be cost-push inflationary as finance is a part of almost everything we do, and the cost of business and living will rise because of it for no gain.”

Cost-push inflation will drive up the Consumer Price Index, ostensibly justifying further increases in the interest rate, in a self-fulfilling prophecy in which the FOMC will say, “We tried—we just couldn’t keep up with the CPI.”

A Closer Look at the FOMC

The FOMC is composed of the Federal Reserve’s seven-member Board of Governors, the president of the New York Fed, and four presidents from the other 11 Federal Reserve Banks on a rotating basis. All 12 Federal Reserve Banks are corporations, the stock of which is 100% owned by the banks in their districts; and New York is the district of Wall Street. The Board of Governors currently has four vacancies, leaving the member banks in majority control of the FOMC. Wall Street calls the shots; and Wall Street stands to make a bundle off rising interest rates.

The Federal Reserve calls itself “independent,” but it is independent only of government. It marches to the drums of the banks that are its private owners. To prevent another Great Recession or Great Depression, Congress needs to amend the Federal Reserve Act, nationalize the Fed, and turn it into a public utility, one that is responsive to the needs of the public and the economy.

This article was originally published on Truthdig.com

Scooter Libby with Paul Wolfowitz in 2008

- Observes Majorityrights correspondent, Kumiko.

It waves a giant red flag as to how much Trump is down with the Zionist agenda.

Who even needed 9-11 when you had Scooter Libby!

When you have insiders like that to manipulate the evidence to create false warrant on behalf of Zionist Operation Clean Break, you don’t need massive false flag events.

Some background: from her comment #22, 23 January 2017 at 03:33, MR article, “Next-Level TRS” -

A key moment

In fact, if you look at the PBS piece titled “A Secret History of ISIS”, they actually reveal the precise moment at which Israel injected itself into the decision-making process in the lead up to the Iraq War in 2003, and thus shaped the outcome to their advantage.

From 11min 40sec onward in that video, the transcript:

COLIN POWELL: The speech, supposedly, had been prepared in the White House and in the NSC. But when we were given what had been prepared, it was totally inadequate and we couldn’t track anything in it. And when I asked Condi Rice, the National Security Advisor, “Where did this come from?”, it turns out the Vice-President’s office had written it.

NARRATOR: Powell would turn to the CIA to vet the speech.

NADA BAKOS: We [the CIA] had a copy of the speech that was sent over from the White House that Powell was preparing, and one of our senior analysts was working on it, editing, working on the language to ensure that it reflected our analysis.

NARRATOR: Just days later, Powell arrived at the United Nations.

POWELL: Walking into that room is always a daunting experience, but I had been there before. And we had projectors and all sorts of technology to help us make the case.

KAREN DEYOUNG: Powell was very nervous. Powell doesn’t like to read speeches; he likes to have a few note cards and then do his Powell thing. But this one he read from the text, every word.

NARRATOR: At the Counterterrorism Centre, Bakos was watching carefully to see what Powell would say about Zarqawi, bin Laden, and Saddam Hussein.

BAKOS: We’re sitting in our room at CTC watching the television with a copy of the speech in our hand. When he got to our portion, it went off our script fairly quickly. And we were looking around at each other saying, “Where’s he at, where’s he at?” We’re flipping through pages. And so, you know, right away, we could tell that this wasn’t reflecting the language that we had used.

NARRATOR: Powell used Zarqawi to make the connection between bin Laden and Saddam Hussein.

BAKOS: It drew conclusions in language that we would not use. So we were very, very, very careful about describing the relationship as we saw it, and it seemed to overinflate and not reflect our analysis.

INTERVIEWER: How did that happen, Nada?

BAKOS: Within the process of how it went, you know, where it went back to the White House and who worked on it after that, I don’t know how it was changed, or by who.

If anyone should want to know what happened at that crucial point, and how, the place to look would be at the office of the Chief of the Staff to the Vice President of the United States, who at the time was Scooter Libby.

If you understand that Scooter Libby was to Dick Cheney as Dick Cheney was to George W. Bush, then suddenly you become capable of seeing how it could be possible for the changes that Bakos is referring to, to have been made in the Vice-President’s office by Scooter Libby and his network of very Zionist associates.

In summary

There is no need for any kind of 9/11 conspiracy theory to explain what happened in Iraq.

The explanation has been right in front of everyone’s face from day one. The office of the Chief of the Staff to the Vice President of the United States was compromised by Israel, and as such, all decision-making processes that flowed through there were subject to having Israeli policy preferences injected into them.

It is not the only node that was compromised, but it is the most pivotal and significant one in this situation. I hope that clears up all possible questions and that everyone can draw a line under that issue and call it a closed case now.

Now for the BBC article:

BBC, “Scooter Libby: Trump pardons Cheney aide who leaked”, 13 April 2018:

US President Donald Trump has pardoned former Vice-President Dick Cheney’s chief of staff, who was convicted of lying about leaks to the media.

Lewis Libby, known as Scooter, was found guilty in 2007 following an investigation into the unauthorised disclosure of a CIA agent’s identity.

The White House said Libby was “fully worthy of this pardon”.

“I don’t know Mr Libby,” said Mr Trump, “but for years I have heard that he has been treated unfairly.

“Hopefully, this full pardon will help rectify a very sad portion of his life.”

What’s the background to the case?

Libby was found guilty of perjury, obstruction of justice, and making false statements following an investigation into a leak that revealed the name of CIA agent Valerie Plame.

His trial heard that Bush administration officials wanted to get back at Ms Plame’s husband, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson.

Mr Wilson had written a 2003 New York Times op-ed accusing Mr Cheney of doctoring pre-war intelligence on Iraq.

Libby was charged with lying to investigators about his contacts with reporters, but he maintained he simply misremembered the sequence of events.

He was sentenced to 30 months in prison and fined $250,000 (£175,000).

But his sentence was commuted by then-President George W Bush.

What’s the reaction?

In an interview on Friday with MSNBC, Ms Plame condemned Mr Trump’s decision to pardon Libby.

“My personal sense is that I didn’t think my contempt for Donald Trump could go lower, but he surprises me each and every day,” she said.

“It’s very clear that this is a message he is sending, that you can commit crimes against national security and you will be pardoned,” she added.

Ms Plame has previously said her career as a CIA agent was finished “in an instant” once her identity was leaked.

She told the BBC in 2007 that “treason” had been committed in pursuit of political retribution.

Mr Cheney told the New York Times Mr Libby is “one of the most capable, principled and honourable men I have ever known.

“He is innocent and he and his family have suffered for years because of his wrongful conviction. I am gratedful that President Trump righted this wrong…”

On Friday, Democrats charged Mr Trump with hypocrisy for pardoning a man who leaked to the media, despite the president’s condemnation of such disclosures in his White House.

Mr Trump’s decision came on the same day that he savaged former FBI Director James Comey as a “proven LEAKER & LIAR”.

Democratic Congressman Adam Schiff tweeted: “This is the President’s way of sending a message to those implicated in the Russia investigation: You have my back and I’ll have yours.”

What was Libby case’s political fallout?

Mr Cheney had pressured Mr Bush to pardon Libby in the final days of his presidency.

But Mr Cheney’s badgering reached the point where Mr Bush reportedly told his aides his vice-president was beginning to annoy him.

After consulting White House lawyers, Mr Bush decided it was best not to issue a pardon.

When he finally told Mr Cheney about his decision, Mr Cheney snapped at him, saying: “You are leaving a good man wounded on the field of battle.”

“The comment stung,” Mr Bush would write in his memoirs.

“In eight years, I had never seen Dick like this, or even close to this.

“I worried that the friendship we had built was about to be severely strained, at best.”

Key players in the 2007 CIA leak probe

What is a presidential pardon?

Libby’s pardon amounts to official forgiveness for his crime, but does not equate to exoneration or finding that he was innocent.

Presidential pardons can overturn consequences of a conviction such as being denied the right to carry out jury service, vote or run for political office.

Since the conviction, Libby has already had his law license reinstated.

And former Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell restored his voting rights in 2013.

This is the third time Mr Trump has issued a pardon.

In August last year, he did so for former Arizona sheriff Joe Arpaio, who was convicted of criminal contempt over his crackdown on undocumented immigrants.

Last month he pardoned Kristian Saucier, a Navy sailor who took photos of classified areas inside a US submarine and served a year in federal prison.

Kumiko adds:  Last night’s strike was not what they wanted.

John Bolton and some middle eastern leaders are laying the metapolitical backdrop for that - they wanted a broad and longer engagement. .

Instead, they got a limited strike because the US Defence Dept prevented anything bigger.

Trump was upset but went with what he could do.

(Trump was wanting something bigger too)

Though Vice is a liberal program and they do their critical best to undermine Orban, this episode inadvertently illustrates the popularity of Orban and his ethnonationalist cause - encouraging:

Zuckerberg “concedes” by increasing ZOG’s global influence - viz. in Asia - by cracking down on use of social media - viz. Facebook - by opponents of its Abrahamic footsoldiers (Islam) in Myanmar

Reuters, “Facebook’s Zuckerberg vows to work harder to block hate speech in Myanmar”, 11 April 2018:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Facebook Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg said on Tuesday his company would step up efforts to block hate messages in Myanmar as he faced questioning by the U.S. Congress about electoral interference and hate speech on the platform.

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg testifies before a joint Senate Judiciary and Commerce Committees hearing regarding the company’s use and protection of user data, on Capitol Hill in Washington, U.S., April 10, 2018. REUTERS/Aaron P. Bernstein

Facebook has been accused by human rights advocates of not doing enough to weed out hate messages on its social-media network in Myanmar, where it is a dominant communications system.

“What’s happening in Myanmar is a terrible tragedy, and we need to do more,” Zuckerberg said during a 5-hour joint hearing of the Senate Commerce Committee and Senate Judiciary Committee.

More than 650,000 Rohingya Muslims have fled Myanmar’s Rakhine state into Bangladesh since insurgent attacks sparked a security crackdown last August.

United Nations officials investigating a possible genocide in Myanmar said last month that Facebook had been a source of anti-Rohingya propaganda.

Marzuki Darusman, chairman of the U.N. Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on Myanmar, said in March that social media had played a “determining role” in Myanmar.

“It has ... substantively contributed to the level of acrimony and dissension and conflict ... within the public. Hate speech is certainly of course a part of that. As far as the Myanmar situation is concerned, social media is Facebook, and Facebook is social media,” he said.

Zuckerberg said Facebook was hiring dozens more Burmese-language speakers to remove threatening content.

“It’s hard to do it without people who speak the local language, and we need to ramp up our effort there dramatically,” he said, adding that Facebook was also asking civil society groups to help it identify figures who should be banned from the network.

He said a Facebook team would also make undisclosed product changes in Myanmar and other countries where ethnic violence was a problem.

Reporting by Andy Sullivan Edited by Damon Darlin

Our Standards:The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Related Stories:

“Hindu women forced to convert to Islam while mass graves of their Hindu men discovered in Rakhine”

“Miss Grand Myanmar”, Shwe Eain Si, stripped of her title for telling truth about crisis in Rakhine”

“Ignore liberal media’s call for compassion: Islam is conquest or lies in pretense of negotiation”

“Islam’s Imposition Upon Malaysia Comes Into Focus Through Conflict With Myanmar, Buddhists”