Economic Warfare


"If the American people ever allow the banks to control the issuance of their currency, first by inflation, and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property, until their children wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. The issuing power of money should be taken from banks and restored to Congress and the people to whom it belongs. I sincerely believe the banking institutions having the issuing power of money, are more dangerous to liberty than standing armies." ~ Thomas Jefferson





                                  'Planning For This Great Economy'  




                                          "So Proud Of You"

[Note: Maloney did say both things in this hearing.  I simply reversed the order in which she said them and cut out intervening speech]

Greenspan's War on Workers.  He redefined the inflation to mean rising wages rather than rising prices.  So to solve the 'inflation problem' of wages, he lobbied the Congress to increase the supply workers.  Flooding our labor markets with foreign workers - legal and illegal drops the price of labor thereby controlling 'inflation' under Greedspan's revised definition.   

[Note: Clinton achieved deficit reduction because he was dismantling our government (reinventing government) by contracting it out. The savings are 'one-time'.  The initial contracts are loss leaders.  Once a contracting firm 'owns' the function, the price goes up.]



Ultimately, the gravity of Greenspan's actions far surpasses the issues of wealth distribution, or whether America's elderly will spend their waning years in dilapidated hovels without water or heat. His maneuverings are a threat to the basic principles of representative government. He knows as well as anyone that democracy can be effectively undermined by eviscerating economic solvency. "Massive debt" transfers power to unelected authorities and creates a slavish relationship between the citizen and state creditors. (Those creditors, in turn, seize anything of value and sell it back
to the citizen at twice the price.)

This is the real danger of Greenspan; he is putting democracy in a "hammerlock" and delivering the nation into the foul grip of the banking establishment and their brother-in-arms', corporate America.

As the debt increases, our prospects grow dimmer.




Alan Greenspan's War on America's New Deal Democracy

"No one has taken on the task of bankrupting the US Treasury with greater zeal than Alan Greenspan. The wizened Fed-master has taken burgeoning budget surpluses and turned them into massive debt in less than four years."

"As the debt increases, our prospects grow dimmer."


Clinton/Greenspan: China Belongs

China is one of the world's biggest economies, Greenspan said, even though it has barely begun to realize its full potential.

"(The Chinese economy) should expand further in response to WTO participation," Greenspan said.

After Greenspan's brief address, Mr. Clinton spoke about China's human rights problems, and the security implications of admitting the country into the WTO.


Greenspan's Remarks At the Chinese Embassy:

"The addition of the Chinese economy to the global marketplace will result in a more efficient worldwide allocation of resources, and will raise standards of living in China and its trading partners. Should China accept the challenge of international competition embodied in World Trade Organization membership. It will doubtless promote internal economic development, encourage the adoption of modern technologies, and contribute to lifting its citizens out of poverty.

Clinton's Remarks At The Chinese Embassy

"The only people in China who want this vote to fail are the more reactionary elements who do not want to give up control. And they need America as a continuing enemy so they do not have to give up control."

[By the inverse, our participation in the WTO means that 'we' gave up control of our economy too - and it shows as the wealth of our nation is being drained - VLD]


Gore - on Reinventing Government

Fourth and finally, strengthening community and civil society. In this way, reinvention and reform are about something far grander than the gears of government, or even the smooth workings of democracy. David Osborne, author of the landmark book "Reinventing Government," talked about the need to "steer, not row." A government that tries to fulfill every function itself -- a government that tries to be an omnipresent welfare state -- will only leave its people in a catatonic state. Smaller, more empowering government unleashes the energy of ordinary families and communities. That's what President Clinton and I tried to do with welfare reform -- setting national standards for moving people from welfare to work, but then letting states and local communities shape the reforms that work best for them.

That's why, in the United States, we started treating our citizens as "customers" -- the way the best private businesses treat their customers. Great Britain pioneered this notion of service to the citizen in the late 1980's. The Danish actually set maximum response times when citizens need help. The French define their goals as putting "the citizen in the core of public service" -- for instance, they now can deliver passports in less than one hour!

[What the Clinton-Gore reinvention of government actually did was to dismantle our government - putting into the hands of corporations and their communist partners.  'Citizen as Customer' is a devaluation of the citizenship.  This was a step towards globalization and the dissolution of our nation.  The bit about 'strengthening community and civil society' is the end-around run of our elected officials.  The 'partners' are the foundations, corporations and non-profit organizations.  They are the carriers of the communist agenda from the United Nations.  Corporations profit from this relationship because the can 'buy-off' the partners and the congress in order that they can continue on with business as usual minus government oversight and regulation. 

Here is what they mean by 'public' participation.  They don't mean 'public', they mean the ecology communists.  The ecology communists follow the UN Agenda 21.... imposing it on local communities and they are funded by one of the worst environmental polluters in the world.  This is what 'public-private partnerships' are all about - implementing communism on people... your tax dollars and corporations for profit.   btw... Bush Sr.  put into place the legislation to establish the taxpayer funded network of communist minions under the guise of 'volunteer' service to America.  They are paid to appear as constituents for the communist UN agenda.  See 1000 Points of Light Foundation ]

[Page: S7417]

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, on May 23, 1990, the Dow Chemical Co. announced a new 4-year partnership for wetlands conservation with Ducks Unlimited , Inc., the Nature Conservancy, and the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation to preserve and protect North America's endangered wetlands.

During a press conference, which was held in my Capitol office, Dow presented the first installment of a $3 million contribution for wetlands protection and restoration. This donation represents the largest corporate financial donation ever to benefit the North American Waterfowl Management Plan [NAWMP] and demonstrates Dow's dedication to environmental conservation and protection.

In my home State of South Carolina, we have some of the most beautiful wetlands in the country. The Ace basin, another fine example of a joint public and private venture, preserves 350,000 acres of wetlands in the Palmetto State. I am pleased that $500,000 of Dow's contribution will go directly to fund the Ace basin project. Peach Point in Texas and the Hillman Marsh in Ontario, Canada will also receive funds for wetlands acquisition and restoration projects of the NAWMP.

The partnership established by the Dow Corp. with Ducks Unlimited , Inc., the Nature Conservancy, and the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation represents the type of cooperation and commitment that will make programs such as the NAWMP work. As a result, our wetlands and waterfowl will be preserved in all their natural splendor. It is clear that a strong economy and a strong ecology can coexist.

Book Review - Earth in the Balance by Al Gore

Consumed by apocalyptic visions, Gore writes of "an ecological Kristallnacht," and declares, "the ferocity of [industrial civilization's] assault on the earth is breathtaking, and the horrific consequences are occurring so quickly as to defy our capacity to recognize them."

Gore in the Balance

"Of no help is Gore's intellectual style. Parts of Earth in the Balance are hashes of New Age cliches (Gaia, the Goddess, Indians' higher spiritual plane, the "psychic pain" underlying modern civilization), and Gore's method throughout is to think not deductively but in similes, comparing everything to everything. (That's why classical economics is like antisemitism.) The result is that much of the book comes off as simply screwy, the work of a dilettante who has dangerously overestimated his intellectual competence."

Earth Sense in the Balance

This week, Bush-administration officials are meeting in Vienna to discuss a United Nations plan to globalize environmental regulation. Dubbed the "Strategic Approach to Global Management of Chemicals" or SAICM, the program is anything but strategic.

SAICM would attempt to regulate basically all substances in commerce manmade and natural and would attempt to manage all the world's solid and hazardous waste. And in time, it could easily spill into other areas air and water.

If you read the documents published by SAICM negotiators, you might think you are reading Al Gore's 1992 book, Earth in the Balance, in which he proposed making the environment the "central organizing principle for civilization." In the chapter titled "A Global Marshall Plan," Gore outlines a utopian vision for a "Strategic Environment Initiative" through which world regulators could effectively "discourage and phase out" supposedly "inappropriate technologies and the same time develop and disseminate a new generation of environmentally benign substitutes."

This sounds an awful lot like SAICM's "Global Action Plan." Among 288 "concrete measures" proposed in SAICM's plan are intentions to "restrict availability" of "highly toxic pesticides;" substitute "highly toxic pesticides;" "promote substitution of hazardous chemicals;" "regulate the availability, distribution and use of pesticides;" "halt the sale of and recall products" that pose "unacceptable risks;" "eliminate the use" of certain "hazardous chemicals;" and so on.

Such policies would be pushed by an international chemicals bureaucracy and implemented by "stakeholders" government, industry, and nongovernmental organizations. Somehow we are supposed to believe that these parties know better than the rest of us the actors in the world marketplace who must live with the consequences of such decisions.

While SAICM negotiators don't want to acknowledge it, many products are valuable because they are toxic and even "highly toxic." These properties provide important advantages, and their risks can be managed. Pesticides, for example, should be highly toxic to the vermin they are supposed to kill, while having little impact on humans when used properly. Chlorine is caustic and dangerous if misused and for that we can thank its Creator. Indeed, chlorine's potent properties will be crucial in helping control the spread of deadly pathogens in the hurricane-torn regions of Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama.

These states face risks that are all-to-common in poor nations risks of cholera, dysentery, and other deadly water-borne diseases. The only difference is, the United States has access to disinfectants and many poor communities around the world don't.

In 1991, residents of Peru and surrounding nations learned about the dire impacts of following the advice of regulators who suggested reduced chlorine use because of alleged risks associated with the chemical. According to the scientific literature on the topic, inadequate chlorination was a key factor in a cholera epidemic that started in Peru and spread throughout the hemisphere, leading to about a million cases of cholera and thousands of deaths.