BRICS Summit in Durban, South Africa

On 26 March 2013, the “Big Picture” on India’s parliamentary television station Rajya Sabha TV discussed the BRICS summit in Durban (26-7 March 2013): ‘Guests: M K Bhadrakumar (Former Ambassador and Foreign Policy analyst) ; Mohan Guruswamy (Distinguished Fellow, Observer Research Foundation) ; Nandan Unnikrishnan (Senior Journalist and Senior Fellow, Observer Research Foundation) ; Pramit Pal Chaudhary (Foreign Affairs Editor, Hindustan Times) – Anchor: Girish Nikam’.

The Associated Press reports as follows: ‘Leaders of five of the world’s emerging economic powers agreed Wednesday [, 27 March] to create a development bank to help fund their $4.5 trillion infrastructure plans _ a direct challenge to the World Bank that they accuse of Western bias. But the rulers of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa _known as the BRICS group _were unable to agree on some basic issues. Foreign Minister Pravin Gordhan of South Africa told reporters that there were “different views” about how much capital such a bank would need. He said $50 billion had been mentioned, an amount conference officials said would be seed capital shared equally between the five countries. Finance ministers had discussed basing contributions on a country’s wealth, but then felt it would leave economic giant China, with the world’s No. 2 economy, in an untenably dominant position, according to conference officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they are not authorized to speak to reporters. Analysts said there was little doubt that China, with the world’s largest reserves of foreign exchange, inevitably would be dominant, perhaps in much the same way that the United States and Europe dominate the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. The development bank would be the first institution of the informal BRICS forum which was started in 2009 amid the economic meltdown to chart a new and more equitable world economic order. South Africa joined two years ago. “Russia supports the creation of this financial institution,” President Vladimir Putin said Wednesday, but he cautioned “we believe that, if it is created, then it must work on market principles only and support the businesses of all our countries.” But his deputy foreign minister, Sergey A. Ryabkov, implied the announcement was premature: “We are not contesting the idea, we support it, we favor it, but we are urging everyone to be serious enough to make further efforts in order to create the right foundation.” They were at a stage where “the devil is in the details,” he added. Inability to agree on fine points about the bank, first mooted a year ago when finance ministers were tasked with exploring its feasibility, highlighted the differences between the bloc that is made up of democracies and autocracies, diverse foreign policies and structurally different economies. But at the fifth BRICS summit, its first in South Africa at the coastal resort of Durban, leaders pointed to their shared histories and aims: South Africa, very much the junior partner with a much smaller economy, has a decades-old relationship with China and Russia since they funded and armed anti-apartheid liberation movements; it shares a history of colonization with Brazil, a country that was the destination for more African slaves than any other; and with India as Mahatma Gandhi lived in South Africa for more than 20 years and developed his political activism here as he faced discrimination from a white minority government. South African President Jacob Zuma, whose country is lobbying to be home to the BRICS development bank, said the formal negotiations to establish the institution were “based on our own considerable infrastructure needs, which amount to about $4.5 trillion U.S. dollars over the next five years.” The bank will also cooperate with other emerging market countries and developing economies. Zuma said the bank also will establish a “BRICS contingent reserve arrangement,” a pool of money to cushion member states against any future economic shocks and further lessen their dependence on Western institutions. Both those aims challenge the traditional roles of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, institutions that in their 50-year life have been dominated by the United States and Europe’.[1]

Will Durban spell the end of the era of Breton Woods???  The AP report continues that ‘Brazil’s President Dilma Rousseff said BRICS has confounded its critics. “Even the most skeptical voices do recognize the contribution the BRICS bloc of countries has provided in the field of international economics,” she said. Even the World Bank has said that global growth over the past few years and for the foreseeable future is being driven by the bloc. Rousseff said it is time multilateral institutions like the IMF and World Bank become more democratic to clearly reflect the growing influence of developing countries’.[2]  If nothing else, these developments highlight the power of words, as the mere concept of BRIC (or BRICS, as it is now spelt and understood) was actually coined by the Goldman Sachs economist Jim O’Neill, lumping together far-flung countries with apparently similar economic outlooks. I wonder what will happen to the MIST configuration in some years’ time???

---

[1] “BRICS plan development bank to fund infrastructure” AP (27 March 2013). http://www.ellwoodcityledger.com/news/business/brics-plan-development-bank-to-fund-infrastructure/article_8d14b66c-c68d-59eb-b82c-b94ccc88064d.html.,

[2] “BRICS plan development bank to fund infrastructure”.

Cambridge House: The Dollar Vigilante Talks

‘The Dollar Vigilante’s Jeff Berwick is back chatting about a myriad of economic and stock market-related issues with Cambridge House Live’s anchor, Bridgitte Anderson. Taped at Cambridge House International’s Vancouver Resource Investment Conference. (24 Jan 2013)’.

Counting the Cost – The cost of the London Olympics

As the 2012 London Olympics begin, we are focusing the world’s most-watched sporting festival on this special edition of Counting the Cost. So what is the price tag for London’s Games? And when the games are over and the last medal is handed out, what kind of legacy will be left? Joining us to discuss this is Daniel Moylan, the chairman of the London Legacy Development Corporation; and Pamela Gardner, the director of neighbourhoods and communities at East Thames, a housing provider and social regeneration charity. A more immediate challenge than creating a legacy is providing security. And the scale of the security operation for London 2012 is quite staggering. Joining us is Dr. Pete Fussey, a senior lecturer in Criminology at the University of Essex whose work has focused on security and regeneration in relation to major events. Counting the Cost is also looking at the Olympic trademark and the issues behind it. Why are small British businesses being prevented from benefiting from Olympic fever? Is the Olympic branding clampdown going too far? And are Olympic organisers killing off the spirit of the games? (28 July 2012).

The London Olympics: Austerity Rules???

A lot of hype surrounds this year’s Olympic Games in London. And the UK has not spared any costs . . . hosting ‘the 2012 Summer Games cost a mere $14 billion’,[1] while the Cameron government has spent months preaching austerity and cutting services. . . but spending money to offer illusory comforts or sheer escapist fantasies is arguably cheaper than tackling real problems upsetting real people.

The ‘satirical, sardonic, and mildly offensive’ Daily Shame opines: ‘Dunno about you but this double-dip recession’s going rather well isn’t it. I read in the papers that austerity is the only path to growth, you see. David Cameron said so. George Osborne said so. I don’t know if you’ve heard of George Osborne, but he’s the Chancellor of the Exchequer on Tuesdays, Wednesday mornings and Fridays between 11am and 2pm. And I don’t know if you’ve heard of David Cameron, but he’s the fat-faced fella who follows businessmen around with his tongue out saying “I’ll spread my legs for you if you give me some money”. So yeah, austerity it is, folks. That means no money for your health service, no money for wages, no money for libraries and all those things that Gordon Brown spent your money on – because we’ve spent it all on the banks and quantitative easing (i.e. the banks). But austerity is the path to growth’.[2]

In the grand old tradition of bread and games, the UK is now hosting the greatest show on earth, allowing McDonald’s, Coca Cola, and other big corporations to reap the monetary benefits of this orchestrated mass hysteria. Moreover, in this television and internet-saturated 21^st-century world of ours, not just the British public is lulled into a serene sleep of oblivion, the whole global public out there will now be able to enjoy the benefits of Olympic anaesthetics like never before. The Belfast Telegraph happily reports that ‘[b]illions of people from across the world tuned in to watch the £27 million spectacular [Olympic opening show], while thousands of others travelled to the UK to witness the official start of the sporting celebration in person. The three-and-a-half-hour show seemed to be an instant hit with many, with its British sense of humour and vibrant soundtrack celebrated by viewers from other countries’.[3]

Danny Boyle’s quirky presentation of the Queen, Bond, and Great Britain has fired up a lot of people . . . even the exported talking head (read twat) Piers Morgan seems to have forgotten himself gazing upon the £27 million extravaganza. Obviously also forgetting that the EU is the new wanna-be European empire, albeit with London preferring to hang on to the Pound Sterling, Mister Morgan nevertheless went ahead and tweeted his ridiculous statement. A statement that led to numerous responses, such as this one: “Why don’t you invade India and report back on how it goes”, by jonronson‏@jonronson or the more sober “Sad that you would say that. World doesn’t need more empires”, by RayBeckerman‏@RayBeckerman. On a more serious note, Al Jazeera’s Kamahl Santamaria states that the ‘latest [UK] government report has the games on target to cost $14.5bn of public sector money. However, a recent parliamentary committee warned the full cost of the games could amount to $17bn and skeptics are saying it could be even more. So there is the cost but how will the Olympics affect the British economy?  A report by VISA predicts an increase in consumer spending of $1.2bn during the games and a $8bn stimulus to the British economy over three years. David Cameron, the British prime minister, is more optimistic, saying that the London Games will generate over $20bn. But when the games are over and the last medal is handed out, what kind of legacy will be left?  The idea of creating a legacy in London’s East End was central to London’s successful bid back in 2005. In Victorian times east London was a black hole of slums and disease. It got bombed heavily in World War II. Nowadays it can still present a picture of gloom, the forgotten part of the British capital, so London’s bid for the Olympics offered hope that the games might finally turn the area around’.[4]  Rather than the East End, the real winners this year will be the international corporations sponsoring the games: ‘The Olympic Games in London have got off to a shaky start, with political controversies, security failings and traffic concerns. And now it’s some of the athletes in the main spotlight, and not only because of their sporting skills. It’s their toned bodies that are grabbing the headlines, as RT’s Anastasia Churkina reports (28 July 2012)’.

‘Top sponsors at the Olympic Games are expected to pay at least £65 million each, with the International Olympics Committee raising over £12 billion in costs of the games from domestic sponsors. This comes as up to two-thirds of the tickets for the games have been given to Olympic bodies and corporate sponsors, while London closes off public roads for the exclusive use of VIPs. Mark Perryman, Olympics author, says the Olympics has turned from a game for the common man into a showcase for corporate greed, disconnecting sports from the average fan. Press TV has conducted an interview with Perryman to further discuss the issue (25 July 2012)’.

---

[1] Ryan Rudnansky, “Opening Ceremony 2012: Kickoff of London Olympics Lives Up to High Price Tag” bleacher report (28 July 2012). http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1275904-opening-ceremony-2012-kickoff-of-london-olympics-lives-up-to-high-price-tag.

[2] Admin, “Osborne and Cameron spread UK’s legs for business, close them for the rest of us” The Daily Shame (27 July 2012). http://www.dailyshame.co.uk/2012/07/satire/osborne-and-cameron-spread-uks-legs-for-business-close-them-for-the-rest-of-us/.

[3] “London 2012 Olympic Games: Billions tune in to watch spectacular opening” The Belfast Telegraph (28 July 2012). http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/sport/olympics/london-2012-olympic-games-billions-tune-in-to-watch-spectacular-opening-ceremony-16191078.html.

[4] Kamahl Santamaria, “The cost of the London Olympics” Counting the Cost (28 July 2012). http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/countingthecost/2012/07/201272895042894654.html.

LIBOR: Barclays Manipulation

The Libor scandal has been in the news now for some weeks. The news broadcaster Euronews explains: ‘Libor – the London Interbank Offered Rate – is the average cost of borrowing at which Britain’s banks lend each other money. It is calculated daily, based on information supplied by those banks and is used worldwide as a benchmark for prices on trillions of euros worth of derivatives and other financial products. After the financial crisis, the Libor rate also was seen as a guide to the health of bank’s balance sheets. Barclays manipulation alone could not have had a big effect on the final rate, but the suggestion is a lot of the big banks were doing the same thing. And the Libor rate has an effect on the real economy as Tony Greenham, Head of Finance and Business at the New Economics Foundation, explained: “That average is what drives the interest rates paid by hundreds of millions of people on their own mortgages, small business on their loans, student loans, insurance products. It affects a hugely diverse range of financial transactions globally, not just in the UK.” Britain’s central bank, the Bank of England, is trying to avoid being dragged into this scandal. It has denied it knew about Libor manipulation and was allowing it to happen. “It is nonsense to suggest that the Bank of England was aware of any impropriety in the setting of Libor,” a BoE spokesman said. “If we had been aware of attempts to manipulate Libor we would have treated them very seriously.” Barclays said it submitted artificially low estimates of its borrowing costs because it thought rivals were doing the same, and higher submissions would make it appear to be in trouble. Barclays is the first bank to settle in an investigation which is looking at more than a dozen other banks, including Citigroup, HSBC, UBS and RBS. HSBC said that as a bank that contributes to setting the Libor interest rate it was providing information to authorities, but the Financial Services Authority said it was not investigating HSBC’ (2 July 2012).

 

Libya Elections 2012

The apparently orchestrated Arab Awakening and Libya’s violent Assisted Rebellion, which ended in Colonel Gadhafi’s violent death, have now finally born their first tangible fruits, as related by AP’s Maggie Michael: ‘Jubilant Libyans chose a new parliament Saturday [, 7 July] in their first nationwide vote in decades, but violence and protests in the restive east underscored the challenges ahead as the oil-rich North African nation struggles to restore stability after the ouster of longtime dictator Moammar Gadhafi. One person was killed and two wounded in a gunbattle between security forces and anti-election protesters in the eastern city of Ajdabiya, according to the head of the election commission. Nouri al-Abari said the polling centre targeted by the protesters was later reopened and voting commenced normally. The shooting followed a attacks on polling centres in the eastern half of the country, which was the cradle of the revolution against Gadhafi but is angry about the perceived domination of power by rivals in Tripoli. The vote capped a transition that has exposed major fault lines ranging from the east-west divide to efforts by Islamists to assert power’.[1]

In other words, the transition to democracy in Libyahas apparently not been a complete success. Now, “major fault lines ranging from the east-west” are beginning to expose the power-struggle between Islamist forces and so-called proponents of democracy, arguably backed by major international oil and gas companies desirous of big shares in the North African country’s underground wealth. Still, the BBC optimistically reports that now ‘[p]artial results are expected later in the week, with some unofficial exit polls suggesting a liberal alliance was leading Islamist parties. Officials said turnout on Saturday was about 60%. Voting continued in some areas where technical difficulties caused delays’.[2]  Libyans have not been able to cast votes since 1964 . . . a dentist Adam Thabet said “I have a strange but beautiful feeling today”.[3]

The UN and the Libyan Electoral High Commission (HNEC) provide these statistical data: Libyahas ‘2.8 million registered voters from around 3-3.5 million eligible (45% women). 2,639 individual candidates (competing for 120 seats in 69 constituencies). 374 party lists from more than 100 political entities (competing for 80 party seats in 20 constituencies). 559 women registered for party seats (44%). 88 women registered for individual seats (3%)’.[4]  In contrast, last year the Obama Administration declared that the costs of the war in Libya amounted to $550 million.[5]  Additionally, Canada spent about $110 million CAD, France $813 million USD, Italy $1.24 billion USD, the UK $333 million USD, and the U.S. in total $1.3 billion USD.[6]  In other words, a grand total of about $3.5 billion USD were spent as subsidies for the oil and gas industry, or for the benefit of 2,8 million registered Libyan voters casting ballots on who should take responsibility for selling offLibya’s natural assets . . . France, Italy, and the UK are now going through difficult times as the Euro crisis widens and austerity measures cut deep and deeper. As the map reproduced below indicates, other states also contributed: namely, the EU members Belgium, the Netherlands, Spain, Denmark, Sweden as well as the UAE, Qatar, and the North Sea Oil-rich tiny nation of Norway.

At the beginning of July, the Libyan Deputy Minister of Higher Education and Scientific Research, Prof. Fathi Al Akkari said that “Libyaneeds everything. There is huge demand for goods, services and know-how from all sectors of the economy and Libyawelcomes all to support its rebuilding efforts”.[7]  At the end of June, over 150 delegates from Canada, China, Germany, Egypt, Italy, UAE, UK, GCC, Middle East, USA and other countries participated in the Future Libya Development Forum event, held in Dubai. These individuals were there to “demonstrate and reassure their commitment to the Libyan market and create and strengthen their trading links with Libya’s public and private sector business communities”.[8]  In the meantime, hapless Libyan voters were given the opportunity to exercise their democratic rights in an effort to convince them and the world that Libya is moving forward . . .

---

[2] Maggie Michael, “Violence mars Libyan election  ” AP (08 July 2012). http://thechronicleherald.ca/world/114867-violence-mars-libyan-election.

[2] “Libya election: Count under way after historic vote” BBC News (08 July 2012). http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-18758389.

[3] Maggie Michael, “Violence mars Libyan election  ”.

[4] “Libya election: Count under way after historic vote”.

[5] “Libyan war cost $550 million so far, lawmaker says” Reuters (30 March 2011). http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/30/us-libya-usa-cost-idUSTRE72T6XZ20110330.

[6] “Funds spent by Foreign Powers on War in Libya. – 2011 military intervention in Libya” Wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_military_intervention_in_Libya.

[7] “Libya open to doing business with international partners, Minister.” BI-ME (04 July 2012). http://www.libyaninvestment.com/libya-business-news/65313.html.

[8] “Dubai Chamber endorses Libya Infrastructure and Rebuild Conference” UAE (08 February 2012). http://www.ameinfo.com/289465.html.

American Autumn: an Occudoc (full length)

Following a year of occupying and sleeping rough, here is the intrepid Dennis Trainor, Jr.’s long-awaited Occudoc. Trainor is a writer and host of Acronym TV.[1] The equally intrepid David Swanson had this to say about Trainor’s latest: “we now have a film of our own. This is not amateur hour. This is a movie as well made, in technical terms, as anyHollywood blockbuster with Pentagon funding. But this is a movie with us in it. I don’t mean our little group of activist friends. I mean us, the people of this country, our stories, our hardships, our triumphs, our injustices, our tragedies, our humor. This is radically different from what you’ll see at your local movie theater”.

---

[1] Acronym TV. http://acronymtv.wordpress.com/.

Brussels EU Summit: A Final End to the Euro-Crisis???

The European Union Summit ended with a final plan to address the eurozone debt crisis. It aims to help struggling banks and control borrowing costs (29 June 2012).

The Los Angeles Times reports that ‘European Union leaders surprised and impressed markets worldwide Friday [, 29 June 2012] by taking unexpectedly decisive action to boost confidence in the struggling euro common currency at a summit where little had been expected except impasse and discord. At the urging of heavily indebted Spain and Italy, the presidents and prime ministers of the 27 EU nations agreed to let the European Central Bank use its surplus cash to recapitalize insolvent Spanish banks and to buy Spanish and Italian government bonds at interest rates vastly more affordable for those two nations, officials told reporters in Brussels after their two-day meeting. The moves were expected to spare Italy and Spain from paying such high costs to borrow money that they would have to seek bailouts for their national treasuries, a prospect that would likely overwhelm the EU’s emergency rescue funds. They are the third- and fourth-largest economies in the 17-nation Eurozone, which shares the euro currency’.[1]

APM’s Marketplace presenter Kai Ryssdal says it like this: “When you get right down to it, this has been a pretty good week for the economy — risk-wise — both here and over in Europe. That’s actually saying something, given the peril Europe could possibly hold”.[2]  In a somewhat grim voice, CNBC’s senior editor John Carney adds that “We are done for a few days, but by Monday, what people are going to see is that there’s a promise, but the promise to bail out the banks is based on a lot of contingencies, a lot of things that have to be agreed upon that are not yet agreed upon — like a bank supervisor. They’re going to create an entirely new regulatory apparatus before they will do the bank bailout. I mean, we’ve seen how long it’s taken to implement Dodd-Frank here, and we already had the regulators. They want to create entire new ones — it’s not going to happen quickly, and it might not happen quick enough”.[3]

---

[1] “EU summit produces surprise moves to bolster struggling euro” The Los Angeles Times (29 June 2012). http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/world_now/2012/06/eu-summit-produces-surprise-action-to-bolster-the-struggling-euro.html.

[2] Kai Ryssdal, “Weekly Wrap: On risk and Europe” Marketplace Business (29 June 2012). http://www.marketplace.org/topics/business/weekly-wrap-risk-and-europe.

[3] Kai Ryssdal, “Weekly Wrap: On risk andEurope”.

EU/Russia Summit in St. Petersburg, June 3-4, 2012

 EU/Russia Summit to discuss Eurasian Economic Union, CIS modernization, bilateral ties, situation in Syria.

And here is Herman van Rompuy, the President of the European Council, having his opportunity to mince a few words.

Following this minor Euro-summit, Putin took not such a slow boat to China, where he met up with Mister Hu for a big get together  . . .

Occupy Bilderberg Continued

‘Around 150 of the world’s elite will meet outside of Washington, DCthis week at the annual Bilderberg Conference, and although the agenda isn’t advertised to the public, some sources are already speaking out about what this year might bring. Officially, the details of each Bilderberg Conference aren’t anything its members will go on the record to reveal. According to spectators that have kept a close eye on the event’s happenings each year, however, the annual conference has a reputation for being a kingmaker — and an elusive and exclusive one at that. Speaking to RT earlier this month, radio host Alex Jones shared his expectations for the coming conference. According to the journalist, “Should the elite get behind Mitt Romney or Barack Obama?” is a question that he expects to be brought up for discussion. “Both men are bought and paid for by the same financial interests, and so the discussion will be which candidate can basically con the American people to lay down the tyranny for another four years.” But does the biggest election of 2012 really rely that much on a mysterious meeting? Many people will tell you yes, and they are often willing to provide evidence to explain. Before becoming household names, politicians such as former presidents George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton both attended Bilderberg conferences in the years before being elected to the Oval Office. Tony Blair was on hand at the 1993 gala before becoming prime minister of England in 1997, and the 2008 conference is believed to be the catalyst for that year’s US presidential election: rumors suggest that attendees settling on backing Barack Obama for the Democratic Party nomination at that year’s event, only for contender Hillary Clinton to bow out two days later’.[1]

But, is all this speculation about this annual get-together really warranted???  Does the world’s fate really depend on what is said behind the closed Bilderberg doors???  The journalist and author Daniel Estulin thinks so, and he has published numerous books and articles on the topic. This year, however, he is awfully quiet . . .

In a review of the Estulin book The Bilderberg Group, Bill Gallagher opines that the work “does much to further illuminate these machinations [behind] world events during the last century. Through exhaustive research and first hand accounts, this book details the people and groups responsible for this quiet conquest; it covers events prior to the cold war as well, thereby supplying an invaluable, and up until now, Secret history, that is not just pertinent and important, but really kind of terrifying. The Bilderberg Group meets once a year, in what can only be called extreme secrecy. The group is composed of world leaders from many realms, and is named after the place where the first meeting was held, Hotel Bilderberg, at Oosterbeek, Netherlands, in 1954. Since then, the location of the Bilderberg meetings are kept secret until one week before the meeting, when invitations for that year are sent out. One day prior to a Bilderberg meeting, all private individuals are cleared out of the area, usually a large hotel of world renown, and then government agencies, up to and including the CIA, go over the site with dogs and a fine tooth comb. America has many enemies, but none so potent as those within. Names like Rockefeller, Clinton, Kerry, Bush, Brzezinski, Kissinger — these crop up over and over again when the Bilderberg group and its satellites are examined. The designs of this elite group have become more evident as their plans proceed, and culmination approaches. The book The True Story Of The Bilderberg Group highlights all this, and it should be said that were it not for this work by Mr. Estulin, the maneuverings by these traitors would be much further advanced than they are. The Bilderberg group is actually just one of many groups planet wide whose purpose is world government, but this does not mean a world government encompassing American ideals of freedom and free enterprise, but one comprised of large police forces enforcing global taxation, electronic mind control, behavior engineering, and total control of just about everything of value. It is outwardly stated by these people that America, as well as the rest of the world, must sacrifice its freedom and prosperity for the betterment of mankind. Demands have been made for governments of decree, where multinational corporations rule by profit, and do everything necessary to insure they never lose control of those profits. A striving for the hive, that’s what this is, and the kings and queens and lords and barons of this world are, and have been, actively seeking this throughout the entire 20^th century, and now, into the 21^st. Two fairly well known tentacles of the Bilderberg octopus are the Trilateral Commission, and the Council of Foreign Relations (CFR). There are many members who belong to all three groups, or two of these three groups. David Rockefeller is the moving force behind a lot of the activities of these groups, and it should be noted that no other person has engaged in more treasonous activities than this one man. His family is well known for their hate of the American way, even though it is America [that] has mistakenly given them their exalted positions in the world. Not only have the Rockefellers bitten the hand that feeds, they have actually tried to put it in handcuffs! After reading this book I sincerely believe several of the Rockefellers, especially David, along with certain of their unknown relations, should be arrested immediately”.[2]  Those are strong words, but . . . who is Bill Gallagher and should we trust him???  According to his Facebook page, his full name is William Joseph Gallagher and he describes himself as a ‘Writer and Publisher. Treasure Hunter. Metal Detector Specialist. Gem Specialist and Lapidary. Master Leathersmith. Stone Carver. Political Activist. Numismatist’.[3]

Back to this year’s Bilderberg event now . . . Here is the notorious Abby Martin on air, explaining how it works.

(31 May 2012)

 Miss Martin mentioned the Logan Act, and the good people of Wikipedia tell us that this particular Act ‘is a United States federal law that forbids unauthorized citizens from negotiating with foreign governments. It was passed in 1799 and last amended in 1994. Violation of the Logan Act is a felony, punishable under federal law with imprisonment of up to three years’.[4]

(31 May 2012)

 

---

[1] “Will Bilderberg elect the next US president?” RT (30 May 2012). http://rt.com/usa/news/bilderberg-us-conference-jones-629/.

[2] Bill Gallagher, “REVIEW: The True Story Of The Bilderberg Group” The Bilderberg Group (15 February 2012). http://bilderbergbook.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=42&Itemid=2.

[3] “William Joseph Gallagher, info” Facebook. https://www.facebook.com/luxefaire#!/luxefaire?sk=info.

[4] “Logan Act” Wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logan_Act.