Posted on 31st July 2015 by Administrator in Economy |Politics |Social Issues

, ,



Posted on 22nd July 2015 by Administrator in Economy |Politics |Social Issues

, ,

France Restricts Cash, Movement of Gold & Crypto-Currencies


Posted on 4th May 2015 by Administrator in Economy |Politics |Social Issues

, , , ,

Hollande Addresses Nation on EU Failure 5-26-2014

France is of course the most socialist country in Europe and it always attacks anyone with money. Its latest war on money is broadening to create a virtual lock-down on all assets of anyone. France is strengthening the control of cash payments drastically. Also the gold sales and movement of any tangible goods is to be reported.

The French Finance Minister Michel Sapin has announced a drastic tightening of the use of cash in France. As the newspaper Le Parisien reported that citizens should be strictly monitored from September 2015 if they make payments in cash.

– The limit on cash payments will be reduced from 3,000 euros to 1,000 euros.

– Tourists can only pay up to 10,000 euros in cash, so far there were 15,000 euros.

– If a Frenchman wants to change money into another currency, it must still do to 1,000 euros without identification only. So far, French could buy foreign currencies for 8,000 euros.

– If a bank customer stands out more than 10,000 euros in a month from his account, the bank must report the transaction to the Money Laundering Authority TRACFIN.

– Banks must inform the authorities of all cargo transfers within the EU that exceed 10,000 euros. This regulation checks, pre-paid cards and even gold are affected.

– The control of crypto-currencies like Bitcoin to be drastically tightened.

This is the economic tyranny we face. What is yours really belongs to them from the way they see it. We no longer live in a democratic world. This is all about them controlling the people to sustain their power. The French official reason for these measures is the “war on terror”. In fact, it is the measure that we are witnessing around the globe because those in power feel it slipping away. This is not a war on terror, it is war against the people in the form of financial repression. It is still unclear whether other euro countries to follow the example of Paris and its citizens in other countries restrict the free, private use of their money.



Posted on 12th February 2015 by Administrator in Economy |Politics |Social Issues

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

In Part One of this article I explained the model of generational theory as conveyed by Strauss and Howe in The Fourth Turning. In Part Two I provided an overwhelming avalanche of evidence this Crisis has only yet begun, with debt, civic decay and global disorder propelling the world towards the next more violent phase of this Crisis. In Part Three I addressed how the most likely clash on the horizon is between the government and the people. War on multiple fronts will thrust the world through the great gate of history towards an uncertain future.

War on Multiple Fronts

“The risk of catastrophe will be very high. The nation could erupt into insurrection or civil violence, crack up geographically, or succumb to authoritarian rule. If there is a war, it is likely to be one of maximum risk and effort – in other words, a total war. Every Fourth Turning has registered an upward ratchet in the technology of destruction, and in mankind’s willingness to use it.” – Strauss & Howe – The Fourth Turning

The drumbeats of war are pounding. Sanctions are implemented against any country that dares question American imperialism (Russia, Iran). Overthrow and ignominious imprisonment or death awaits any foreign leader questioning the petrodollar or standing in the way of America spreading democracy (Iraq, Libya, Syria, Ukraine, Egypt). The mega-media complex of six corporations peddle the government issued pabulum about ISIS being an existential threat to our freedoms; Russia being led by the new Hitler and poised to take over Europe; Syria gassing innocent women and children; and Iran only six months away from a nuclear bomb (they’ve been six months away for the last fourteen years). Hollywood does their part with patriotic drivel like American Sniper, designed to compel low IQ unemployed American youths to swell with pride and march down to enlistment centers, located in our plentiful urban ghettos.

The most disconcerting aspect of Fourth Turnings is they have always climaxed with total destructive all-out war. Not wars to enrich arms dealers like Iraq, Afghanistan, and Syria, but incomprehensibly violent, brutal, wars of annihilation. There are clear winners and losers at the conclusion of Fourth Turning wars. Leaders mobilize all forces, refuse to compromise, define their enemies in moral terms, demand sacrifice on the battlefield and home front, build the most destructive weapons imaginable, and employ those weapons to obtain victory at any cost.

It may seem inconceivable that war on such a scale will happen within the next ten years, but it was equally inconceivable in 1936 that 65 million people would die in the next ten years during World War II. We valued all the wrong things and made all the wrong choices leading up to this Crisis and during the early stages of this Crisis. The accumulation of unmet obligations, unpaid bills, un-kept promises and unresolved issues will provide the fuel for an upheaval that will shake our society to its core and transforms the country’s direction for the next sixty years. The outcome of the conflict could be tragedy or triumph. Our choices will make a difference.

There will be war on many fronts, and they have already begun. The culmination will likely be World War III, with the outcome highly uncertain and potentially disastrous.


US & UK try to sabotage any Ukraine peace agreement


Posted on 7th February 2015 by Administrator in Economy |Politics |Social Issues

, , , , ,

Talks between Russia’s President Putin, France’s President Hollande, and German Chancellor Merkel have been constructive, said Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov on Friday. However, RT spoke with political analyst Dan Glazebrook, who thinks that while Germany seems enthusiastic about the peace talks, the other sides involved in the conflict – the US and UK – are creating obstacles which may stand in the way of the conflict’s resolution.

France Has Taken the Extremists’ Bait…


Posted on 18th January 2015 by Administrator in Economy |Politics |Social Issues

, , ,

Guest Post by Bill Bonner

Dear Diary,

It took only 48 hours. And France took the bait.

Rather than declare the murder of the Charlie Hebdo cartoonists a crime, which it surely was, French prime minister Manuel Valls turned an act of murder into an act of war, which it surely wasn’t.

“France Declares ‘War,’” bleated a headline in Sunday’s New York Times.

Now the killers are martyrs in a holy war against the West. Western nations can now roll out more armored vehicles, more airport security, more snooping and more spending – all in the name of protecting citizens from fanatics.

Fear and Loathing in Paris

Paris looked like a city under siege when we went through it on Saturday.

Helicopters overhead. Gendarmes everywhere. Fear and loathing down every rue.

Even with the diminutive François Hollande at its head, the French government seemed suddenly robust – its muscles flexed, its cheeks rosy and flush with energy and purpose.

“War is the health of the state,” said American writer Randolph Bourne.

“Compare what these Islamic commandos did to Charlie Hebdo and what your Navy SEAL team did to Osama bin Laden,” suggested a provocative Frenchman.

“Both were trained to kill. Both killed unarmed people in the name of their cause. Bin Laden had been accused of a serious crime. But no trial was ever held. No verdict ever rendered.

“The cartoonists had been accused of a serious crime, too… at least as the radical Islamists saw it. In both attacks the killers gunned down innocent people who hadn’t been accused of anything.”

“What’s the difference?” he asked. He did not stay for an answer.

We had one: In our Western tradition, making fun of someone is not a capital crime. Plotting the murder of thousands is.

But the man had a point. The perps – the brothers Kouachi – believed in a different tradition… a different set of rules… and a different kind of justice.

Once killing is permitted, people will reach out to others… and blow their brains out.




Posted on 14th January 2015 by Administrator in Economy |Politics |Social Issues

, , , , ,

That’s funny. European politicians joined together in solidarity to rejoice in the beauty of free speech. I guess their interpretation of free is different than mine. If you agree with their government approved speech, than it’s OK. If not, they arrest you.

The French are going to use this incident as the reason to create their own Patriot Act. Rather than supporting the right to free speech, they will take away more liberties and freedoms from their citizens. It was so predictable. And the sheep will stand idly by while they are led to slaughter.

PARIS — France’s prime minister announced he would seek tighter surveillance of convicted extremists Tuesday and reports emerged that the weapons used by a terror cell to kill 17 people around Paris came from outside the country.

In a rousing, indignant speech, Prime Minister Manuel Valls said “serious and very high risks remain” and warned the French not to let down their guard. He called for new surveillance of imprisoned radicals and told the interior minister to come up with new security proposals shortly.

In a sign that French judicial authorities were using laws against defending terrorism to their fullest extent, a man who had praised the terror attacks in a drunken rant to police was swiftly sentenced Monday to four years in prison.

French Comedian Arrested Over Sympathizing With Charlie Hebdo Killer

Tyler Durden's picture

Yesterday we discussed the crackdown on ‘extremism’ around the world (and its potential implications for freedom). Today, as The Guardian reports, notorious French comedian Dieudonné M’bala M’bala is now intimately aware of the implications, having been arrested for being an “apologist for terrorism” after suggesting on Facebook that he sympathised with one of the Paris gunmen.

As The Independent reports, French Prime Minister Manuel Valls attacked Dieudonné, calling him a “peddler of hate and said there should be no confusion between the ‘impertinent’ satire of Charlie Hebdo and ‘anti-semitism, racism and negationism’.”

In an open letter, the comedian claimed on Tuesday that he had been misunderstood.


The comedian made international headlines in 2013 when French footballer Nicolas Anelka was banned for five matches by English football authorities for using a gesture created by Dieudonné that many consider to echo the Nazi salute.

His original statement on his Facebook page was as follows:

“After this historic, no legendary, march, a magic moment equal to the Big Bang which created the Universe, or in a smaller (more local) way comparable to the crowning of the (ancient Gaullish king) Vercingétorix, I am going home. Let me say that this evening, as far as I am concerned, I feel I am Charlie Coulibaly.”

What he had meant to say on Facebook, he said, was that “I am considered like another Amedy Coulibaly when in fact I am no different from Charlie.”

*  *  *
Be careful what you say – or think!!

Ron Paul: “Lessons From Paris”


Posted on 13th January 2015 by Administrator in Economy |Politics |Social Issues

, , , , , ,

After the tragic shooting at a provocative magazine in Paris last week, I pointed out that given the foreign policy positions of France we must consider blowback as a factor. Those who do not understand blowback made the ridiculous claim that I was excusing the attack or even blaming the victims. Not at all, as I abhor the initiation of force. The police blaming victims when they search for the motive of a criminal.

The mainstream media immediately decided that the shooting was an attack on free speech. Many in the US preferred this version of “they hate us because we are free,” which is the claim that President Bush made after 9/11. They expressed solidarity with the French and vowed to fight for free speech. But have these people not noticed that the First Amendment is routinely violated by the US government? President Obama has used the Espionage Act more than all previous administrations combined to silence and imprison whistleblowers. Where are the protests? Where are protesters demanding the release of John Kiriakou, who blew the whistle on the CIA use of waterboarding and other torture? The whistleblower went to prison while the torturers will not be prosecuted. No protests.

If Islamic extremism is on the rise, the US and French governments are at least partly to blame. The two Paris shooters had reportedly spent the summer in Syria fighting with the rebels seeking to overthrow Syrian President Assad. They were also said to have recruited young French Muslims to go to Syria and fight Assad. But France and the United States have spent nearly four years training and equipping foreign fighters to infiltrate Syria and overthrow Assad! In other words, when it comes to Syria, the two Paris killers were on “our” side. They may have even used French or US weapons while fighting in Syria.

Beginning with Afghanistan in the 1980s, the US and its allies have deliberately radicalized Muslim fighters in the hopes they would strictly fight those they are told to fight. We learned on 9/11 that sometimes they come back to fight us. The French learned the same thing last week. Will they make better decisions knowing the blowback from such risky foreign policy? It is unlikely because they refuse to consider blowback. They prefer to believe the fantasy that they attack us because they hate our freedoms, or that they cannot stand our free speech.

Perhaps one way to make us all more safe is for the US and its allies to stop supporting these extremists.

Another lesson from the attack is that the surveillance state that has arisen since 9/11 is very good at following, listening to, and harassing the rest of us but is not very good at stopping terrorists. We have learned that the two suspected attackers had long been under the watch of US and French intelligence services. They had reportedly been placed on the US no-fly list and at least one of them had actually been convicted in 2008 of trying to travel to Iraq to fight against the US occupation. According to CNN, the two suspects traveled to Yemen in 2011 to train with al-Qaeda. So they were individuals known to have direct terrorist associations. How many red flags is it necessary to set off before action is taken? How long did US and French intelligence know about them and do nothing, and why?

Foreign policy actions have consequences. The aggressive foreign policies of the United States and its allies in the Middle East have radicalized thousands and have made us less safe. Blowback is real whether some want to recognize it or not. There are no guarantees of security, but only a policy of non-intervention can reduce the risk of another attack.



Posted on 13th January 2015 by Administrator in Economy |Politics |Social Issues

, , ,

Guest Post by Fred Reed

The Birth of Three Nations

Diversity: Koom. Bah. Humbug

Regarding the unsurprising slaughter in Paris:

Diversity is a disaster. Why people cannot see this is a mystery. A country can ignore an unfortunate reality, but it cannot ignore the consequences of ignoring it. Why governments allow and even encourage immigration of incompatible populations is a greater mystery. Few things cause more misery, hatred, death, and destruction than does diversity. One may wish it were not so, but it is so.

Some examples of diversity: Chechens and Russians. Irish Catholics and Irish Protestants. Tamils and Sinhalese. French and Moslems. Dutch and Moslems. Swedes and Moslems. Germans and Moslems. Turks and Armenians. Whites and blacks in South Africans. Ugandans and Indians. Cambodians and Vietnamese. Blacks, whites, and browns in the United States. Jews and Germans. Jews and the rest almost everywhere. Hindus and Moslems. Sunnis and Shias. Turks and Kurds. Tutsis and Hutus. Moslems and Israelis in Palestine.

Note that most of these have caused horrendous bloodshed. Diversity doesn’t work, as a rule catastrophically. Why would any country deliberately seek more of it?

If you point this out, the responses are automatic. “I know some really nice Mexicans/blacks/Moslems etc.” Or “Most Catholics/Protestants/Hindus aren’t terrorists.” True, well, and good. And irrelevant. There were really nice Germans and Jews in the Third Reich. How much did that help?

As a species we do not like diversity, though we may think that we should. People want to be with others like themselves. Difference breeds suspicion, friction arises,and the depraved or disagreeable nature of the other group is blamed.

Distaste for diversity of almost any kind runs through societies. Liberals associate chiefly with liberals, conservatives with conservatives, military people with military people, the rich with the rich, the highly intelligent with the highly intelligent, the young with the young. We may tolerate others if the distinctions are not too great, or if we are not forced into excessive contact. For example, while the Chinese in America are superficially very different from Euro-Americans, they are quiet, courteous, law-abiding, and studious, so little antagonism occurs. But the potential is there, as when they greatly outperform whites academically.

Men of all groups object to marriage of their women to other groups. The women are somewhat less clannish, more willing to marry out-of-group. This can cause bloodshed.




Posted on 12th January 2015 by Administrator in Economy |Politics |Social Issues

, , ,



Via William Banzai

In Solidarity With a Free Press: Some More Blasphemous Cartoons


Posted on 12th January 2015 by Administrator in Economy |Politics |Social Issues

, , , ,

Hat tip flash

Featured photo - In Solidarity With a Free Press: Some More Blasphemous Cartoons

Joe Raedle

Defending free speech and free press rights, which typically means defending the right to disseminate the very ideas society finds most repellent, has been one of my principal passions for the last 20 years: previously as a lawyer and now as a journalist. So I consider it positive when large numbers of people loudly invoke this principle, as has been happening over the last 48 hours in response to the horrific attack on Charlie Hebdo in Paris.

Usually, defending free speech rights is much more of a lonely task. For instance, the day before the Paris murders, I wrote an article about multiple cases where Muslims are being prosecuted and even imprisoned by western governments for their online political speech – assaults that have provoked relatively little protest, including from those free speech champions who have been so vocal this week.

I’ve previously covered cases where Muslims were imprisoned for many years in the U.S. for things like translating and posting “extremist” videos to the internet, writing scholarly articles in defense of Palestinian groups and expressing harsh criticism of Israel, and even including a Hezbollah channel in a cable package. That’s all well beyond the numerous cases of jobs being lost or careers destroyed for expressing criticism of Israel or (much more dangerously and rarely) Judaism. I’m hoping this week’s celebration of free speech values will generate widespread opposition to all of these long-standing and growing infringements of core political rights in the west, not just some.

Central to free speech activism has always been the distinction between defending the right to disseminate Idea X and agreeing with Idea X, one which only the most simple-minded among us are incapable of comprehending. One defends the right to express repellent ideas while being able to condemn the idea itself. There is no remote contradiction in that: the ACLU vigorously defends the right of neo-Nazis to march through a community filled with Holocaust survivors in Skokie, Illinois, but does not join the march; they instead vocally condemn the targeted ideas as grotesque while defending the right to express them.But this week’s defense of free speech rights was so spirited that it gave rise to a brand new principle: to defend free speech, one not only defends the right to disseminate the speech, but embraces the content of the speech itself. Numerous writers thus demanded: to show “solidarity” with the murdered cartoonists, one should not merely condemn the attacks and defend the right of the cartoonists to publish, but should publish and even celebrate those cartoons. “The best response to Charlie Hebdo attack,” announced Slate’s editor Jacob Weisberg, “is to escalate blasphemous satire.”

Some of the cartoons published by Charlie Hebdo were not just offensive but bigoted, such as the one mocking the African sex slaves of Boko Haram as welfare queens (left). Others went far beyond maligning violence by extremists acting in the name of Islam, or even merely depicting Mohammed with degrading imagery (above, right), and instead contained a stream of mockery toward Muslims generally, who in France are not remotely powerful but are largely a marginalized and targeted immigrant population.But no matter. Their cartoons were noble and should be celebrated – not just on free speech grounds but for their content. In a column entitled “The Blasphemy We Need,” The New York Times‘ Ross Douthat argued that “the right to blaspheme (and otherwise give offense) is essential to the liberal order” and “that kind of blasphemy [that provokes violence] is precisely the kind that needs to be defended, because it’s the kind that clearly serves a free society’s greater good.” New York Magazine‘s Jonathan Chait actually proclaimed that “one cannot defend the right [to blaspheme] without defending the practice.” Vox’s Matt Yglesias had a much more nuanced view but nonetheless concluded that “to blaspheme the Prophet transforms the publication of these cartoons from a pointless act to a courageous and even necessary one, while the observation that the world would do well without such provocations becomes a form of appeasement.”

To comport with this new principle for how one shows solidarity with free speech rights and a vibrant free press, we’re publishing some blasphemous and otherwise offensive cartoons about religion and their adherents:

And here are some not-remotely-blasphemous-or-bigoted yet very pointed and relevant cartoons by the brilliantly provocative Brazilian cartoonist Carlos Latuff (reprinted with permission):

Is it time for me to be celebrated for my brave and noble defense of free speech rights? Have I struck a potent blow for political liberty and demonstrated solidarity with free journalism by publishing blasphemous cartoons? If, as Salman Rushdie said, it’s vital that all religions be subjected to “fearless disrespect,” have I done my part to uphold western values?




Posted on 12th January 2015 by Administrator in Economy |Politics |Social Issues

, , ,