After the onset of the financial/economic crisis it is increasingly clear that it did not arise just out of thin air – it even did not come as a real surprise to those who had been seeing the symptoms of an insane building of unfounded wealth being invested into e.g. homes at prices totally out of proportions to the real estate real values. The manipulated bankruptcies of the Bear Stearns (profiteer JP Morgan, Rothschild agent) and the Northern Rock (to be managed by Rothschild after the British government paid enormus bailout) made it quite clear that wealthy bankers were profiting at the “cost” of the Federal Reserve and the Bank of England, i.e. taxpayers and depositors. Now the EU has adopted a financial supervision system comprising the same Rothschild supervisors as before the crisis – although these supervisers completely failed to warn against the current crisis brought about by Rothschild bankers!

Gordon-brown-charmør

Prime Minister Gordon Brown gladly grasping for your money. As can be seen on this video and on the right margin of this blog, Mr. Gordon Brown likes to evangelize for the New World Order

 Under the title: "Gordon Brown Helped Cause the Crisis," Keith Marsden, a member of the Council of the Centre for Policy Studies, formerly an operations adviser at the World Bank and senior economist at the International Labour Organization wrote the below.
The Wall Street Journal 15 June 2009: Shocked by the parliamentary expenses scandal and suffering from the recession, British voters have shown their displeasure with Gordon Brown's government. Labour was trounced in local and European elections earlier this month. Despite this electoral drubbing, Labour lawmakers expressed their confidence in the prime minister on June 8. Given his supposedly successful management of the economy while chancellor of the exchequer, the majority felt that he was best qualified to lead Britain out of the recession, which, they claim, was caused by external forces, not by Mr. Brown's policies.

The facts show otherwise. Britain's economic downturn began when its house price and household debt bubbles inevitably burst, beginning with the run on Northern Rock in September 2007. These bubbles had swollen to higher levels, relative to average price and income levels respectively, than in the U.S. and other major economies.

In relation to their long-term average, British house prices soared by 88.5% between 1997 and 2007, according to the OECD. In the U.S. the rise was 64.5%. Britain's household debt rose to 176.9% of disposable income in 2007 from 104.8% in 1997. During the same period, U.S. household debt rose only to 105.8% of disposable income from 64.3% in 1997. The increases in Germany and France were considerably lower.

Gordon Brown tolerated and even encouraged the formation of these bubbles for several reasons. The traditional sources of Britain's economic strength, the mining and manufacturing industries, shrank during his term as chancellor. Total mining sector output, including oil and natural gas, dropped by 31% between 2000 and 2007. Total manufacturing production was stagnant during this period.

Bubble_deesThe gross value, in inflation-adjusted prices, of output from all production industries combined fell by 3% between 2000 and 2007. Their employment level dropped by nearly 1.1 million over the same period. These trends were not an inevitable result of shifts in comparative advantages that are said to occur in advanced economies. Real manufacturing output rose at an average annual rate of 2.2% in the U.S., 1.2% in Germany and 1.1% in France between 2000 and 2006, according to the World Bank.

Eager to achieve the illusion of steady progress in the overall economy, Mr. Brown needed the rapid expansion of financial services, and the real estate and business services industries. Their output soared by 48% and 33% respectively from 2000 to 2007, compared with 19% for the overall economy. Their combined employment level reached nearly 6.7 million in 2007, an increase of more than one million.

Rapid expansion of consumer credit in turn boosted demand for wholesale and retail products and services. The booming financial and real estate sectors, with their inflated salaries, bonuses, and profits generated by unsustainably rapid credit growth, also filled Mr. Brown's tax coffers.

Thus, despite the decline in corporate and personal income and national insurance tax revenues from the production industries, he was able to fulfill Labour's 1997 election promise of expanding public services. The output of health and social services increased by 26.3% from 2000 to 2007. Employment in the category "other service activities," which includes public administration and government services, grew by 1.3 million between 2000 and 2007, reaching almost 10 million — nearly a third of all British jobs.

Eye2_deesSo the boom in the financial and real estate sectors served Mr. Brown's political interests well. And he was by no means a passive bystander to their growth. He urged them along in several policy speeches. Introducing on April 1, 2005, a policy document entitled "Homebuy: Expanding the Opportunity to Own," he insisted that "this Britain of ambition and aspiration is a Britain where more and more people must and will have the chance to own their own homes."

Ignoring the inability of many house buyers to pay their mortgages, he touted this message to City bankers in successive annual speeches at the Mansion House in London, promising them "light-touch regulation." Already in 1997 he transferred the responsibility for bank regulation from the Bank of England to the inexperienced Financial Services Authority. He also curbed the central bank's ability to keep asset inflation in check by removing housing costs from the price index.

Mr. Brown also repeatedly praised the City's "innovative skills," bragging in 2006 that it was responsible for 40% of the world's over-the-counter derivatives trade — which includes the now infamous repackaged subprime mortgages. He gave financial institutions a false sense of security by telling them on June 16, 2004, that "I am determined to ensure that we can lock in greater stability not just for a year, or for an economic cycle, but in this generation."

With this assurance from the chancellor, how could anyone expect bankers to forego juicy profits and bonuses by avoiding innovative but unduly risky practices? Because of the large size and global reach of Britain's financial sector, and the many newfangled financial instruments it created and marketed, Mr. Brown cannot honestly deny all responsibility for Britain's recession.

House_deesThis card house scam , building on castles in the air,  is New World Order finance.

Now US Pres. Obama has launched a plan which seemingly may strengthen the New World Order´s Federal Reserve. But who is to govern a new supervision body? 
The Telegraph 17 June, 2009: The US President said that he wanted to eradicate "a culture of irresponsibility" which had spread from Wall Street to Washington to Mainstreet."  Among the proposals is a strengthened Federal Reserve to take responsibility for major banks, which will be subject to tighter regulation; Speaking after a meeting with many of America's leading regulators, including Fed chairman Ben Bernanke, President Obama stressed that he did not want to repeat a situation where America was "facing one of the largest financial crises in history – and those responsible for oversight were mostly caught off-guard and without the authority needed to address the problem."
He used the landmark address to criticise the industry for creating complex financial instruments "built on a pile of sand" and for allowing "excessive executive compensation – which rewarded recklessness rather than responsibility."

Congressman Barney Frank, who chairs the influential House of Representatives´ Financial Ser John Berlau, of the Competitive Enterprise Institute, said the proposals "leaves the status quo among regulatory agencies largely in place, and only adds additional layers of "systemic" regulation from "super" agencies such as the Federal Reserve."

The Washington Times 16 June 2009: The Federal Reserve, already arguably the most powerful agency in the U.S. government, will get sweeping new authority to regulate any company whose failure could endanger the U.S. economy and markets under the Obama administration's regulatory overhaul plan. 
Secretary of the Treasury, Geithner, said that the administration ….decided to work within the patchwork of multiple agencies established over the past century or so in response to various financial crises.

Bernanke-financial-reformThe financial Times 17 June, 2009 The administration sees the new rules as a rejection of the light-touch approach that held sway under Alan Greenspan, former Fed chairman.
The response of a senior banker summed up Wall Street’s reaction to the Obama administration’s proposals for an overhaul of financial regulation: relief mixed with apprehension at the planned new powers to be assumed by the central bank. 
“If the industry had a choice of an overall regulator, it would have chosen the Fed,” said another Wall Street executive.

Here is an MSNBC video-interview with Congressman Ron Paul: “Now the Fed is more powerful than Congress as for US economy! We have had regulations by the Fed for 20 years – leading to the financial crisis. What should be regulated is the Fed, which in an intransparent manner produces too much money for its friends, giving too easy credits and ruling artificially low interest rates!”

CNBC 17 June, 2009:  Given the massive disruptions that have occurred in the financial markets, the urge is to create an entirely new structure instead of fixing/reforming what is already in place. Regulation means less supply. Less supply means higher prices. Higher prices mean the winners will make more money. This is exactly what the New Deal did when the government tried to set industrial prices and attempted to cartelize the US economy. Bloomberg 17 June. 2009: Obama’s plan would put the Fed in charge of regulating companies whose collapse would damage the financial system.  The Obama administration is creating a Consumer Financial Protection Agency, (CFPA) taking some powers from the Federal Reserve. The American Bankers Association “strongly opposed” such an agency, President Edward Yingling said in a statement.  The Huffington Post reports discontent in the financial industry, which will endeavour to  have Congress prevent the formation of the CFPA – and satisfaction with the consumers.
But Pres. Obama being the puppet of the New World Order leaders, it is difficult to imagine that they should not profit from the CFPA!

Here is always well-informed Paul Watson of the Prison Planet:  The Federal Reserve is a private entity that according to former Fed chairman Alan Greenspan, is accountable to nobody but the banking families that own it! They are: 1) Rothschild Banks of London and Berlin; 2) Lazard Brothers Banks of Paris; 3) Israel Moses Seif Banks of Italy; 4) Warburg Bank of Hamburg and Amsterdam; 5) Lehman Brothers of New York; 6) Kuhn, Loeb Bank of New York (Now Shearson American Express); 7) Goldman, Sachs of New York.

Professor of public affairs at the University of Texas at Austin, Robert Auerbach writes, “The officials leading the Fed today preside over an organization that is run in substantial part by the bankers they regulate…As economic author Nomi Prins highlights, Obama’s plan does nothing whatsoever to fix the excesses of financial institutions blamed for the financial collapse, it only ensures their continued operation and an expansion of the practices that contributed to the economic crisis in the first place.
Proof that the agenda of implementing overt financial dictatorship is being carefully coordinated can be seen in the fact that an almost identical scheme is also being set up in the United Kingdom, where “The governor of the Bank of England has called for greater powers to allow it to fulfil its new role of promoting financial stability,” according to a BBC report.

Alfred Charles de Rothschild of London masterminded the US Federal Reserve System in 1913

The Fed. is a private bank founded by David Rockefeller´s grandfather, Nelson Aldrich, Rothschild agents JP Morgan and Rothschild “cousin” and agent , Paul Warburg – sent by Alfred Rothschild of LondonToday the Rothschilds owns 57% of the stock of the Fed. The Fed has illegally appropriated the power to print US dollars and lend them to the US government at interest rates which the Fed determines itself. In fact – all US federal income tax – and even more – goes to paying interests to the Fed  video, the biggest and most successful robbery of money and national sovereignty in history! (See this, and this and this). In fact, Fed boss, Ben Bernanke, has admitted that the Fed staged the 1929 Wall Street crash. The Fed and its Wall Street owners are the instigators and beneficiaries of the present economic crisis.

But this money-grasping policy may have a natural explanation: Top politicians and psychopatic killers share the same psychological profile! That goes for Rothschild bankers as well, no doubt!
The Los Angeles Times: "Using his law enforcement experience and data drawn from the FBI's behavioral analysis unit, Jim Kouri has collected a series of personality traits common to a couple of professions. Kouri, who's a vice president of the National Assn. of Chiefs of Police, has assembled traits such as superficial charm, an exaggerated sense of self-worth, glibness, lying, lack of remorse and manipulation of others. These traits, Kouri points out in his analysis, are common to psychopathic serial killers.

But - these traits are also common to American politicians!"