fufor's unregelmässige news

European Central Banksters seek World Currency, Total Control
July 6, 2009
By Jurriaan Maessen

On June 23, 2009, Lorenzo Bini Smaghi of the European Central Bank, gave a speech at the Aspen Institute Italia called ‘The world after the crisis: Designing the future. A monetary order for the XXI century.’

‘(…) We have been searching for a new monetary order since the fall of the Bretton Woods agreement, in the summer of 1971, and even that order was not so orderly, after all.’



In his speech, Smaghi concludes that the IMF/Worldbank has taken its rightful place as head honcho of the ‘international monetary order’, undermining the autonomy of nation-states as it proceeds with its long-term plan of a global government and a single world currency.

‘The fact that the crisis has restored the IMF to its place at the heart of the international financial system should provide some hope in this respect. (…) Most of the IMF’s shareholders seem to favour making IMF financing easier. (…) In sum, a new world monetary order- (…) requires a mechanism to keep imbalances in check. Key elements of such a mechanism include a prominent role for the IMF in two essential areas: strong and effective surveillance in crisis prevention, and responsible lending, with appropriate limits and conditionality, to countries in need.’

Here it is. Surrendering national and even regional economic power to a world body, a world bank, is the main goal of the transnationalists. And all this in the name of ‘preventing’ crises- for which- by the way- the central bankers are more often than not responsible in the first place.

In a speech delivered in 2000, member of the executive board of the ECB, Sirkka Hämäläinen stated:

‘In conclusion, I should like to come back to Paul Volcker’s prophecy. He might be right, and we might one day have a single world currency. Maybe European integration, in the same way as any other regional integration, could be seen as a step towards the ideal situation of a fully integrated world. If and when this world will see the light of day is impossible to say. However, what I can say is that this vision seems as impossible now to most of us as a European monetary union seemed 50 years ago, when the process of European integration started.‘

The prophecy by long-term chairman of the Fed, Paul Volcker, the speaker is referring to went as follows: ‘if we are to have a truly global economy, a single world currency makes sense.’ But, as it turns out, 50 years ago this process she talks about was far from impossible to imagine. In fact, as the Bilderberg memos of 1955 reveal, plans for a world government were well beyond the stage of wishful thinking or geopolitical daydreaming fifty years ago. It is- after all- a much older plan envisioned way back and pursued by the same nobility responsible for centuries of oppression in Europe. Their feudal model has been passed on from generation to generation, like the blueblood racing through their veins.

On another occasion, Hämäläinen repeated her wish for a global economic integration:

‘As a longer-term vision, one should see European integration as a step towards improving global co-operation and securing peaceful and balanced development in the whole world.’

Meaning of course, global government must replace the sovereignty of nation states. The word ‘peaceful’ translates to the absence of war- for once potentials rivals are eliminated, there is no longer conflict. A consolidation of power, in other words, by the central banks of the world.

Jurgen Stark, at the international conference of central bankers and economic educators in 2006, presses the point that only an independent central bank should be given the instruments of setting interest rates, maintaining price stability and overseeing the economy as a whole:

‘Central Bank independence is nowadays enshrined in many central bank laws and statutes around the world. In order to ensure that this achievement also prevails in the future, broad public awareness of the benefits of central bank independence is essential. Fostering and preserving such awareness requires, in particular, that the independence of a central bank, once granted, is respected by the government in question and not undermined by political interference.’

Stark describes this effort of guaranteeing the omnipotence of central banks by propagandizing people and elected governments as improving ‘economic literacy’. In reality it is a synchronized effort by the central banks to consolidate power and qualifying anyone who criticizes their monopoly as economically illiterate. Stark:

‘Furthermore, to underpin its institutional independence, a central bank also needs to be given functional, personal and financial independence. Functional independence implies that the central bank can apply its own judgement in the conduct of monetary policy with the aim of achieving the objective specified in its mandate. A key element of a central bank’s functional independence is its lasting control over the money base and its ability to freely choose the instruments which it uses to implement its policies.’

Both the European Central Bank and the Federal Reserve have claimed that political oversight and transparency will be somehow disastrous for their operations and, subsequently, the world economy. They want it all, it seems, and they want it now. The rational behind all these outrageous preconditions can be summed up with the words of Jean-Claude Trichet, president of the ECB, in 2005:

‘We Europeans know that we can deliver structural reforms: we have done that efficiently in the past. The new state of the world is only adding new reasons to proceed in a direction which has been the European strategy since the late ‘50s, and has contributed, over almost half a century, to productivity progress, prosperity and jobs.’

The economic crisis of the last year has added to a sense of urgency- with everyone with a stake in this new world order screaming for one world government at the top of their lungs.

One currency to rule them all, one currency to find them, one currency to bring them all and in the darkness bind them- one could say, superimposing Tolkien’s Ring-mantra over the objectives of the world’s central banksters.
http://tinyurl.com/mlo9lx

Israeli sub sails Suez, signaling reach to Iran
July 3, 2009
By Dan Williams

JERUSALEM (Reuters) - An Israeli submarine sailed the Suez Canal to the Red Sea as part of a naval drill last month, defense sources said on Friday, describing the unusual maneuver as a show of strategic reach in the face of Iran.

Israel long kept its three Dolphin-class submarines, which are widely assumed to carry nuclear missiles, away from Suez so as not to expose them to the gaze of Egyptian harbormasters.

It was unclear when last month the vessel left the Mediterranean. One source said the voyage was planned for months and so was not related to unrest after the June 12 re-election of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, whom the Israelis see as promoting the pursuit of nuclear weapons to threaten them.

Sailing to the Gulf without using Suez would oblige the diesel-fueled Israeli submarines, normally based in the Mediterranean, to circumnavigate Africa -- a weeks-long voyage. That would have limited use in signaling Israel's readiness to retaliate should it ever come under an Iranian nuclear attack.



Shorter-term, the submarines' conventional missiles could also be deployed in any Israeli strikes on Iran's atomic sites, which Tehran insists have only civilian energy purposes.

A defense source said the Israeli navy held an exercise off Eilat last month and that a Dolphin took part, having traveled to the Red Sea port though Suez. Israel has a naval base at Eilat, a 10-km (6-mile) strip of coast between Egypt and Jordan, but officials say it has no submarine dock there.

"This was definitely a departure from policy," said the source, who declined to give further details on the drill or say whether the Dolphin had undergone Egyptian inspections in the canal, through which the submarine sailed unsubmerged.

A military spokeswoman had no immediate comment on the voyage, first reported on Friday by the Jerusalem Post.

EGYPTIAN POSITION

Egyptian officials at Suez said they would neither confirm nor deny reports regarding military movements. One official said that if there was such a passage by Israelis in the canal, it would not be problematic as Egypt and Israel are not at war.

Egypt is one of only two Arab states to have signed a peace treaty with Israel, but relations remain cool. However, Arab states that are allies of the United States appear to share some of Israel's concerns about non-Arab Iran's nuclear program.

Israel is assumed to have the Middle East's only atomic arsenal, but does not discuss this under an "ambiguity" policy billed as deterring its enemies while avoiding provocations.

Another Israeli defense source with extensive naval experience said the drill "showed that we can far more easily access the Indian Ocean, and the Gulf, than before."

But the source added: "If indeed our subs are capable of doing to Iran what they are believed to be capable of doing, then surely this is a capability that can be put into action from the Mediterranean?"

Each German-made Dolphin has 10 torpedo tubes, four of them widened at Israel's request -- to accommodate, some independent analysts believe, nuclear-tipped cruise missiles. But there have been questions about whether these would have the 1,500-km (1,000-mile) range needed to hit Iran from the Mediterranean.

Israel plans to acquire two more Dolphins early next decade. Naval analysts say this could allow it to set up a rotation whereby some of the submarines patrol distant shores while others secure the Israeli coast or dock to undergo maintenance.
http://tinyurl.com/kmud63

Saudis give nod to Israeli raid on Iran
July 5, 2009
Uzi Mahnaimi in Tel Aviv and Sarah Baxter

The head of Mossad, Israel’s overseas intelligence service, has assured Benjamin Netanyahu, its prime minister, that Saudi Arabia would turn a blind eye to Israeli jets flying over the kingdom during any future raid on Iran’s nuclear sites.

Earlier this year Meir Dagan, Mossad’s director since 2002, held secret talks with Saudi officials to discuss the possibility.

The Israeli press has already carried unconfirmed reports that high-ranking officials, including Ehud Olmert, the former prime minister, held meetings with Saudi colleagues. The reports were denied by Saudi officials.

“The Saudis have tacitly agreed to the Israeli air force flying through their airspace on a mission which is supposed to be in the common interests of both Israel and Saudi Arabia,” a diplomatic source said last week.

Although the countries have no formal diplomatic relations, an Israeli defence source confirmed that Mossad maintained “working relations” with the Saudis.

John Bolton, the former US ambassador to the United Nations who recently visited the Gulf, said it was “entirely logical” for the Israelis to use Saudi airspace.

Bolton, who has talked to several Arab leaders, added: “None of them would say anything about it publicly but they would certainly acquiesce in an overflight if the Israelis didn’t trumpet it as a big success.”

Arab states would condemn a raid when they spoke at the UN but would be privately relieved to see the threat of an Iranian bomb removed, he said.

Referring to the Israeli attack on an alleged Syrian nuclear facility in 2007, Bolton added: “To this day, the Israelis haven’t admitted the specifics but there’s one less nuclear facility in Syria . . .”

Recent developments have underscored concerns among moderate Sunni Arab states about the stability of the repressive Shi’ite regime in Tehran and have increased fears that it may emerge as a belligerent nuclear power.

“The Saudis are very concerned about an Iranian nuclear bomb, even more than the Israelis,” said a former head of research in Israeli intelligence.

The Israeli air force has been training for a possible attack on Iran’s nuclear site at Natanz in the centre of the country and other locations for four years.
http://tinyurl.com/mlapa6