Bilderberg.org

[marektysis]

http://www.infowars.com/leveraged-buyout-magnate-henry-kravis-and-wife-marie-josee-kravis-arrive-at-bilderberg-2011/

[marektysis]

THE SECRET BILDERBERG GROUP MEETING:
Why no coverage by mainstream media?
June 12, 2011


(MONROE, WA) -- A recent Internet report caught the collective eyes of the scribes at the mighty Chronicle. It went like this:

“This weekend, dozens upon dozens of the wealthiest and most powerful people in the world will be gathering behind closed doors at a luxury hotel in Switzerland. All of the participants are sworn to secrecy and swarms of heavily armed security guards are making sure that nobody unauthorized gets in. Decisions will be made at this meeting, which will fundamentally change our future…you would think that these meetings would be something that the mainstream media would want to cover… So why doesn’t the mainstream media want to talk about the Bilderberg Group?

From June 9th to June 12th, over a hundred of the most powerful people on the planet meet in utter secrecy and will discuss the future of the world..all of the participants have been sworn not to reveal what is discussed. Yet this doesn’t interest the mainstream media at all?

Every year since 1954, the Bilderberg Group has been holding these meetings. For years, even the existence of this group was denied. On U.S. talk shows anyone that dared to suggest that the Bilderberg Group existed was mocked as a “conspiracy theorist.”

Well, not considering ourselves here at the Chronicle part of “mainstream media” (in the derogatory sense) here goes – the Chronicle does cover Bilderberg.

Remember kids, you read it here first.

Here’s what Wikipedia has to say about the secret Bilderberg Group and their secret meetings:

“The Bilderberg Group, Bilderberg conference, or Bilderberg Club is an annual, unofficial, invitation-only conference of approximately 140 guests, most of whom are people of influence in the fields of politics, banking, business, the military and news media. The names of attendees are made available to the press, but the conferences are closed to the public and the media, and no press releases are issued.

Because of its exclusivity and privacy, the Bilderberg group is frequently accused by conspiracy theorists from both extremes of the political spectrum of being an all-powerful secret society fixing the fate of the world behind closed doors.

Critics of Bilderberg conspiracy theories counter that it is nothing more than a policy discussion forum and social club which only serves as a means to brainstorm, reach consensus, and create social cohesion within the power elite of Western European and North American nations, to better promote Atlanticism and neoliberalism.

The original conference was held at the Hotel de Bilderberg, (hence the name Bilderberg) near Arnhem in the Netherlands, from 29 May to 31 May 1954. It was initiated by several people, including Polish politician Józef Retinger, concerned about the growth of anti-Americanism in Western Europe, who proposed an international conference at which leaders from European countries and the United States would be brought together with the aim of promoting Atlanticism – better understanding between the cultures of the United States and Western Europe to foster cooperation on political, economic, and defense issues…

… The guest list was to be drawn up by inviting two attendees from each nation, one of each to represent conservative and liberal points of view. Fifty delegates from 11 countries in Western Europe attended the first conference, along with 11 Americans.”

Now here is where things get a bit murky and where some may have strange feelings that maybe this group is a bit more sinister than they might have otherwise presumed.

“The success of the meeting led the organizers to arrange an annual conference. A permanent Steering Committee was established…the steering committee also maintained a register of attendee names and contact details, with the aim of creating an informal network of individuals who could call upon one another in a private capacity.”

Now couple that with this: “Historically, attendee lists have been weighted towards bankers, politicians, and directors of large businesses,” and you have all the makings of a good “rich people, heads of state, CEO’s and bankers” rule-the-world-in-secret conspiracy.

The video below addresses the belief that the Bilderberg Group is a “secret society” bent on doing things more than just holding an occasional weekend conference at a resort.

The information below about the Bilderbeg Conference is from http://www.bilderberggroup.net/

Note that is has a point of view: namely that the Bilderberg Group is a “force against good, out to wipe morality from the earth,” and that the annual conferences are, “An annual ideological assault by the world's most power-hungry people.”

WHAT ARE THE CONFERENCES ALL ABOUT?

The Bilderberg Secretariat proclaims the conferences to be '...private in order to encourage frank and open discussion'. Frank and open discussion is a good thing in any forum but when those doing the discussing are some of the very most powerful financiers and media tycoons in the world it begs the question: If what they discuss is for the good of ordinary people why not publicize it!

Isn't it a perverted use of the word 'open' when no one can find out what they're saying?

Is Bilderberg a secret conspiracy?

When such rich and powerful people meet up in secret, with military intelligence managing their security, with hardly a whisper escaping of what goes on inside, people are right to be suspicious.

But the true power of Bilderberg comes from the fact that participants are in a bubble, sealed off from reality and the devastating implications on the ground of the black-science economic solutions on the table.

No, it's not a 'conspiracy'. The world's leading financiers and foreign policy strategists don't get together at Bilderberg to draw up their 'secret plans for the future'.

It's subtler than that.

These meetings create an artificial 'consensus' in an attempt to spellbind visiting politicians and other men of influence. Blair (Tony Blair, former UK Prime Minister) has fallen for this hook, line and sinker. It's about reinforcing - often to the very people who are on the edge of condemning Globalization - the illusion that Globalization is 'good', 'popular' and that it's inevitable.

Bilderberg is an extremely influential lobbying group. That's not to say though that the organizers don't have a hidden agenda, they do, namely accumulation of wealth and power into their own hands whilst explaining to the participants that globalization is for the good of all.
It is also a very good forum for 'interviewing' potential future political figures such as Clinton (1991) and Blair (1993).

THE BILDERBERG IDEOLOGY

The ideology put forward at the Bilderberg conferences is that what's good for banking and big business is good for the mere mortals of the world.

Silently banished are the critical voices, those that might point out that debt is spiraling out of control, that wealth is being sucked away from ordinary people and into the hands of the faceless corporate institutions, that millions are dying as a direct result of the global heavyweight Rockefeller/Rothschild economic strategies.

When looking at one of the (partially reliable) participant lists it should be remembered that quite a number of participants are invited in an attempt to get them on-board the globalization project.

These are carefully selected people of influence, who have been openly critical of globalization.

Examples are Jonathan Porritt (Bilderberg 1999) and Will Hutton (Bilderberg 1997) but there are many others. Most of these kinds of participants are happy to speak about the conference afterwards, and may even be refreshingly critical.

The Bilderberg organizers are accepted by those 'in the know' as the prophets of Capitalism.

Will Hutton, deputy Editor of The Observer newspaper in London and left-leaning Economist, described private clubs of the elite as masterminded by 'The High Priests of Globalization'.

The ecclesiastical allusion is not accidental.

The Bilderberg high priests are a force against good, out to wipe morality from the earth. For the organizers Bilderberg Conferences are an annual ideological assault by the world's most power-hungry people.

Not content with owning unimaginable amounts of money and property they want to use that wealth to acquire even more power for themselves. Power is the most dangerous and addictive drugs known to man. Will the craving be satisfied when a handful of men own and control everything on earth?

WHO IS BEHIND BILDERBERG?

Bilderberg is run by a Steering Group - if you're wondering who's responsible for so much of the capital-friendly and dissent-crushing law-making, poverty and general misery in the world this may be the place to look…this is the closest approximation to a shadow world government…the perverse objective of the Bilderberg Steering Group is to dress totalitarian corporate ideology up to appear rational and push it out, unattributable, for mass consumption under Chatham House rules. Meanwhile, outside the Bilder-bubble, 'god-is-money' globalization is the new religion with the greedy given a pat on the back as they plunder both the earth and a large part of the human spirit.”

Well, there you have the view of the folks at bilderbewrggroup.net. No mistaking where they stand on the issue.

You can find a list of the 1954 founding members of the Bilderberg Group here: http://www.nndb.com/org/514/000042388/

Taking a look at the invite list, it’s easy to see why some would call this group a “shadow government” and not have really good feelings about what the group was up to.

Here is a bit more balanced (perhaps) look Bilderberg in a 2008 report on CNN:



There is a timeline of the Bilderberg Group meetings (and other info) located here

And you’ll find a June 12, 2011 report here from the London Telegrapoh that attempts to separate fact from fantasy about Bilderberg.

And finally, here’s the rumpus from the horse’s mouth, as it were. The complete lowdown about Bilderberg from the official Bilderberg website:

http://www.bilderbergmeetings.org/index.php

There you have it. You picks your horses and you believes what you believes.
http://www.skyvalleychronicle.com/BREAKING-NEWS/THE-SECRET-BILDERBERG-GROUP-MEETING-BR-Why-no-coverage-by-mainstream-media-686675

[marektysis]

http://www.bilderberg-transparency.org/2011/06/10/etienne-davignon/

[marektysis]

Hillary ClintonHillary Clinton is considering leaving her job at the White House as she decides to head the World Bank, next year. This news triggered a lot of debate in the political circles, especially, regarding its authenticity.
The World Bank’s current President, Robert ZoellickRobert Zoellick would be leaving the office after his term expires in the middle 0f 2012. Hillary Clinton has publicly said that she does not intend to stay in the State Department for more than four years. Hence, the reports of Hillary potentially replacing Robert as the head of World Bank, in a year’s time, do not come in as a surprise.
These reports have been confirmed by sources close to Hillary. A source has also confirmed that President, Barrack Obama has expressed his support to Hillary for the potential change in her role. However it is still unknown whether he has formally agreed to nominate her for the position or has only encouraged her, based on her interest. In case, a formal nomination has been made by the US President, approval will be required by the 187 member countries of the World Bank. The official sources from the White House are still quiet over the issue, and have declined to make a comment so far.
HilaryHilary has publically stated several times that she does not plan to stay in the State Department for more than four years. One source who knows the secretary well said "Hillary Clinton wants the job'' A question that intrigues most of her well-wishers is that why would she be willing to let go of her current job? There isn’t much information available to answer this concern but with time all the reasons will be unveiled. This discussion has cropped up at a very crucial time, when the United States is already considering extending support to World Bank's sister organization, the IMF. The head of the IMF has always been a European and the World Bank presidency has always been held by an American.
If Clinton were to leave State, John Kerry, a close Obama ally who is chairing the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, could be considered a possible replacement for her. Despite all the forethought, there is no substantial evidence over whethere ithis is actually going to happen and as to why this news has cropped up in the first place.
Political leaders are waiting to hear from Hilary and the media is eager to get its hands on any criucial information that may reinforce this rumor.
http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/9359483-hillary-clinton-considers-leaving-her-job-at-the-white-house

[marektysis]

Podcast: Dodd-Frank, Housing and Europe’s Power Banker
By JEFF SOMMER
It’s been a year since Congress enacted the Dodd-Frank financial regulation law. That might seem plenty of time to get the new rules in good working order. But as it turns out, many haven’t even been written yet, and lobbying is under way to derail at least some of them.

Louise Story, who covers finance for The Times, has been writing about the obstacles to completing and implementing the regulations required by the law, and she discusses them on the new Weekend Business podcast. Some lobbyists are trying not only to slow the process, she says, but also to overturn the law, if not during this Congress then after the 2012 election.

In another conversation in the podcast, Robert Shiller, the Yale economist, says a social epidemic of rampant optimism caused the housing bubble. As he writes in the Economic View column in Sunday Business, the expectations of home buyers have since plummeted, making it likely that the housing market will remain weak for months to come.

And David Gillen talks to Liz Alderman about the central role of Josef Ackerman, the head of Deutsche Bank, in dealing with the European debt crisis. As she writes on the cover of Sunday Business, Mr. Ackerman may be the most powerful banker in Europe.

While he dispenses advice to European politicians, he is a servant of the shareholders of his own bank. Deutsche Bank’s interests and those of the citizens of an embattled country like Greece are hardly identical, as has been made very clear as the financial crisis continues.

You can find specific segments of the podcast at these junctures: financial regulation (31:07); news roundup (22:05); Deutsche Bank (18:22); Robert Shiller (10:3; the week ahead (2:0.

As articles discussed in the podcast are published during the weekend, links will be added to this posting.

You can download the program by subscribing from The New York Times’s podcast page or directly from iTunes.
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/06/10/podcast-dodd-frank-housing-and-europes-power-banker/

[marektysis]

Bilderberg And You


by Global Research


Global Research, June 13, 2011

This weekend the high-powered think tank, the Bilderberg Group, is meeting to discuss current events, form a consensus on the coordination of policies of the Western imperial powers, and to attempt to influence and shape the world in a direction of their liking. The Bilderberg Group, founded in 1954, is a secretive organizations which holds meetings once per year, drawing together roughly 130 of the world's elite: bankers (such as David Rockefeller), monarchs (such as Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands), central bankers, oil executives, industry leaders, media moguls, establishment academics, prime ministers, presidents and up-and-coming politicians, think tank leaders, the heads of foundations, military commanders and intelligence chiefs, and a host of other important figures.

Bilderberg is not a 'conspiracy', but is rather an organization for the formation of consensus among the elite. They do, however, have a common ideology. Denis Healey, a British politician who was a member of the gorup's Steering Committee for over thirty years, told the Guardian in 2001: "To say we were striving for a one-world government is exaggerated, but not wholly unfair. Those of us in Bilderberg felt we couldn't go on forever fighting one another for nothing and killing people and rendering millions homeless. So we felt that a single community throughout the world would be a good thing." He added: "Bilderberg is a way of bringing together politicians, industrialists, financiers and journalists. Politics should involve people who aren't politicians. We make a point of getting along younger politicians who are obviously rising, to bring them together with financiers and industrialists who offer them wise words. It increases the chance of having a sensible global policy." [Source: Who Pulls the Strings?]

So while our elite get together to "increase the chance of having a sensible global policy" to bring about "a single community throughout the world," the people continue with their lives, not having the ability to influence the media, academics, politicians, or the direction of the world. Unless you are a geostrategic adviser or very rich and influential, chances are you have not been invited to this year's meeting. The discussions from each meeting are secret and unreported, yet the decisions or consensus being formed are far-reaching. Their deeds are done in the darkness of a media blackout. That which can undo them is done in the light. (Click here to learn more.)

Here at Global Research and the Centre for Research on Globalization, we present an alternative type of 'think tank': not secretive, but open and honest; not powerful, but empowering; not elite-driven but people-oriented; not deceptive, but informative. We too, seek to help shape a new consensus among the people themselves, to help shape a new 'public opinion.' We feel, unlike Bilderberg, that an informed and educated populace is not only necessary for a democracy, but is demanded of the inherent rights of being human. Our information is open and available to all. Our aims and objectives are to inform and empower the people. Our methods are to bring to light all of that which stands in darkness. We expose Bilderberg, we don't get invited to their meetings.

However, we do not have the benefactors that Bilderberg is endowed with. We have no bankers, Rockefellers, King or Queens, Rothschilds or others as members. The CIA was not kind enough to fund us, as they did the Bilderberg Group for the first couple years. The country we live in does not foot the bill for our activities, as is the case with Bilderberg. We are not friends with the executives of Shell, Goldman Sachs, the Federal Reserve, BP, or Barclays. Our finances come strictly from you, the reader. We are a donation-based organization, and while our readership far surpasses Bilderberg's membership, our readers surely lack the money and influence inherent at Bilderberg. Thus, we need to beseech our readers to do what they can to help us continue doing what we do. Whether it is $5 or $500 or more, every bit helps. There are more of us than there are of them, and while we may be modest in our means, together, we can overcome. Help shine light on the darkness, help the road clear for a new direction for the world, one not decided by self-appointed oligarchs like those at Bilderberg.

Please donate to Global Research and help us inform, educate, and empower the people against the powers that be.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=25240

[marektysis]

The Next Financial Crisis
by Gary North

Recently by Gary North: The Safe Banking Fantasy


The mainstream financial media are running stories on the next financial crisis. This is unheard of two years into a so-called economic recovery. So weak is this recovery that the old pre-2008 confidence has not returned.

The first sign that "this time, it's different," was Treasury Secretary Geithner's statement, which received widespread coverage, that there will be another crisis.

On May 18, The Daily Beast ran a story on Geithner's unexpected appearance at the initial screening of an HBO movie, Too Big to Fail, which dramatizes the crisis of late 2008, during which time Geithner was president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. In an interview, Geithner said this. "It will come again. There will be another storm. But it's not going to come for a while."

That was surely forthright for a sitting Treasury Secretary. He was not specific, but to say that another crisis will come was unique. He added this: "It's not going to be possible for people to capture risk with perfect foresight and knowledge."

That was amazingly forthright. It points to the reality of the naive faith of regulators that they can devise formulas that will keep the system from being hit by some unexpected mini-crisis that will trigger a wider systemic breakdown. He acknowledged that risk analysis, based on statistics, cannot deal with uncertainty: events outside the law of large numbers that serves as the basis of statistics. Ludwig von Mises discussed this in 1949, and Frank H. Knight wrote a book on this in 1921: Risk, Uncertainty, and Profit. Nassim Taleb has called this a black swan event. Whatever we call it, such an event torpedoes the best-laid plans of government regulators as well as statisticians advising leveraged banks.


"Things were falling apart," Geithner said. "We had no playbook and no tools. . . . Life's about choices. We had no good choices. . . . We allowed this huge financial system to emerge without any meaningful constraints. . . . The size of the shock was larger than what precipitated the Great Depression."

That is the official government line, which Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson used to persuade Congress to fork over $700 billion in TARP loans. It justified the Federal Reserve's swaps at face value of liquid Treasury debt in its portfolio for unmarketable toxic assets held by large banks. It justified the 2009 stimulus package of another $830 billion.

The author of the article correctly noted: "In the end, the taxpayers saved the Wall Street investment banks, with Geithner & Co. injecting enough capital to cushion them from bad bets." That is exactly what happened.

GEITHNER RETREATS

On June 6, Geithner spoke at a meeting of the American Bankers Association in Atlanta. Here, his analysis was completely different from what he had revealed in his appearance at the HBO screening. It turns out that the system was saved by investors, not by the government and the Federal Reserve.

Of the 15 largest financial institutions in the United States before the crisis, only nine remain as independent entities.


Those that survived did so because they were able to raise capital from private investors, significantly diluting existing shareholders. We used stress tests to give the private market the ability – through unprecedented disclosure requirements and clear targets for how much capital these institutions needed – to distinguish between those institutions that needed to strengthen their capital base and those that did not.

He did not mention that the reason why investors came to the rescue was that the winners had been bailed out by the taxpayers and the Federal Reserve.

Regulation has saved us, he insisted, and it will continue to save us.

We now have the authority to subject all major financial institutions operating in the United States to comprehensive, consolidated limitations on risk taking. That represents a dramatic change from before the crisis, when more than half of the financial activity in the nation that was involved in "banking" from the investment banks to large finance companies, AIG, and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, operated outside those limits.


And the markets where firms came together – like the over-the-counter derivatives markets – will now be subject to oversight, once regulators finalize and implement new rules authorized by Dodd-Frank. We now have much stronger tools to limit the risk that one firm's failure could cascade through markets to weaken the rest of the system.


Overall, and this is the most important test of crisis response, the U.S. financial system is now in a position to finance a growing economy and is no longer a source of risk to the recovery.


He ended with this inspiring promise. "So we will do what we need to do to make the United States financial system stronger. We will do so carefully. And as we do it, we will bring the world with us."

This was cheerleading for government regulation. This is what we have come to expect. The problem is this: it is a full-scale retreat from his admission at the HBO screening.


GEITHNER'S GOOFS

Simon Johnson took him to task in the New York Times on June 9, in an article titled, "The Banking Emperor Has No Clothes." Johnson was the chief economist of the International Monetary Fund, and is a member F.D.I.C.'s newly established Systemic Resolution Advisory Committee. He said that Geithner is naive about the supposedly high degree of safety for the banking system. He complains that Geithner is way too optimistic.

First, he reminds us that the government bailed out the banks. He reminds us of Geithner's admission of this in his HBO interview. Second, he reminds us that the international banking system is interconnected.


But big banks in almost all other major countries have run into serious trouble, including those in Britain and Switzerland – where policy makers are now open about the potential scope of further disasters. French and German banks made large amounts of reckless loans to peripheral Europe and have strongly resisted higher capital requirements, helping to create the current potential for contagion throughout the euro zone (and explaining why the Europeans are so keen to keep control of the International Monetary Fund).

Geithner claimed in Atlanta that U.S. banks are less concentrated than other nation's' banks. But how will that save our banks from a crisis that is triggered outside the U.S.? "Mr. Geithner's most serious mistake is to believe that we can handle the failure of a global megabank within the Dodd-Frank framework."


Mr. Geithner's thinking on bank size is completely flawed. The lesson should be: big banks have gotten themselves into trouble almost everywhere; banks in the United States are very big and have an incentive to become even bigger; one or more of these banks will reach the brink of failure soon.

Johnson then gets to the famous bottom line. The bottom line is this:


There is no cross-border resolution mechanism or other framework that will handle the failure of a bank like Citigroup, JPMorgan Chase or Goldman Sachs in an orderly manner. The only techniques available are those used by Mr. Geithner and his colleagues in September 2008 – a mad scramble to find buyers for assets, backed by Federal Reserve and other government guarantees for creditors.
That this should appear in the New York Times is indicative of the extent to which the old confidence in the banking system is fading.


FELDSTEIN WEIGHS IN

On June 8, the Wall Street Journal ran a column by Martin Feldstein, who served as Reagan's chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers. He is a Harvard faculty member.

Feldstein is a Keynesian. He has a reputation as a conservative. He is on the board of contributors to the Journal. He is regarded as a conservative because he favors tax cuts. But he also favors Federal spending in times of crisis. Somehow, he also comes out for a lower deficit.

He said that Obama's $830 billion stimulus package did not go far enough. "As for the 'stimulus' package, both its size and structure were inadequate to offset the enormous decline in aggregate demand." The money should have gone to the Defense Department.


Experience shows that the most cost-effective form of temporary fiscal stimulus is direct government spending. The most obvious way to achieve that in 2009 was to repair and replace the military equipment used in Iraq and Afghanistan that would otherwise have to be done in the future. But the Obama stimulus had nothing for the Defense Department. Instead, President Obama allowed the Democratic leadership in Congress to design a hodgepodge package of transfers to state and local governments, increased transfers to individuals, temporary tax cuts for lower-income taxpayers, etc. So we got a bigger deficit without economic growth.

This is pure Keynesianism. It is a call for massive spending in a recession. So, should there be another fiscal crisis, Feldstein's recommendation is a bigger stimulus. The problem for his is this: with the economy slowing, it will be even more vulnerable to an unexpected black swan event.


Second, we are getting an economic slowdown, he says, because Obama will not make the Bush tax cuts permanent. This creates uncertainty in the minds of investors. So, he sounds like a supply-side economist. But he isn't. He is a traditional Keynesian.

Third, there is the deficit.


A third problem stems from the administration's lack of an explicit plan to deal with future budget deficits and with the exploding national debt. This creates uncertainty about future tax increases and interest rates that impedes spending by households and investment by businesses.

Fourth, there is the official strong dollar policy that has led to the decline of the dollar. But he never mentions Federal Reserve policy: QE2.


What are our prospects? He is not optimistic.

The economy will continue to suffer until there is a coherent and favorable economic policy. That means bringing long-term deficits under control without raising marginal tax rates – by cutting government outlays and by limiting the tax expenditures that substitute for direct government spending. It means lower tax rates on businesses and individuals to spur entrepreneurship and investment. And it means reforming Social Security and Medicare to protect the living standards of future retirees while limiting the cost to future taxpayers.


All of these things are doable. But the Obama administration has not done them and shows no inclination to do them in the future.

So, here is a Harvard economist saying that we needed a larger stimulus in 2009, but we need reduced spending now. We also need to reform Social Security and Medicare, while protecting the future retirees and limiting costs. All this is doable.

All this is utter nonsense. The politics of Medicare and Social Security have not changed in 40 years because there is no politically acceptable way to limit their costs. Voters will vote against anyone who suggests such a reform. The voters were promised the Keynesian moon, and they will not tolerate the popping of that pipe dream. In short, none of what Feldstein suggests is doable, short of a monumental crisis that enables Congress to start goring specific electoral oxen. And when that crisis comes, Feldstein will no doubt recommend a large deficit, with the money going to the Defense Department.

This is Establishment Wall Street opinion.

WIGGIN TELLS IT STRAIGHT

Then there was an article in Forbes, a conventional outlet, written by Agora's Addison Wiggin. He begins with this.


There is definitely going to be another financial crisis around the corner," says hedge fund legend Mark Mobius, "because we haven't solved any of the things that caused the previous crisis."

Mobius is a legendary hedge fund manager. If he thinks there is going to be another crisis, we would be wise to listen.

Wiggin thinks the Greek debt crisis is a good candidate for a trigger event.


The Greek crisis is first and foremost about the German and French banks that were foolish enough to lend money to Greece in the first place. What sort of derivative contracts tied to Greek debt are they sitting on? What worldwide mayhem would ensue if Greece didn't pay back 100 centimes on the euro?


That's a rhetorical question, since the balance sheets of European banks are even more opaque than American ones. Whatever the actual answer, it's scary enough that the European Central Bank has refused to entertain any talk about the holders of Greek sovereign debt taking a haircut, even in the form of Greece stretching out its payments.


The ECB is determined to protect the Too Big to Fail banks. It always says that it will not lend more money to the Greek government, but it always does. It calls for more bailouts by the German and French governments. The game must go on!


It will accomplish nothing. Going deeper into hock is never a good way to get out of debt. And at some point, this exercise in kicking the can has to stop. When it does, you get your next financial crisis.
CONCLUSION

We are being warned in advance by the financial media: expect another major crisis. The bailouts were not enough. The expansion of the monetary base was not enough. The new Dodd-Frank regulatory structure is not enough.

The international banking system is an interdependent, interconnected system. The system is not transparent. Even if it were, the level of debt – unsecured IOUs – is enormous. Wiggin comments.


Estimates on the amount of derivatives out there worldwide vary. An oft-heard estimate is $600 trillion. That squares with Mobius' guess of 10 times the world's annual GDP. "Are the derivatives regulated?" asks Mobius. "No. Are you still getting growth in derivatives? Yes."


In other words, something along the lines of securitized mortgages is lurking out there, ready to trigger another crisis as in 2007-08.


There is no formula to deal with this. There is no organized government response that is waiting in the wings. There will be another crisis. And when it comes, the response will be the same: to preserve the solvency of the biggest banks, at taxpayer expense and at central bank expense. When it comes to bailouts and central bank inflation, it's all "doable." It will therefore be done.
http://lewrockwell.com/north/north990.html

[marektysis]

Germany Must Get EADS Veto Right, Enders Tells Welt am Sonntag
By Richard Weiss - Jun 11, 2011 6:22 PM GMT+0200 .

...Airbus SAS wants Germany to have veto power over decisions at European Aeronautic Defence and Space Co. NV rather than a stake in the company, Welt am Sonntag said in a preview of tomorrow’s edition, citing Airbus Chief Executive Officer Thomas Enders.

The exit of Daimler AG (DAI), which is considering selling part of its EADS stake, shouldn’t mean another government becomes a shareholder, the release cited Enders as saying.

To contact the reporter on this story: Richard Weiss in Frankfurt at rweiss5@bloomberg.net.

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Benedikt Kammel at bkammel@bloomberg.net.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-06-11/germany-must-get-eads-veto-right-enders-tells-welt-am-sonntag.html

[marektysis]

http://www.sacbee.com/2011/06/12/3694614/vips-conspiracy-theorists-descend.html

[marektysis]

Kissinger: China poses 'big challenge' for U.S.By the CNN Wire StaffJune 12, 2011 -- Updated 1638 GMT (0038 HKT)
Former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, left, talks to CNN's Fareed Zakaria on Sunday.
Henry Kissinger traveled to China on a secret trip nearly 40 years ago
His actions paved the way for normalizing relations between the U.S. and China
He says the Chinese "have been dominant in 1,800 of the last 2,000 years"
Henry Kissinger
(CNN) -- Given China's increasing power and economic security, dealing with the communist nation poses a "big challenge" for the United States, former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger said Sunday.

Kissinger was national security adviser in President Richard Nixon's administration, and almost 40 years ago he made a secret trip to confer with the Chinese, a voyage that paved the way for the normalization of relations between Washington and communist China. He recently has written a book, "On China," and appeared Sunday on CNN's "Fareed Zakaria GPS."

Asked whether he had any inkling four decades ago that China would become the global power it is today, competing with the United States economically and technologically, Kissinger said, "It would have been inconceivable. Nobody had any such perception or expectation."

Since those talks, relations between China and the United States have remained stable, Zakaria noted. In recent years, China has tried to get America's help in modernizing its economy, tacitly supporting a lot of U.S. foreign policy, Zakaria said. But some believe that may be changing now and that a new chapter of Chinese foreign policy may be beginning.

"There are elements in China who, particularly after the financial crisis, feel that there has been a fundamental shift in the balance of power and that the international conduct of China and the results of its conduct should reflect this," Kissinger said. "But one shouldn't think that all of this is America's fault, because the Chinese -- we have been dominant in the last 50 years. They've been dominant in 1,800 of the last 2,000 years.

"And you know, I think America is entering a world in which we are neither dominant nor can we withdraw, but we are still the most powerful country," he said. "So how to conduct ourselves in such a world -- it's a huge test for us. And China is the most closely approximate country in terms of power. And one with such a complex history. It's a big challenge."

Another Cold War is not the answer, he said, as that "would lead to confrontations over an extended period of time that would be draining to both societies and draining to the countries that have to deal with both societies."

President Barack Obama's approach to China is "fundamentally correct," said Kissinger, who served as secretary of state under Presidents Nixon and Gerald Ford. "What we fundamentally need with the Chinese is to come to an understanding of where we both think we are going.

"And I believe the best thing that Nixon did, that we did in the Nixon administration, was not that we were super skillful on practical problems, but we were willing to spend many hours explaining how we thought, in middle- and long-run terms, and so did the Chinese."

While that didn't help on the actual day of the conversation, "when something came up, you could have some feeling that the other side, when it was reported to them, would have a framework within which to interpret it," he said. "This is still not adequately done."

Asked whether he is reluctant to criticize China more publicly on its human rights record, Kissinger said, "I'm not reluctant at all. And I insist on affirming my preference for democracy and my rejection of autocratic and dictatorial institutions. At the same time, there are a number of people, very few, who have, over a period of decades, established the confidence of the Chinese leadership. And we think that we are in a better position to bring about the achievement of these objectives by using influence in such a way that there is no demonstrated victor or loser.

"I have said that when I engage myself in China, as I do periodically on individual cases, I do not do it in a public confrontation, but in a personal dialogue. That is really the nature of the disagreement. It is not a disagreement as to the importance of the objective," he said.

On whether he thinks Obama is "Kissingerian," Kissinger -- who endorsed Republican candidate Sen. John McCain in the 2008 election -- said, "My impression of Obama is that he would like to believe that you can sweep the world by the power of ideas and that the ideas alone will dominate the world and that you can ignore the equilibrium part of the equality and that you can do it with rhetoric. ... That's what he'd like to believe."

But Obama, he said, is also "a good mind. And so he looks at the world and sees what's actually happening. So when he speaks, he often sounds as if he were in the world of ideas alone. When he acts, he is very conscious of reality. I think he's basically very close, if I put his actions together, to the objectives that I affirm."

Obama, he said, may view his remarks as "a private compliment, but he will not want to advertise it."

http://edition.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/06/12/kissinger.china/

[marektysis]

Bilderberg 2011: Lord Mandelson's nature walkCharlie Skelton looks on as Peter Mandelson – and some billionaire buddies – take the air at Bilderberg

Peter Mandelson and Richard Lambert at Bilderberg. Photograph: Quierosaber
A shadow fell across the Engadine. The skylark ceased his merry song, the flowers curled and blackened in the meadow and a man in a special issue Bilderberg anorak set off on his stroll.

Bilderberg has had some bad ideas in its time (a European superstate, anyone?) but Lord Mandelson's nature walk has to be the worst. What were they hoping for? Had they not seen the 200 activists camped opposite the hotel gates?

Out of the gates they drove in their very own Bilderbus, up the mountain to a charming spot. The plan: to amble down through the gorgeous scenery, back to the Suvretta House Hotel for tea.

Out of the bus stepped Erich Schmidt, the executive chairman of Google, and Franco Bernabè, the CEO of Telecom Italia, followed by China's vice-minister of foreign affairs, Ying Fu, with her amazing hair.

Photograph: Hannah Borno
Then came the Swedish billionaire banker and industrialist Jacob Wallenberg, and the dapper CEO of Airbus, Thomas Enders. More of him later.

Mandelson led the way, locked in conversation with Sir Richard Lambert, a global non-executive director for Ernst & Young and the former editor of the FT. The Tory MP Rory Stewart trotted behind.

It was an odd walk right from the start. From nowhere, like something from a dream, a distinguished lady, dressed from top to toe in white, whooshed serenely past security and swanned to the front of the power walkers.

Photograph: Hannah Borno No one recognised her or has seen her since. She had an other-worldy quality; I half expected her to be leading them to Charon's boat, or up a stairway formed of clouds.

Mandelson fell into step with Schmidt. We couldn't hear their happy chatter, but I presume they were admiring the breathtaking scenery, comparing their favourite wild flower, and hammering out how best to implement an internet kill switch.

Photograph: Stefan-Hans Bauer The lady in white led her band of Bilderberg bigwigs and billionaires along the charming Swiss byways, across bridges over gentle streams ... and straight into a pack of 50 baffled activists, who were milling around outside a community hall during a break in a symposium.

This couldn't possibly be happening. "This is terrible," Mandelson was heard to exclaim as the activists swarmed around the delegates, firing questions and chorusing their concern. You can watch some remarkable footage from the incident on Alex Jones's website.

One activist, Ali Aslan, walked alongside Enders, the Airbus boss, and
asked him what was being discussed at this year's conference. "Nothing bad," said Enders. "We are just making our agendas." (This was the German word used: agenda – the same as in English).

"I don't understand," said Alsan. "There are politicians inside. Why are we not allowed to know what you're talking about?"

Enders smiled and said: "I don't have to tell you, and you don't need to know." And with that, he and his fellow delegates ducked beneath the security cordon, into the blessed safety of Bilderberg.

I don't know who organised the conference itinerary this year – but good luck in your next job.
Posted by
Charlie Skelton Sunday 12 June 2011 11.16 BST
guardian.co.uk Printable versionSend to a friendShareClipContact us

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/blog/2011/jun/12/bilderberg-2011-mandelson-nature-walk

[marektysis]

Hillary Clinton ‘wants to quit to run World Bank’
- Sandy Williams Sunday, June 12, 2011
By Toby Harnden, Washington
09 Jun 2011
telegraph.co.uk

Hillary Clinton has been in discussions with the White House about stepping down from her job as Secretary of State to become head of the World Bank, according to reports.

Mrs Clinton, the former First Lady, Senator for New York and rival to President Barack Obama in the 2008 Democratic primary race, is said to be eager to become the first female president of the World Bank should the post become vacant next year.

“Hillary Clinton wants the job,” a source close to Mrs Clinton told Reuters, which broke the news of the possible move.

Robert Zoellick, a former Bush administration official, is believed to be ready to step down as president at the end of his term in the middle of next year.

World Bank
Robert B. Zoellick is the president of the World Bank, was the deputy secretary for the U.S. Department of State, a member of the Clinton Global Initiative, the vice chairman for the Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (Bailout Company), and the EVP at Fannie Mae.

Note: Marc Mezvinsky is an investment banker for Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (Bailout Company), and married to Chelsea V. Clinton.

Chelsea V. Clinton is married to Marc Mezvinsky, and her mother is Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Hillary Rodham Clinton is Chelsea V. Clinton’s mother, a member of the Clinton Global Initiative, and the secretary at the U.S. Department of State for the Barack Obama administration.

Henry M. Paulson Jr. was the chairman & CEO at the Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (Bailout Company), and a 2008 Bilderberg conference participant (think tank).

James A. Johnson is a director at the Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (Bailout Company), a member of the Trilateral Commission (think tank), a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (think tank), an honorary trustee at the Brookings Institution (think tank), a member of the American Friends of Bilderberg (think tank), was the chairman of Fannie Mae, and a 2008 Bilderberg conference participant (think tank).

Martin S. Feldstein is a director at the Trilateral Commission (think tank), was a director at the Council on Foreign Relations (think tank), and a 2008 Bilderberg conference participant (think tank).

Klaus Kleinfeld is a member of the Trilateral Commission (think tank), a trustee at the Brookings Institution (think tank), the chairman of the U.S.-Russia Business Council, and a 2008 Bilderberg conference participant (think tank).

David O. Maxwell is an honorary trustee at the Brookings Institution (think tank), and the chairman & CEO for Fannie Mae.

A.W. Clausen was an honorary trustee at the Brookings Institution (think tank), and the president of the World Bank.

Thomas S. Foley is an executive committee member for the Trilateral Commission (think tank), a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (think tank), and a partner at Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer & Feld, LLP.

Vernon E. Jordan Jr. is of counsel at Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer & Feld, LLP, an honorary trustee at the Brookings Institution (think tank), a director at the Lazard Group LLC, a director at Lazard Ltd., a life trustee at the Urban Institute (think tank), Valerie B. Jarrett’s great uncle, a director at the American Friends of Bilderberg (think tank), and a 2008 Bilderberg conference participant (think tank).

Philip A. Laskawy is a director at the Lazard Group LLC, a director at Lazard Ltd., and the chairman of Fannie Mae.

Afsaneh M. Beschloss is a trustee at the Urban Institute (think tank), and was the treasurer & CIO, director of investments for the World Bank.

Jessica Tuchman Mathews is a member of the Trilateral Commission (think tank), a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (think tank), the president of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace (think tank), a director at the American Friends of Bilderberg (think tank), was an honorary trustee at the Brookings Institution (think tank), and a 2008 Bilderberg conference participant (think tank).

Ed Griffin’s interview with Norman Dodd in 1982
(The investigation into the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace uncovered the plans for population control by involving the United States in war)
illuminati-news.com

NORMAN DODD: So then, in 1909, they raised the second question and discussed it, namely: “How do we involve the United States in a war?”

Well, I doubt at that time if there was any subject more removed from the thinking of most of the people of this country than its involvement in a war. There were intermittent shows in the Balkans, but I doubt very much if many people even knew where the Balkans were. Then, finally, they answered that question as follows: “We must control the State Department.” That very naturally raises the question of how do we do that? And they answer it by saying: “We must take over and control the diplomatic machinery of this country.” And, finally, they resolve to aim at that as an objective.

James F. Collins is a senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace (think tank), an honorary director, director at the U.S.-Russia Business Council, and was a senior advisor at Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer & Feld, LLP.

William W. George is a trustee at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace (think tank), and is a director at the Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (Bailout Company).

Richard N. Haass was a senior associate for the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace (think tank), the director of policy planning for the U.S. Department of State, a VP at the Brookings Institution (think tank), and is the president of the Council on Foreign Relations (think tank).

Abby Joseph Cohen was a trustee at the Brookings Institution (think tank), and is the senior investment strategist for Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (Bailout Company).

Cyrus F. Freidheim Jr. is an honorary trustee at the Brookings Institution (think tank), a member of the Commercial Club of Chicago, and an honorary life director at the Chicago Council on Global Affairs.

John H. Bryan is a director at the Chicago Council on Global Affairs, and a director at the Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (Bailout Company).

Henry S. Bienen is a director at the Chicago Council on Global Affairs, a director at the Council on Foreign Relations (think tank), was a consultant for the U.S. Department of State, and a consultant for the World Bank.

Jeffrey A. Goldstein is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (think tank), and was the managing director & CFO for the World Bank.

William M. Daley is a member of the Commercial Club of Chicago, Mayor Richard M. Daley’s brother, the chief of staff for the Barack Obama administration, a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (think tank), and a director at the Chicago Council on Global Affairs.

Michelle Obama is a director at the Chicago Council on Global Affairs, married to Barack Obama, a friend of Valerie B. Jarrett, was a lawyer at Sidley Austin LLP, and Mayor Richard M. Daley’s staffer.

Barack Obama is married to Michelle Obama, and was an intern at Sidley Austin LLP.

R. Eden Martin is counsel at Sidley Austin LLP, and the president of the Commercial Club of Chicago.

Richard M. Daley is William M. Daley’s brother, a member of the Commercial Club of Chicago, the Chicago (IL) mayor, Michelle Obama was his staffer, and Valerie B. Jarrett was his deputy chief of staff.

Valerie B. Jarrett was Mayor Richard M. Daley’s deputy chief of staff, is a friend of Michelle Obama, a member of the Commercial Club of Chicago, the senior adviser for the Barack Obama administration, and her great uncle is Vernon E. Jordan Jr.

Rahm I. Emanuel is a member of the Commercial Club of Chicago, was the White House chief of staff for the Barack Obama administration, and Ari Emanuel is his brother.

Commercial Club of Chicago, Members Directory
commercialclubchicago.org

Ari Emanuel is Rahm I. Emanuel’s brother, and the co-CEO & director for William Morris Endeavor Entertainment.

Condoleezza Rice is a client of the William Morris Endeavor Entertainment, a trustee at the Aspen Institute (think tank), a director at the Atlantic Council of the United States (think tank), an overseer at the International Rescue Committee, was the secretary for the U.S. Department of State, a governor for the Broadcasting Board of Governors, and a 2008 Bilderberg conference participant (think tank).

Hillary Rodham Clinton is the governor for the Broadcasting Board of Governors, and the secretary at the U.S. Department of State for the Barack Obama administration.

Elizabeth Cheney Perry was the deputy assistant secretary for the U.S. Department of State, the attorney for the World Bank, is a University of Chicago Law School graduate, and Richard B. Cheney’s daughter.

Barack Obama was a senior lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School.

Richard B. Cheney is Elizabeth Cheney Perry’s father, a trustee at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Foundation, and was a regent for the Smithsonian Institution.

Henry A. Kissinger was a lifetime trustee at the Aspen Institute (think tank), the secretary for the U.S. Department of State, is a trustee at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Foundation, a director at the Atlantic Council of the United States (think tank), an overseer at the International Rescue Committee, a Nobel Foundation Nobel peace prize winner, a director at the American Friends of Bilderberg (think tank) and a 2008 Bilderberg conference participant (think tank).

Jacob Wallenberg is a board member at the Nobel Foundation, and a 2008 Bilderberg conference participant (think tank).

Joseph E. Stiglitz is a Nobel Foundation Nobel Prize winner (economics, 2001), and was the chief economist & SVP for the World Bank.

Hilda Ochoa-Brillembourg is a director at the Atlantic Council of the United States (think tank), and was the division CIO for the World Bank.

Robert S. McNamara was a lifetime trustee at the Aspen Institute (think tank), an honorary director at the Atlantic Council of the United States (think tank), an honorary trustee at the Brookings Institution (think tank), the president of the World Bank, and a member of the Cosmos Club.

Chester A. Crocker is a member of the Cosmos Club, a professor at Georgetown University, was an assistant secretary for the U.S. Department of State, and a 2008 Bilderberg conference participant (think tank).

Emmett J. Rice is a member of the Cosmos Club, Susan E. Rice’s father, and was the U.S. alternative director for reconstruction & development for the World Bank.

Madeleine K. Albright is a professor at Georgetown University, a trustee at the Aspen Institute (think tank), a director at the Atlantic Council of the United States (think tank), an overseer at the International Rescue Committee, a director at the Council on Foreign Relations (think tank), a director at the National Democratic Institute (think tank), a friend of Susan E. Rice, was the secretary for the U.S. Department of State, and the chairman for the National Democratic Institute (think tank).

Susan E. Rice is Emmett J. Rice’s daughter, a friend of Madeleine K. Albright, a friend of Esther Brimmer, was the assistant secretary for the U.S. Department of State, a director at the Atlantic Council of the United States (think tank), a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (think tank), a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution (think tank), and a director at the National Democratic Institute (think tank).

Esther Brimmer is a friend of Susan E. Rice, a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (think tank), and the assistant secretary at the U.S. Department of State for the Barack Obama administration.

Tom Daschle is a director at the National Democratic Institute (think tank), and a 2008 Bilderberg conference participant (think tank).

James D. Wolfensohn is a director at the National Democratic Institute (think tank), an overseer at the International Rescue Committee, an honorary trustee at the Brookings Institution (think tank), a director at the American Friends of Bilderberg (think tank), was the president of the World Bank, and a 2008 Bilderberg conference participant (think tank).

Paul Wolfowitz was the president of the World Bank, the ambassador to Indonesia for the U.S. Department of State, his romantic interest is Shaha Riza, and a 2008 Bilderberg conference participant (think tank).

Shaha Riza is Paul Wolfowitz romantic interest, and was the senior communications adviser for the World Bank.

Christopher J. Dodd is a senior advisory committee member at the National Democratic Institute (think tank), his wife is Jackie Clegg Dodd, and was a regent at the Smithsonian Institution.

Lawrence M. Small was the secretary for the Smithsonian Institution, and was the president & COO for Fannie Mae.

Jackie Clegg Dodd is married to Christopher J. Dodd, and was the vice chairman & first VP for the Export-Import Bank of the US.

John D. Macomber was the chairman & president of the Export-Import Bank of the US, and is a director at the Atlantic Council of the United States (think tank).

William H. Draper III was a director at the Atlantic Council of the United States (think tank), and the chairman of the Export-Import Bank of the US.

James H. Lambright was the chairman & president for the Export-Import Bank of the US, a VP at Credit Suisse First Boston, is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (think tank), and the interim chief investment officer for the 2008-2010 financial bailout.

Richard C. Holbrooke was the vice chairman for Credit Suisse First Boston, a director at the Atlantic Council of the United States (think tank), a director at the Council on Foreign Relations (think tank), an assistant secretary for the U.S. Department of State, the special envoy to Afghanistan, Pakistan for the U.S. Department of State, and a 2008 Bilderberg conference participant (think tank).

Jonathan Plutzik was the vice chairman for Credit Suisse First Boston, and is a director at Fannie Mae.

Herbert M. Allison Jr. was the president & CEO for Fannie Mae, and is a director at the Atlantic Council of the United States (think tank).

Roderick K. von Lipsey was a director at the Atlantic Council of the United States (think tank), and a VP for the Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (Bailout Company).

John C. Whitehead is a director at the Atlantic Council of the United States (think tank), an honorary trustee at the Brookings Institution (think tank), and was the co-chairman & senior partner at the Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (Bailout Company).

George Herbert Walker IV was a partner at the Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (Bailout Company), and is George H.W. Bush’s second cousin.

George H.W. Bush is George Herbert Walker IV second cousin, and a member of the Bohemian Club.

Walter L. Cronkite was a member of the Bohemian Club.

Henry A. Kissinger is a member of the Bohemian Club, a director at the American Friends of Bilderberg (think tank) and a 2008 Bilderberg conference participant (think tank).

Connie K. Duckworth is a member of the Belizean Grove, and was an advisory director at the Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (Bailout Company).

Mark O. Winkelman is a senior director at the Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (Bailout Company), and was a senior investment officer for the World Bank.

Marc Mezvinsky is an investment banker for Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (Bailout Company), and married to Chelsea V. Clinton.

Chelsea V. Clinton is married to Marc Mezvinsky, and her mother is Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Hillary Rodham Clinton is Chelsea V. Clinton’s mother, a member of the Clinton Global Initiative, and the secretary at the U.S. Department of State for the Barack Obama administration.

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/37458

For the Elite, is the world little...marek

[vicflame]

!!! WANTED !!!






Dear friends,


The ugly guy with a beard above and whose face is circled in red, has been officially recognized by Marek Tysis as the security chief who was present at the annual Bilderberg conference in Genval (Belgium), in 2000.

This man was still present this year in St Moritz (Switzerland), and was still working as the Bilderberg security chief. So he’s an important figure, and a Nazi who defends dictatorship, protects the vile globalists and prevents anyone who was uninvited to Bilderberg (be it an member of Parliament from the country where the meeting takes place) to access the meeting.

We need your help: if you know the name, nationality and/or other information on this frightful man, would you please let us know ?

Thank you very much. Vic.

[marektysis]

New Gas-Supply Interruptions Threaten Italy's Energy Security - Scaroni
Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News
Thursday, June 09, 2011
Italy's energy security would be put gravely at risk should new natural gas supply interruptions occur following energy giant Eni's decision to halt production in war-torn Libya, company chief executive officer Paolo Scaroni said Wednesday in Rome.

"From Libya we get 10 billion cubic meters of gas, equal to 13 percent to 14 percent of Italian consumption. We can deal with this supply shortfall but not another one," he said during a presentation in the Italian capital.

Rome-based Eni, the biggest foreign oil company operating in Libya, has stopped pumping oil and gas in the country with Africa's biggest oil and gas reserves as rebels and Libyan military forces face off in fighting that began in February.

From Libya, Eni transports gas supplies via its Greenstream pipeline. Italy receives further gas supplies through pipelines from Russia and Algeria.

Qatari gas is transported aboard special ships in a liquefied state and turned back to gas in Italy.

Copyright (c) 2011, Adnkronos International, Rome. Distributed by McClatchy-Tribune Information Servic
http://www.downstreamtoday.com/News/ArticlePrint.aspx?aid=26872&AspxAutoDetectCookieSupport=1

[marektysis]

Bilderberg 2011: Handbags at dawnThe rich and powerful leave this year's Bilderberg


On his way back from Bilderberg, Alexei Mordashov, the
Russian steel magnate, swept through the airport checkpoint in a window-tinted people carrier. Here he is, about to board his private jet at St Moritz airport:

Photograph: Hannah Borno Nice bag. You don't get to be worth $18.5 billion without developing a taste for classy accessories. The only classier bit of luggage we saw all conference was this stylish holdall, carried by... well, see if you can guess from the legs. And the coat of arms on the side of the jet...

Photograph: Paul Dorneanu / infocon.ro That's right, delegate spotters, it's Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands! A shame we're only seeing her knees, and are denied our annual peek at her glorious Molly Sugden bouff. Still, we got to enjoy the two-tone swirls of Fu Ying (China's Vice-Minister of Foreign Affairs and current Chinese Ambassador to the UK) on Lord Mandelson's nature walk.

Here's a reminder: it's Fu Ying strolling with Neelie Kroes, European Commissioner for Digital Agenda and a Vice President of the European Commission.

Photograph: Quierosaber The gong for worst hair of the conference belongs to tech investor Peter Thiel, co-founder of Paypal. I guess when you're only worth a couple of billion, and only own about 3% of Facebook, you have to make do with Tesco Value hair dye.

Peter Thiel. Photograph: Hannah Borno Maybe he was thinking: I'm in Switzerland, I'll go with their national colour. I'm tempted to approach him for seed capital for my peer-to-peer nanotech tinting solution.

The post-Bilderberg Thiel seemed a little grumpy at the airport. Maybe he was hungover after David Rockefeller's birthday disco. Or maybe the discussion on: 'Social Networks: Connectivity and Security Issues' hadn't gone his way.

Thiel is a good Bilderberger, in that he's an avowed fan of a global single-market, single-currency future. He says "everything that counts as political represents a counterforce to globalization" Perhaps he needled the politicians present with his view that: "as we continue to see the globalization of the world economy, we will come to see government more and more as a reactionary force, as a force that is standing in the way of progress. And we will have to make a very drastic choice."

Thiel's single-market libertarianism fits snugly with Bilderberg's desire to see national sovereignty melt away and supranational bodies (and corporations) take its place. Thiel is forever celebrating the individual, and the individual's choices. But in a world without government, without politics, there's nothing much standing between his newly empowered individual and the unimpeded transnational corporation.

You might think that the protesters outside Bilderberg are largely anti-government. In fact you'll find, on the whole, that they're anti-anti-government, insofar as they know that representation within a functioning and sovereign democratic system is their best defence within a free-for-all global economy.

They know that attending Bilderberg you've got the Chairman of Novartis, Daniel Vasella. You've got the Chairman of Coco-Cola HBC, George A. David. You've got Marcus Agius, the Chairman of Barclays PLC. The activists know that the bottom line of these fine fellows is not the interests of the general public.

And why would it be? They're businessmen. The public didn't vote Amazon's Jeff Bezos into office. And they don't expect representation from Peter Brabeck-Letmathe, the Chairman of Nestlé - seen here on his way to his private jet:

It's such a comfort to know that our Chancellor has spent the last four days at the Bilderberg summit fighting for the interests of the British people. Delegates have been debating, amongst other things, "Budgetary Discipline" - which sounds like we've got rocky times ahead. But you know what? It'll be fine. Osborne's got our back.

If you'd like to know what the Chancellor been discussing at Bilderberg, and to hear what he's achieved, then simply watch one of the BBC reports from St Moritz. Or catch up with the analysis on CNN. Or read the commentary in the Independent. Or find out what the Daily Telegraph's political editor made of his trip to the conference. Or listen to Radio 4.

Or watch Sky News. Or read the Express. Or the Washington Post. Or catch up with the gossip from the venue on the Huffington Post.

Or open the Guardian.

Oh my god, I just had a crazy thought. Imagine if none of the British press had bothered covering this major international summit! Imagine if the BBC hadn't sent a news crew! Imagine if George Osborne wasn't being interviewed by heavyweight political journalists about his official trip as Chancellor to perhaps the world's most important annual policy forum! Ha ha ha ha -- ah, sorry, just amusing myself there.

Where was I?

Oh yes - at the airport. With Alexei Mordashov.

I know that you're sick to death of the media analysis of this year's conference, but I'm going to take a wild, amateurish swing at explaining why Mordashov is here in St Moritz this year.

A few years ago, the oligarch declared: "we would like to build the biggest steel company in the world". So far, he's managed to turn Serverstal into the biggest steel company in Russia. But only the 9th biggest worldwide. That's the sort of life-disappointment that can keep you up at night.

Mordashov is the only (declared) Russian delegate at Bilderberg 2011. So why was he invited? Presumably he's not go much to to say on the subject of "Demographic Challenges" or "Social Networks". I think the topic "Conflict Areas" might be getting closer to his usefulness.

Here's what I reckon. Back in 2003, Mordashov was made a representative of Vladamir Putin in the 2004 election. In 2006, Mordashov told the FT that, "as a good corporate citizen", he consults his government when making big decisions.

Top of the "Conflict Areas" discussed at Bilderberg was presumably Libya. And we know that Vladamir Putin recently derided UN Security Council Resolution 73 as being "defective and flawed" because it "allows everyone to do anything, take any action against a sovereign state." So, is Mordashov at Bilderberg because Putin said the action in Libya "reminds me of a medieval call to a crusade?" Is it because Putin asked, of the NATO targetting of Gadaffi: "Who took on the right to execute this man, no matter who he is?"

Is Mordashov a steel-timbered bridge to Moscow?
Maybe someone better qualified than me can answer that.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/blog/2011/jun/13/bilderberg-2011-switzerland