If the British Parliament is Hung, Then the Bitch Steps Center Stage

March 1, 2010 (LPAC)—It is increasingly likely, given that the Tory lead over Labour has slipped to only 5-6 percent (or less) in the polls, that there will be a hung Parliament in the next election, where neither party has a majority of seats to govern. If that occurs (the last time was 1974), then the Bitch steps center stage and becomes a major factor in making a new Prime Minister.

Already, the "golden triangle" of Britain's most senior civil servants and courtiers is meeting to prepare a dossier of advice to the Queen on what steps she might consider. Sir Gus O'Donnell, the cabinet secretary, has distributed secret memos compiled by the Prime Minister's private secretary in March, 1974, Robert Armstrong, as a guide for discussion by the "golden triangle." The memos are also being avidly studied at No. 10 Downing Street.

The memos make clear that in the event of a hung Parliament today, the following possibilities exist:

1) Labour Prime Minister Gordon Brown would be able to remain Prime Minister if the Tories won but failed to secure a majority, while Brown attempts to form a coalition with the Liberal Democrats. However, the Liberal Democrats have indicated that they do not want to form a coalition government with either the Tories or Labour. In this case, the Queen would not have to do anything more, but wait for Brown's resignation.

2) The Bitch could call on someone other than Brown or Tory Party leader David Cameron to form a government. This is seen in No. 10 as "the Miliband option," referring to the selection of Foreign Secretary David Miliband, whom the party considers the successor to Brown. However, this possibility is remote, because the Liberal Democrats would be no more likely to form a coalition with Miliband, than with Brown.

3) The Bitch could refuse to dissolve the Parliament, even if Brown requested that she do so. The Bitch would then, after a short period, call for new elections.

All this and more is under consideration by the "golden circle" advising the Bitch, who has already appointed two Prime Ministers, early in her reign.

LaRouche: The Only Option is Obama's Removal From Office

February 24, 2010 (LPAC)—Lyndon LaRouche today made some very pointed comments about the strategic situation, including the Haitian crisis. His essential message: We must get rid of Obama now! He must be forced into early retirement—very quickly. It is because of Obama that the United States is wallowing in excuses, as to why it is not possible to undertake the emergency evacuation of over a million of Haitians who are otherwise facing devastation in just a matter of weeks. It is no excuse that the Army Corps of Engineers has been gutted. You don't wait for some future opportunity to rebuild the Corps. You rebuild by doing the Haiti mission. Massive action is required, and Obama is the biggest single obstacle to that kind of action.

LaRouche elaborated: It is not difficult to make Obama quit. Play on his psychology. If you have enough serious patriots around, you can force him to leave. The bottom line is: There are no "easy" alternatives. There are no other options. The problem is President Obama. Haiti's people are facing Hell on Earth, and there is no chance of improving their prospects for survival, so long as Obama is in office.

The question to be posed, publicly, is: How many Haitians are going to have to die before it becomes obvious that Obama must be either impeached or forced to resign, under threat of impeachment? Until you get that dramatic shift, at the top, in the United States, there is no chance to save Haiti—or anyone else, for that matter. Make this a public issue. It will resonate with the population, which is already disgusted with Obama, after just a little over a year in office.

The other big problem with which we are dealing is the British Crown, which is very much tied to the Obama problem. In the same way that the Obama problem is a problem of the British Crown, the same is true in Russia, where you have Kudrin, who is part of the British oligarchical system. More than Kudrin, you have Gorbachov, who is a really nasty, hardcore British agent. We know the Gorbachov case, directly, from the Strategic Defense Initiative. Today, still, the seminal issue for Russia is the SDI issue, and nothing else. Putin's own greatest blunder was in downgrading the role of the Russian Academy of Science. Yes, there were problems there, including a great deal of wasted effort. But rather than cleaning up those secondary problems, Putin effectively abandoned the Academy.

LaRouche also warned that the Obama problem has a great impact inside Russia. Russia won't operate until Obama is gone.

Everywhere you look, from continental Europe to Brazil, where the country is being looted through the carry trade swindle, the British are desperately grabbing any resources they can get their hands on. The system is dead, beyond any prospect of repair. The British are delusional. What they stubbornly refuse to face is the fact that, in an existential crisis, people blow their stacks and don't act rationally. If they think they can "manage" the consequences of their carry trade looting, whether in Greece, or Brazil, or Spain, or Ireland, they are sorely mistaken.

So the key is: Obama must go now. If Obama stays in office because some people want to compromise, the world is gone. We plunge into a new dark age or worse. There is no room to play games. It's ipeachment or forced resignation, under threat of impeachment. Nothing else works.

Pearl Harbor has already struck, buddy! You can no longer wait around for a better option.

Parasite Says California Greater Threat than Greece

March 1, 2010 (LPAC)—Jamie Dimon, the parasite who heads the JP Morgan Chase looting apparatus, told his underlings at their recent annual meeting that "investors" should be more worried about the risk of default of the state of California than of Greece's current debt woes. "There could be a contagion" if a state the size of California has problems making debt payments, he said, reports the Feb. 26 London Telegraph.

Displaying his keen sense of finance, Dimon said that his and other U.S. financial institutions are largely immune to the European debt crisis. California poses more of a risk, he said, because of its $20 billion budget deficit—which Nazi Schwarzenegger is trying to reduce by coming up with more ways to kill greater numbers of the state's population.

Last week, John Chiang, the state's controller, said that if a workable plan to reduce the deficit and increase cash levels is not reached soon, he will have to return to issuing IOUs. Last summer, California issued $3 billion in IOUs to creditors, including residents owed tax refunds. "I can't write checks without money; that's against the law. My main goal is to keep the state afloat, but I won't be able to do it without the help of new legislation," said Chiang.

Rothschild-Funded Cultural Warfare Pits Israelis vs. Palestinians

February 29, 2010 (LPAC)—At a special meeting of the Israeli Cabinet last Sunday (Feb. 21) at Hi Tal. the minutes show that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu took the occasion to announce a special Heritage Project, and he asked the Cabinet members to thank the Rothschild Foundation of Israel for putting up the seed money. Netanyahu went on to announce that his government would put up NIS400 shekels for a Israeli Heritage Prject, where Israeli tourists could follow two roads to 150 refurbished Jewish and Zionist historic sites, thus shaping the idea that Israel was a state for the Jewish people. Among the sites Netanyahu mentioned were Zionist leader Joseph Trumpledor's home, and the building on Rothschild Boulevard, where the existence of the state of Israel was first announed by David Ben-Gurion.

No sooner had the Heritage Project been announced than the settlers' movement asked Netanyahu, who readily acquiesced, to include Hebron's Tomb of the Patriarchs and Rachel's Tomb in the Heritage Project. The only problem is that these two sites are on the West Bank territory under semi-autonomous control of the Palestinian Authority. On Feb. 24, the Israeli press banner headlines calls for an renewed Intifada from unknown Palestinians facing the prospect of right-wing Zionists descending on the West Bank sites, just as Gen. Ariel Sharon's visit to the Temple Mount in Jerusalem triggered the second Intifada in September 2000.

At this time it is not known whether P.N.A. President Abu Abbas (Abu Mazen) wants an Intifada, because there is nothing Netanyahu would like more to take the international pressure off concessions for the start of serious negotiations for a two-state solution.

The Money Masters

The Money Masters - Part 1 of 2 The Money Masters the documentary discuss the topics of money (as it relates to central banking and, fractional reserve banking), debt, taxes and their development throughout the modern world. [edit] Private central banking and fractional reserve banking The documentary criticises the control aspects of modern centralized banking systems and regulation. The film uses as evidence the history of money and banking, showing the viewer how central banks came to be what they are today, and how they operate. It supports its assertions by references and quotations from past Presidents and major players in the banking industry. [edit] Media control The film contends that by the end of World War I private central banks owned and controlled much of America's large media, paper and film outlets, and that they achieved this through the large consolidation of wealth generated by Fractional-reserve banking and later a fractional based finance system. The film contends this alleged near-monopoly of the financial system goes largely unnoticed or redacted from the human history because of the control of human information exchange through this mainstream media ownership. [edit] Tax The film touches briefly on the U.S. Federal income tax. See also Tax protester constitutional arguments. [edit] Monetary Reform Act By way of conclusion, the film presents an option for a different kind of monetary policy for the United States of America

THE REAL EDUCATION IN ECONOMY AND MONETARY SYSTEM.

Google Video Part 1 and 2 

GOOGLE KNOL

Economic Shock to Students: Cancellation of Credit Cards

February 28, 2010 (LPAC)—As of February 22nd, the so-called credit card industry "reform act" went into effect, and students will be among the hardest hit. As of last Tuesday, Feb. 23, banks and credit card companies were sending out notices of cancellation and reduction of credit lines. College students will no longer benefit from their parents' credit ratings, and will therefore be hit with wholesale cancellations of credit. The credit card reform bill, which was passed last Spring, will now require students to either have enough income to show that they can repay credit cards themselves, or have a parent or guardian co-sign the credit line.

According to one senior Democratic Party source, many blue-collar families rely on these credit lines to enable their kids to attend college and the impact is going to be felt immediately. This will clearly be one of the factors feeding into the protests that have already hit college campuses in California because of education budget cuts, and will soon spread around the country.

As of 2009, more than one-third of students put their college tuition on credit cards, according to a survey by Sallie Mae, the largest originator of federally insured student loans in the country; this is up from 24% of students in 2004. In addition, Sallie Mae also found that more than 50% of students have four of more credit cards, with an average balance of $3,173, which is an all-time record. The situation is even worse this year with millions more jobs lost since Obama took office. The bottom line is that students in the lower 80 percent income brackets use their credit cards to buy food, books, pay rent and other necessities, including tuition.

It is not surpising that recent polls show that 51% of people under the age of 29 who voted overwhelmingly for Obama (79%) in 2008, said they won't do that again.

Pound Sterling Is a "Basket Case"

February 27, 2010 (LPAC)—Jim Rogers, the former partner of Her Majesty's private speculator George Soros, told the Guardian that the pound sterling is a "basket case" of world currencies. "Other currencies aren't strong and the euro has real problems, with cracks much wider than Greece beginning to show," Rogers said, "but it's the pound that's most vulnerable. In real terms, it's already devalued against virtually every currency barring the Zimbabwe dollar and it's especially exposed over the weeks running up to the U.K. election. In a basket of currencies, the pound is potentially a basket case. That will put Britain in an extremely bad position."

The pound fell two cents to the dollar to an 9-month low. It also fell against the euro and yen.

Rogers has in the past warned that nitroglycerin can be found under British treasury bonds. Most of that refers to the mountain of bad debt it is holding, of the banks it has bailed out. One of these is Lloyds Bank, which announced a £6.3 billion loss for 2009, which follows a loss of £6.7 billion loss in 2008. It suffered "impairments" (bad loans) of £24 billion. The bank is 41.3% owned by the government. This follows a reported loss by the Royal Bank of Scotland—now 84% owned by the government—of £3.6 billion.

Much of this bad debt is from the British housing bubble, which began to collapse two years ago. The slight increase in prices over the last months is proving to have been a dead cat bounce. Housing prices dropped by 1% during February for the first time in 10 months, following a downturn in home sales by 8%.

Haitians Being Sent Back to Die in Rubble, Because of Obama

February 27, 2010 (LPAC)—Because of President Obama's firm "no" to the proposal that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers should undertake an immediate, emergency relocation of some one million Haitians now living in hundreds of unsanitary makeshift camps, into more elevated areas of Haiti before the rainy season arrives in April, the Haitian government and relief agencies have adopted an unworkable policy: tell people in the Port au Prince camps to pick up their bedsheets, plastic sheeting, or (for the lucky) their tents and tarps, and go set them up in the rubble-covered neighborhoods which they fled.

With rain falling last night (sending sewage streaming down streets and camps), and Haiti's first big rainstorm since the earthquake forecast for this weekend, pressure is building to "do something" about the camps. Associated Press reports that relief officials are "delaying plans to build big refugee camps outside the capital," focusing instead on this return-to-neighborhood strategy, what Mark Turner, spokesman for the International Organization for Migration (IOM) which plays a leading role in camp policy, called "the big new strategy."

Gerald-Emile Brun, an architect with the government's reconstruction committee summed up the implications of this strategy to AP bluntly: "Everything has to be done before the start of the rainy season, and we will not be able to do it."

Residents of the 20,000 or so person Champs de Mar camp are being registered as a pilot project for the "return to nothing" strategy, because 45% of its residents came from one neighborhood (Turgeau). Yet, according to U.S. Air Force Lt. Col. John Blackwell, who is involved in coordinating the plan, engineers have evaluated only 25% of that neighborhood as to which houses are safe for return, and which have to be razed, where it is proposed that smaller camps of 50 or 100 tents can be set up. Blackwell estimates it will take at least until late March to sufficiently clear enough rubble to enable resettlement of merely that one camp—yet aftershocks of significant magnitude continue knocking down pieces of precarious structures in the city, the rains are coming on, and 1.2 million malnourished, shell-shocked people, tens of thousands of them wounded and most with dangerously-weakened immune systems, are living in crowded camps, the majority still without access to even latrines, or shelter from the weather.

The question raised by Lyndon LaRouche on Feb. 24 still stands: How many Haitians are going to have to die before it becomes obvious that Obama must be either impeached or forced to resign, under threat of impeachment?

More:  http://www.larouchepac.com/

While Nerobama Fiddles, More Jobs Are Lost

February 26, 2010 (LPAC)—According to the Labor Department, the number of Americans filing for initial unemployment insurance surged to a three-month high just below the 500,000 level last week, and have climbed more than 12% over the past two weeks.

There were 496,000 initial job claims filed in the week ended Feb. 20, up 22,000 from a revised 474,000 the previous week, the Labor Department said in a weekly report. The prior week, there were 442,000 claims filed. The 4-week moving average of initial claims was 473,750, up 6,000 from the previous week's revised average of 467,750. The government said 4,617,000 people filed continuing claims in the week ended Feb. 13, the most recent data available. That's up 6,000 from the preceding week's revised 4,611,000 claims. The 4-week moving average for ongoing claims rose by 4,250 to 4,600,750 from the previous week's revised 4,596,500.

At the same time orders for durable goods, excluding transportation, "unexpectedly" fell 0.6 percent, the most since August, while a measure of bookings for business equipment showed its biggest decrease in nine months, the Commerce Department in Washington said.

More than 1 million people will run out of benefits after Feb. 28 if the application deadline is not extended.

Haiti Six Weeks Later: Concerned? Not Good Enough

February 26, 2010 (LPAC)—The U.S. Institute of Peace (USIP), a Washington DC based policy group, held a well attended forum event yesterday, entitled, Haiti: Six Weeks Later. The occasion drew high-level participation from officials from the US State Department, US Army SOUTHCOM, members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and numerous policy advisors, journalists, and students. The fact that so many people from official Washington participated, clearly indicates a heightened concern with the condition and political future of Haiti, beyond the US aid deployment of Joint Task Force Haiti. However, while many of the formal remarks made by participants did show the greater competence of some policy makers and researchers within Washington, and, additionally, greater compassion than manifestly exists in President Obama, delimitations were clearly evident. And, so, due to high curiosity for big and powerful ideas, the introduction of Lyndon LaRouche's emergency call, for the immediate US-led relocation and evacuation of 1 million disaster stricken Haitians from Port Au Prince, enhanced the discussion beyond the typical formalism and pragmatism of topical discussions, creating the type of intervention needed to advance just such a proposal.

The contributions of every panelist and speaker, as well as the questions asked by attendees, evinced the characteristic points of view underlying the handling of not only Haiti, but of the approach most in Washington take, in general. While a far cry from LaRouche's Four Powers proposal, some noteworthy proposals provided for a useful dialogue. Robert Maguire, chair of the Haiti Working Group at USIP, presented a set of proposals to deal with the manifold dilemmas facing the nation, through establishing functional national sovereignty. Of Maguire's three dilemmas, his third, while not called out by its name—the legacy of British Imperial Globalization—is responsible for the deplorable conditions in Haiti, from which demographic problems and government instability have arisen. Over the course of the 1990s and 2000s, approximately 2.7 million Haitians migrated from rural areas, purposely left undeveloped, into Port-Au-Prince. 78% of Port-Au-Prince's former population of 3 million has survived on less than $2 per day, and unemployment, most severe among Haiti's youth, is everywhere to be seen. In addition, the Government of Haiti has been unable to, well, govern. With globalization, and the pattern of political instability which has wracked the country, the nation, particularly its universities (all of which are in Port-Au-Prince) has been privatized.

Maguire's attack on the problems Haiti faces, included some morally decent proposals, such as a National Civic Service Corps: a Haitian version of President Roosevelt's CCC; nation-wide infrastructure development, proposed for modernizing 200 rural towns, including clustering public education, health and sanitation services, therein, and, a reassignment of the nation's agronomists, from an un-agricultural Port-Au-Prince, to the nation's desperate farmers. However, this, and his other proposals, as well as those of every other participant, suffered from the cultish belief in, The Market. While admitting to LaRouche PAC representatives that Haiti, like all nations, is subject to the usurious predation of a collapsing international monetarist system, Maguire fell back upon, and promoted, the dead-end uses of micro finance and the very Benthamite conditional cash transfers (a new form of indentured servitude), as a way of stirring Haiti's robust informal economy, a.k.a. Black Market. Animal spirits, anyone?

During the question and answer period, LaRouche PAC representative Shannon Chew, intervened into what had otherwise been an attempt by the relevant panelist, Rev. Thomas Streit, to cover over the immense biological disaster befalling disaster stricken Haiti, now. Chew forcefully introduced the reasons why Lyndon LaRouche's Army Corps of Engineers-style relocation and evacuation of lower-elevation city denizens, is absolutely necessary to avert a potential biological holocaust. This met with initial speechlessness and shock from the crowd, and the panelists, too, who decided to take it as a statement for the record.

The relevant panelist, Reverend Streit, is the founder of the Notre Dame Haiti Program, and has reportedly worked for 20 years to eradicate Lymphatic Filariasis (otherwise known as Elephantiasis), as well as several other infectious diseases, but, from his remarks, you might not know it. Reverend Streit was the first to reveal two deplorable propagandistic excuses, which not only suggest his definitive incompetence in something you'd suppose, after 20 years of work, he should know something about, but, which questions his moral disposition. You would expect an expert in infectious diseases, and their link with poverty, to sound the alarm before the oncoming storms of the season produce deadly water borne illnesses, right? The two morally depraved notions, the imputed resilience of the Haitian people, and their quick adaptation to a New Normal, formed the basis for off-handedly excusing the threat of biological catastrophe, in the way only Margaret Mead could do. To paraphrase him: While we are concerned about the outbreak of diarrheal diseases, stemming from close quarters and bad hygiene, we say that the media is to be rightly surprised by the resilience of the Haitian people, and this includes the health sector. Things don't really look so bad. The reason is that the Haitian people have what I call herd immunity. They are sort of immunologically super-human. To survive the first five years of life they must develop plenty of anti-bodies to grow up strong. In fact, because the Haitian people practice a high degree of sanitation, they... I think you get the drift.

Over and over again, from the panelists to audience members like Mark Schneider of the International Crisis Group, came themes such as, we need a modernized and strong Haitian government that can maintain its sovereignty and rule of law throughout; it's not just money, we need technology transfers, like shear walls and modern cement, to hold buildings together (Haiti uses crushed limestone as the basis for their cement); and, decentralize the government. Extend governing power throughout the nation, to stop off-the-land migration.

But, evidently, only one proposal could move to meet such conditions: LaRouche's. In a twist of irony, Tim Sullivan, a panelist and fellow of the American Enterprise Institute, responded to Chew about LaRouche's proposal: I'm with LaRouche on this one.