Crimes Against Reality

What computerized accounting fraud can taketh away

computerized accounting fraud and airplanes flying into buildings can cover up



In September of 2004, Treasury Secretary John Snow spoke at the National Press Club on the U.S. economy. It was a most revealing speech - probably much more so than he intended.   The following is a clip from that speech and it is the beginning point of this commentary.   If you don't have working sound, you can read it by clicking HERE

The two key pieces of information that Treasury Secretary Snow gave us were that the Equity Markets collapsed in 2000 and that $7 TRILLION dollars was taken out of the economy. 

At the end of this excerpt, Snow repeats a question that world finance and economic leaders ask him...

"How could it be that the American economy has weathered all these storms the way it has and continued even in the face of these extraordinary headwinds to continue to move to job creation, higher levels of growth and now of course, leading the recovery in the world economy?"

The answer is that it couldn't.  When the Equity Markets collapsed, the economy of the United States collapsed. 


Click Here for Audio


So how is it that the Equity Markets collapsed and nobody jumped out of windows and there were no big headlines proclaiming: 'Stock Market Crash!'?    The answer to that question is fraudulent accounting reports - fabricated statistics and - as Robert Bradley called it recently in a talk on Enron - philosophical fraud:  Crimes Against Reality

In straight talk: they are cooking the books.  The unemployment numbers being reported are false.  The GDP growth is false.  Stock market values are false.  

The economic game plan for destroying the U.S. economy is very simple and can be likened to rape.

Through government regulation or policy, one entity is held down leaving the rapist free to have his way with the targeted victim. The goal is predatory - destroy the entity and steal what they have.  In economic terms - it's called supply side economics.  Hold one side down - steal or blow out the other.  It's not free market capitalism.   It's economic warfare on free market capitalism and on our country.   It is in this way the biggest heist in the history of the world was pulled off and now the criminals are trying to bury the evidence.    

Enron was prototypical of the strategy, but it was not the biggest heist.  The biggest heist was the fraudulent tech boom.  To understand how it worked, one must step back in time to October 19, 1987 - Black Monday. 

In 1987, in a day and a half, the stock market lost over a trillion dollars of valuation when Market Specialists - the Goldman Sachs, the Lehman Brothers, the Morgan Stanleys, etc. refused to step in to make the market.  There were sellers - but no buyers.  After a day and a half of staggering losses, the Federal Reserve stepped in to back the market - opening up the U.S. Treasury to Wall Street.   It seems safe to say with the benefit of hindsight, that the market failure was engineered for the purpose of creating the 'need' for the Federal Reserve to step into the to regulate it.  This was the set up.   

Following the Fed backed market recovery, a commission was formed to determine the cause of the crash and to make recommendations to prevent it from ever happening again.  That commission was called the Brady Commission after Nicolas Brady, the man who was chosen to lead it.  The Commission's conclusion was that the crash was caused by "the interplay between stock, options and futures" [1].  An important part of their solution was to put all three markets under the control of the FED - Alan Greenspan. 

The Commission's solution was to implement 'plunge protection' - effectively placing a limit on the amount that the market could drop in any one day.  This put a control on one side of the market leaving the other side of the market - the up side to rise without limit.  This is the same strategy that was used on the California energy market that allowed Enron to game the electricity market - nearly bankrupting California. 

The one-sided control of the market was a ticking time bomb ready to detonate when the moment was right.  That moment came on August 9, 1995 when the Netscape IPO hit the market.   The Netscape IPO set off the tech boom with the largest one day rise in a stock price - 150% - in the history of Wall Street. 

"Ron Baumert remembers Netscape. He started there when he was 26 years old.  You weren't quite sure just what you were doing, but you knew it had significance. Innovation and growth and doing something avant garde ... no one knew where it was going, but we were going to do it anyway," he said."

So what was special about Netscape that it kicked off a 1920's repeat of 'irrational exuberance'?  The answer is nothing. Netscape was just a browser for the Internet - one of several.  The difference was in the marketing of the concept of the Internet potential.  As you listen to Robert Bradley tell the Enron story from the inside, they were creating the 'image' of a massively successful corporation when the reality was just the opposite.  They were selling an illusion. 

That is in fact, what the dot.con tech boom was all about - it was selling an illusion while stealing the hard earned 401k's of from working people.  Enron was just the biggest and the most famous because of the computerized energy trading system and the theft of billions from the California utilities and energy consumers. [As an aside: Jeff Skilling was also on the Houston branch of the Dallas Federal Reserve Board.]

The dot.con was led by Initial Public Offerings (IPO's).  Before an IPO is issued, there must be an audit to certify that the company is worthy of public trust and investment.  So the partners in crime were the investment bankers and the technology corporations who provided the majority of the venture capital for illusory dot.con corporations.  So what did they get out of it?   The Global Network - Global Crossing.  And that global network has become the pipeline for wealth leaving our nation.  It was strategically planned as described by Thomas Barnett, military strategist and later the 'Joseph Goebbels' for the Office of Force Transformation for the Secretary of Defense.

The whole tech boom from beginning to end was a market manipulation that took $ 7 TRILLION dollars out of the economy.  Alan Greenspan through the The Federal Reserve fed the boom by increasing the money supply and keeping interest rates artificially low while our economy was being drained.  Easy money for refinancing (Robert Zoellick was at Fannie Mae during this timeframe) provided the means for people to take equity loans out of their homes as they attempted to adjust to the 'New Economy' which is actually the 'creative destruction' of our economy as capital and industry moves to cheaper labor market countries.   As Barnett describes it - the "old core" and the "new core".  We are the old core - China and India are the 'new core'.

Barnett described Wall Street's game plan in a presentation he gave to the Industrial College of the Armed Forces.  The following is an excerpt from Barnett's presentation (note: he is a master at doublespeak).  The strategy below is the strategy to destroy the U.S. - not the strategy for the benefit of the U.S.

"Four elements are put together.  Iíll confess, Iím an economic determinist.  Iíll say that technology is the main driver of history.  If globalization continues to advance - all these good things will happen.  You can attach numbers to most of these in terms of per capita income.   Get them below a certain level and they stop doing a lot of these bad things and they start moving in the direction of these positive things.  But Iíll argue we have to manage carefully four crucial flows within globalization IV.  Those four crucial flows meaning resources in regions where they are plentiful have to migrate to regions where they are in scarce supply.       The movement of people is a key flow.  The money of energy is a key flow.  The movement of money - long term, foreign direct investments - not flows in and out of stock markets, not commercial bank loans but foreign direct investment - equity ownership.  Finally, the exporting of security which only the United States can do in any appreciable manner."

The movement of people - allowing our country to be invaded by illegal aliens and importing foreign workers on visas to drive our wages down. Drive our wages down to poverty level so that we can't stop the globalists from destroying our country as they attempt to establish global governance.    Energy to China to fuel their growth while starving our economy of the energy we need.  Moving money and investment out of our country via the global network and fraudulent 'free trade' agreements to China, India and Mexico.  'Exporting Security' means waging war on countries un-cooperative to the global system.  It also means the division of our military into a global force and a crippled domestic force (Northern Command).  The global force is for the global government under the United Nations.  The intent is to impose 'democracy' at the point of a gun if necessary.  They've already divided the world up into sectors and they've incorporated foreign military 'partnerships' into the global military. 

So essentially, Alan Greenspan oversaw the sell off of American assets while he made war on American workers. After feeding the tech boom in the 90's he started raising interest rates beginning in 1999 raising them six times - with the end of the bogus tech boom planned for the 2000 New Millennium and the so-called 'New Economy' - third worldization of the United States.  



According to some analysts, there was no evidence for the conclusion that the market failure was due to "the interplay between stock, options and futures".

The other popular theory was that the crash was caused by nervous investors who were worried about a tax law change that was moving in Congress.  That law would have prevented the junk bond people from deducting interest on leveraged buy-outs.  Personally, I can't see that being the cause either.  When the rules change, people adapt to the new rules.  It's just part of the game. 
The other theory - and the one that I think is the correct one is that Treasury Secretary James Baker III, on October 14th made an "announcement of a large U.S. trade deficit and he suggested the need for a fall in the dollar on foreign exchange markets.   Fears of a lower dollar led foreigners to pull out of dollar-denominated assets, causing a sharp rise in interest rates".   [See Russian Connection - James Baker III]
Since at the time, the markets were very sensitive to everything that government officials said about the economy, it seems unlikely to me that Baker wouldn't have known the effect that he would have on the markets.  My suspicions are that it was intentional to give a plausible excuse for the Market Specialists to refuse to back the market thereby setting the stage for the Federal Reserve to move in to become the 'regulator' of all three markets.  
As far as I know, there was no punitive action taken against the Market Specialists for not stepping in to back the market as they were obligated to do by virtue of their special market privileges. 
With the U.S. Treasury opened up to Wall Street and the Brady Commission's recommendations for 'plunge protection' effectively placing a limit on the amount that the market could drop in any one day, it left the Treasury vulnerable for market manipulation on the upside - which is exactly what happened with the tech boom which was clearly stock market manipulation.  If you pump the value of a stock up high enough - and you are taking profits while you are pumping, then the floor limit on a stock market drop is meaningless.