I have to admit that there have often bee things that I want to bring up on this site that I have chosen to not touch with a ten foot pole. There are things I want to discuss, but I am not a conspiracy theorist. Some examples would be the President’s citizenship and the “One World Government” stuff. I find the ideas interesting. I don’t know that they have merit. I really don’t. I have not spent ample time researching Obama’s citizenship status. I have also not spent ample time researching the one world government stuff. So I don’t know how valid the arguments are for or against either conspiracy theory. But I am afraid that even bringing them up would render this site as filled with conspiracy nuts rather than intelligent folks trying to get a grasp on the truth today. Yet I find that I want to discuss them, because I want to become more informed. So for now I offer this little foray into conspiracy theories.
One of the regular readers sent me this article. I never mention names unless given express authority to do so, so I will not do so here. If that person would like to be recognized for contributing this article to our discussions, they are welcome to speak up and say so. But I will leave that to their discretion. I didn’t have a Friday night guest commentary ready to go so I figured that I would post this article and let everyone read and comment on it. I have not research this subject much, so I can’t offer a great opinion, but I would be really interested to hear from everyone what they think of the content and whether it could be plausible or not. I am sure that there might also be some folks who have researched this subject and I hope that they will share what they have learned.
So let me clear about this article. I have no idea about the source. The website I found it on is called CFP – Canada Free Press (perhaps our northern cousins can enlighten us on this site and it’s purpose or bias). The author of the article is a gentleman by the name of Brice Wiseman. According to his bio on the site:
Bruce Wiseman is the co-founder of a company that oversees the business and financial affairs of some of the biggest names in Hollywood. He writes and speaks on matters of international finance and banking with particular attention to the oppressive activities of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. Bruce has also been an advisor and consultant on the subject of market research, branding and positioning. He writes a market research newsletter on market research and positioning for such publications as Government Technology and Hotel and Motel Management. He is also a published fiction author under the pen name, John Truman Wolfe . Bruce holds a Masters Degree with Honors from the California State University at San Jose and is the former Chairman of the Department of History at John F. Kennedy University.
I can’t claim to know much about Mr. Wiseman, but a preliminary search shows him to be a Scientologist. That is usually enough for me to say, “OK, crackpot, nothing to see here.” But again, I try my best to always judge the content of what I read by its accuracy rather than its source. Heck, even MSNBC gets stuff right once in a while. I figure that posting this article and discussing it can serve a couple of purposes. First, I can get input from people smarter than I am on economic issues, which can help me understand if this article has any merit. Second, if there is no merit, I will acquire ammunition to shoot down those who espouse the conspiracy theory to me in the future. Finally, if this guy is a crackpot, I will have provided a showcase to allow more folks to see what a whacked out organization Scientology might be. So here is his article…
A towering citadel housing what is essentially a sovereign state known as the Bank for International Settlements is located in Basel, Switzerland. The bank now controls the financial affairs of planet Earth.
If you think this is an exaggeration or the conspiratorial ramblings of the author . . . or not, I invite you to read on. I wrote the first installment of this article—“The Financial Crisis: A Look Behind the Wizard’s Curtain”—in mid-March of this year.
The article included the following statement:
The purpose of this financial crisis is to take down the United States and the U.S. dollar as the stable datum of planetary finance and, in the midst of the resulting confusion, put in its place a Global Monetary Authority—a planetary financial control organization “to ensure this never happens again.”
This purpose has now been accomplished.
The dollar, the former king of currencies, now goes begging in the pant-suited persona of Hillary Clinton to our creditors at the Chinese Communist Party.
Almost unthinkable a few short years ago, the U.S. dollar is fast losing its status as the world reserve currency, and any thought of saving it is being nuked by the Larry, Moe and Curly of U.S. economic policy – Bernanke, Geithner and Summers – and their Alice in Wonderland trillion-dollar budget deficits.
I would not be surprised to see central banks start using the renminbi (the currency of the newly awakened People’s Republic of China—also called the yuan) for international trade and reserves in the not too distant future. This prediction will likely be scoffed at by global economists, but then they have about as much credibility as pharmaceutical salesmen these days.
A more generally discussed alternative is the International Monetary Fund’s SDR (which stands for Special Drawing Rights). There is no production or property behind the SDR. It is one of those clown currencies that are made up out of thin air—a magic trick central bankers like to do. Intoxicated by the power of the purse, they think of themselves as fiscal alchemists.
But the dollar has seen its glory. It can return one day, if Washington ever finds its financial backbone. But let’s be real, with the exception of a very few, like Ron Paul in the House and Tom Coburn in the Senate, these folks are addicted to spending like junkies on horse.
More importantly, the other shoe has dropped. Like some ghoulish predator from another Alien sequel, a Global Monetary Authority has been born. It lives.
THE FINANCIAL STABILITY BOARD
On April 2, 2009, the members of the G-20 (a loose-knit organization of the central bankers and finance ministers of the 20 major industrialized nations) issued a communiqué that gave birth to what is no less than Big Brother in a three-piece suit.
Which means? . . .
The communiqué announced the creation of the all too Soviet sounding Financial Stability Board (FSB)—and no, I’m not going to make a crack about the fact that this acronym is the same as that of the Russian intelligence service that replaced the KGB.
The Financial Stability Board. Remember that name well, because they now have control of the planet’s finances . . . and, when one peels the onion of the communiqué, control of much, much more.
The FSB morphed into existence from an earlier incarnation called the Financial Stability Forum. The Financial Stability Forum (FSF) was established in 1999 to promote international financial stability through co-operation in financial supervision and surveillance. Since it had done such a wonderful job, the central bankers decided to expand its powers and give it a new name.
A board sounds like it has more authority than a forum. But the name change isn’t the problem. The FSB’s broadened mandate includes under point 5, “As obligations of membership, member countries and territories commit to pursue the maintenance of financial stability, maintain the openness and transparency of the financial sector, implement international financial standards (including the 12 key International Standards and Codes), and agree to undergo periodic peer reviews, using among other evidence IMF/World Bank public Financial Sector Assessment Program reports.”
Rather a mouthful of elitist banker-speak. But, as a friend of mine is fond of saying, “The Devil is in the details.”
THE 12 INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS AND CODES
While several press releases from the G-20’s London conclave reference these codes as though they were handed down from a fiscal Mount Sinai, finding the specifics takes some digging.
But then the Bank for International Settlements (BIS), out of which the FSB operates, has never seen transparency as one of its core values. In fact, given its fascist pedigree, transparency hasn’t been a value at all. Known as Hitler’s bank, the Bank for International Settlements worked arm in arm with the Nazis, facilitating the transfer of gold from Nazi-occupied countries to the Reichsbank, and kept their lines open to the international financial community during the Second World War.
As noted in the first article, the BIS is completely above the law.
It is like a sovereign state. Its personnel have diplomatic immunity for their persons and papers. No taxes are levied on the bank or the personnel’s salaries. The grounds are sovereign, as are the buildings and offices. The Swiss government has no legal jurisdiction over the bank and no government agency or authority has oversight over its operations.
In a 2003 article titled “Controlling the World’s Monetary System the Bank for International Settlements,” 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.”
And if you don’t find that troubling, a close reading of the new powers of the FSB are chilling.
The 12 key International Standards and Codes, which are minimum requirements, contain such things as:
- clear specification of the structure and functions of government;
- statistical and data gathering from ministries of education, health, finance and other agencies;
- corporate governance principles;
- shareholder rights;
- personal savings;
- secure retirement incomes;
- international accounting standards to be observed in the preparation of financial statements;
- international standards of auditing;
- securities settlement;
- foreign exchange settlement;
- minimal capital adequacy for banks;
- risk management;
- ratification and implementation of UN instruments; and
- criminalizing the financing of terrorism.
“Sounds oppressive,” you say; “but I don’t really care what a bunch of bankers do in Basel, Switzerland. It’s got nothing to do with me.” But I am writing this to tell you that it has everything to do with you, your family, your business, your country, and—if you’re up to it—your planet.
Because as currently structured, the dictates of the Financial Stability Board will impact your life without any say-so on your part whatsoever. Here’s one example from an article written by former Clinton advisor and political strategist Dick Morris in an article for The Bulletin on April 6, 2009.
“The FSB is also charged with ‘implementing . . . tough new principles on pay and compensation and to support sustainable compensation schemes and the corporate social responsibility of all firms.’
“That means that the FSB will regulate how much executives are to be paid and will enforce its idea of corporate social responsibility at ‘all firms.’”
You begin to see what’s involved here.
You see, these standards and codes are commitments, obligations and requirements, not merely advice. The strategy, policies and regulations of the FSB are worked out at the senior levels of the bank. They are approved by the plenary and implemented through the national representatives.
The plenary, in this sense, is the complete membership body of the FSB. And the membership, my friends—the national representatives who implement these policies—just happen to be the heads of the planet’s more powerful central banks. And in case it slipped your mind, most central banks are private institutions and answerable to no one.
Take our central bank, the Federal Reserve Bank. Yes, the chairman is appointed by the President and often testifies before Congress, but there is virtually no public control over the institution. It can’t be audited nor can Congress tell it what to do. It is not really accountable to anyone. The idea that the Fed is a government agency subject to the control of Congress is a PR line. It is simply not true.
Among other things, central banks govern a country’s monetary policy and create (print) the country’s money.
They make income by charging interest on the money they loan to the government.
Watch this, because if you blink, you’ll miss it.
Governments are perpetually in debt. They are always borrowing money. They have a mental disorder that prevents them from spending less than they collect in taxes—BDD, Budget Deficit Disorder. And if it looks like they might balance the books some year, why, someone can always start a war.
Here’s an example.
Let’s say the annual budget calls for the U.S. government to spend $2.5 trillion. But the income will only be $2 trillion. They’re going to be a little short. But no worries, they have the ultimate credit card—a debt limit that they themselves control. If they borrow up to the established limit, they can just vote it higher—which they have done to the tune of a cool $11.2 trillion dollars.
The Fed loves this.
Listen as the Secretary of the Treasury calls the Chairman of the Fed.
“Ben. It’s Tim.”
“Dude. What’s happening?”
“I need a little bread. Friggin’ Taliban again.”
“No problem, Timbo. How much you looking for?”
“Five hundred big ones.”
Ben licks his lips. “Anything for you, big guy. Send me the notes and I’m down with the five hundred. Five percent work for you?”
So the Treasury prints up $500 billion dollars’ worth of IOUs—they are called Treasury bills (short term), notes (medium term) or bonds (long term)—and sends them over to the Fed with a fifth of Chivas.
In the old days, the Fed would print the cash. These days, they click a mouse.
Now here’s the part where you aren’t allowed to blink.
When the Fed prints the money or clicks the mouse, they have no money themselves. They are just creating it out of thin air. They just print it, or send it digitally. And then they charge interest on the money they lent to the Treasury. A hundred-dollar bill costs $0.04 to print. But the interest is charged on the $100. Go ahead: read it again; the words won’t change.
The interest on the national debt last year was $451,154,049,950.63. That’s $1.23 billion a day. These are the same people that are now running our banks, insurance companies and automobile manufacturers.
Sure, I oversimplified it. The Fed doesn’t own all the debt and they do some other things. But these are the basics. That is how a central bank works.
It is the heads of the planet’s central banks and some finance ministers that make up the membership of the FSB.
In brief, here’s how it works: the Board’s leadership provides strategies, policies and regulations to the membership. The members vote on the matters and then see to their implementation in their respective countries.
FSB leadership is in the hands of the chairman, Mario Draghi. Mr. Draghi is also the governor of Italy’s central bank. He is a former executive director of the World Bank and like his comrade in international finance Henry Paulson—the former U.S. Secretary of the Treasury who bludgeoned Congress out of the first $700 billion bailout package—Draghi was a managing director of Goldman Sachs until 2006. Like Paulson, he left Goldman in 2006, a year before the financial crisis exploded: Paulson went to Washington to run the U.S. Treasury; Draghi went to Rome to run Italy’s financial system as well as the Financial Stability Forum (forerunner to the Financial Stability Board).
Let’s call it government by Goldman, shall we?
THE REAL SITUATION
More to the point, you may have noticed that you weren’t consulted on this setup. Neither was Congress. In other words, the command channel for implementing global financial strategies goes from the FSB leadership to its central banker members and from them to the world’s financial institutions. You don’t get a peek, neither does Congress, nor, for that matter, does the White House.
And while there may be some accountability in some of the member countries, by and large these central bankers have the authority to implement these regulations and strategies. And they are held responsible by the FSB to do so.
In short, on April 2, 2009, the President signed a communiqué that essentially turns over financial control of the country, and the planet, to a handful of central bankers, who, besides dictating policy covering everything from your retirement income to shareholder rights, will additionally have access to your health and education records.
There is also this troubling little line about “clear specification of the structure and functions of government.” What the hell is that suppose to mean?
There is no oversight here. Not by you, not by Congress, not by anybody. No oversight over a handful of central bankers who operate out of a clandestine organization that is above the law and is responsible for having implemented and enforced the “standards” that froze world credit markets and precipitated the worst financial crisis in the planet’s history (see “The Financial Crisis: A Look Behind the Wizard’s Curtain”).
I haven’t heard word one out of Congress about this, but I’m afraid they are a few clowns short of a circus up there.
Which begs the question, what do we do about this?
There are two critical things that need to be done.
The first lies in the fact that the communiqué signed by the President is an agreement that is binding on the United States and, as such, requires approval by Congress. If classed as a Treaty, it requires approval by two-thirds of the Senate. At the very least, approval should be by Congressional Executive Agreement, which requires a majority of both houses of Congress.
The agreement signed in London on April 2 has been called a New Bretton Woods (Bretton Woods being the location of a meeting of world leaders toward the end of the Second World War, which gave birth to the international financial organizations the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund). The original Bretton Woods agreement was put in place as a Congressional Executive Agreement. So this “new Bretton Woods” should at least do the same.
But this step is just to get Congress to recognize their responsibility here. The Federal Reserve Act, the bill that established the Federal Reserve System, was passed in 1913 two nights before Christmas by a sparsely attended Congress.
People have been complaining about this ever since.
What do you say we don’t let this happen again? Not on our watch. Congress needs to understand that it has a responsibility to approve any agreement signed by the President that is binding on this nation.
But the point is not to get Congress to approve what has been done. It is to first get them to recognize that agreements have been made that affect our entire financial system and that it is their responsibility to shape these agreements in a way that is beneficial to our Republic AND to provide a mechanism for real oversight of this international body.
Central bankers should not be making decisions about international finance without oversight and a system of checks and balances that are reflective of those provided by a republican form of government.
I am, of course, not talking about a political party here. No, no. I’m talking about the American form of government where citizens elect others to represent them.
A republican form of government is one that is operated by representatives chosen by the people.
Congress must step up to the plate. They must insist that the Financial Stability Board be ratified either by Treaty or Congressional Executive Agreement. And that ratification must include the creation of a body with oversight and corrective powers that is comprised of representatives of all the nations involved who are chosen from each country’s elected officials.
There is nothing inherently evil about an international financial organization. As much as we might protest it, it is a global world today, and a body that oversees the smooth flow and interchange of currencies and other financial instruments is needed in today’s world.
But the organization cannot be controlled by international bankers who are not answerable to the citizens of the countries in which they operate. It should be overseen by a senior level group which itself is organized as a liberal republic, following the original model of the United States.
Why? Because the system of government originally created by the United States has been the most successful form of government in man’s history. Any problems with the system have come about as a result of deviations from the original structure—a representative form of government with adequate checks and balances.
Such a body could help create an international economic system in which those that want to be successful can be so. It would also allow them to take an active role in controlling their futures by effectively participating in the legislative process.
Let your Representatives and Senators know: the Financial Stability Board must be approved by Congress and must be subject to oversight by elected officials of the countries involved.
Personal visits, followed by calls and faxes to both Washington and local offices, are the most effective. Don’t be surprised if they don’t know what you’re talking about. Politely insist they find out and take action. And understand this when dealing with legislators or their staffs: they are focused almost exclusively on legislation that has already been introduced—a bill with a number on it.
That is not the case here. You want them to take action on this matter by introducing legislation that brings the approval and structure of the Financial Stability Board under congressional control.
This can be accomplished.
So how real might all of this stuff be? I have no idea, But I wouldn’t mind figuring it out together. I am, by nature, not a conspiracy theorist, which is why I so often scoff at those ideas, or don’t reply to them at all. And I certainly don’t want to turn my site, with so much intelligent discussion going on, into a conspiracy theory site that gets labeled as such and thus ignored. I will leave it up to all of you as to whether we even take the time to look at the other theories out there such as Obama’s citizenship or the one world government stuff. It might be interesting fodder to discuss, but is it even worth our time?
As for this piece and Mr. Wiseman, I have no idea. As I mentioned above I tend to discredit Scientology right from the start. I don’t know if that is fair or not. I don’t know anything about Scientology except what is presented in the media, which mostly paints them as crackheads without a pipe. Does anyone here have better insight into that group? As I have always said, I am open to learning anything I don’t know about.
And before I forget, a link to the original article: The purpose of the financial crisis