Obama Endorses Soros Plan to Loot America

[galtgulch]

Looted from American taxpayers, Obama's commitments at the G 20 conference could easily surpass trillions of dollars

Link here to article by Canadian Free Press:

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/9902

By Cliff Kincaid Friday, April 3, 2009

At the G 20 summit in London, President Barack Obama won rave reviews from reporters, many of whom clamored like school kids for the chance to ask him a question at his news conference, but the official conference document proves that plans are being made for what can only be described as the further looting of American taxpayers in order to feed unaccountable and corrupt global entities.

This is not “global cooperation,” as so many in the media described it, but a massive new expansion of the power and authority of international agencies and institutions such as the United Nations, the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.

By embracing the “global plan for recovery and reform,” which is how it was officially described, Obama explicitly endorsed International Monetary Fund (IMF) surveillance of the U.S. economy, creation of a global “Financial Stability Board,” the expanded use of a new global currency called Special Drawing Rights, a new global warming treaty, and costly fulfillment of the United Nations Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). This is in addition to the explicit and reported commitment of over $1 trillion in additional taxpayer money to the IMF and the World Bank.

The Special Drawing Rights proposal, which is a vehicle for further U.S. foreign aid to the rest of the world, was the brainchild of billionaire George Soros, who told CNBC’s Maria Bartiromo that the G 20 conference was a “success.”

Dubbed the “Lenin of the 21st Century” by the Ripon Forum magazine, because of his apparent transformation from super-capitalist into “neo-Marxist,” Soros waged an expensive but unsuccessful campaign to defeat President George W. Bush for re-election in 2004. He has been determined to install a puppet in the White House.

In addition to financing Democratic Party politicians and left-wing organizations such as the ACLU, he has subsidized a wide array of liberal causes, ranging from abortion rights to gay rights to legalization of dangerous drugs. Even former members of the terrorist Weather Underground, such as Bernardine Dohrn and Linda Evans, have appeared at functions sponsored by his so-called Open Society Institute or accepted its grants.

Soros had backed Obama for president in 2008, saying that he had “the charisma and the vision to radically reorient America in the world.” His prediction seems to be eerily coming true.

In the final analysis, the grand total of money to be looted from American taxpayers as a result of Obama’s commitments at the G 20 conference could easily surpass trillions of dollars. In a major understatement, the official conference document calls it “unprecedented and concerted fiscal expansion.”

But while Obama endorsed the document and its recommendations, the Congress of the United States can still have some say over whether some of the commitments he made are put into law.

Consider the commitment to the U.N. MDGs, for example. The document includes the statement that “we reaffirm our historic commitment to meeting the Millennium Development Goals...” This is, in fact, a disguised attempt to make then-Senator Obama’s Global Poverty Act the law of the land through executive action. This measure alone has been estimated to cost $845 billion and it was never passed by Congress because of public opposition. In similar fashion, the current Congress can also resist compliance with the U.N. mandate.

“We will support, now and in the future, to candid, even-handed, and independent IMF surveillance of our economies and financial sectors, of the impact of our policies on others, and of risks facing the global economy,” the document states. There is no exception for the U.S. Hence, the IMF will now be in a position to officially monitor and pass judgment on U.S. economic policies. We have become like any other second- or third-rate power in need of global oversight and supervision.

The proposed “new Financial Stability Board (FSB)” will have a “strengthened mandate” and work with the IMF to “reshape our regulatory systems.” Among other things, its mission is to “assess vulnerabilities affecting the financial system, identify and oversee action needed to address them,” “promote co-ordination and information exchange among authorities responsible for financial stability,” and “monitor and advise on market developments and their implications for regulatory policy.”

The Financial Stability Board is the new name for a more powerful and expanded Financial Stability Forum, a body originally designed to “promote international financial stability through information exchange and international co-operation in financial supervision and surveillance.” Members of the group include the central banks of various nations, international financial institutions, and supervisors in important financial centers.

The document also states that “we call on the UN, working with other global institutions, to establish an effective mechanism to monitor the impact of the crisis on the poorest and most vulnerable.”

Is this the same U.N. that has achieved a reputation for corruption, fraud, waste, and incompetence? Is this the organization whose “peacekeepers” have been found guilty of the sexual abuse of women and children around the world? It is one and the same.

In the name of holding big banks accountable, therefore, Obama has put the U.S. in the hands of “global institutions” that are somehow supposed to help provide a “global solution” to the “global crisis.” If anything, the record demonstrates that these institutions make human problems worse, not better.

Nevertheless, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown declared that “A new world order is emerging and with it we’re entering into a new era of international cooperation.”

But viewed in another light, Obama has sold out the sovereignty of the United States and has laid the groundwork for the death of the U.S. dollar as the world’s dominant currency. While President Bush started this insidious process of holding G 20 meetings, Obama has taken the process much further down the road. It is truly unprecedented.

The “London Summit ‚Äï Leaders’ Statement,” dated April 2, 2009, was only nine pages, and there were some vague and confusing statements in it. But much of it was both understandable and frightening, if reporters would only take the time to bother to read it.

“We have agreed to support a general SDR allocation which will inject $250 billion into the world economy and increase global liquidity, and urgent ratification of the Fourth Amendment,” the document says. Basic research would disclose that this is a reference to Special Drawing Rights, a so-called international “reserve asset” which under the Obama plan would evolve into a kind of new global currency based on the willingness of the U.S. and other countries to dramatically increase funding of the IMF. In the words of the IMF, a Special Drawing Right is “a potential claim on the freely usable currencies of IMF members.” That means that its worth is based in part on claims to U.S. taxpayer dollars. It is a new form of foreign aid.

The reference to ratifying the Fourth Amendment (of the IMF Articles of Agreement) means that Obama has agreed that the U.S. will vote to greatly expand the use of SDRs. But the Congress can have a say in this.

This proposal had been demanded by billionaire leftist George Soros. Indeed, according to a news account in advance of the London meeting, he had come up with the specific $250 billion figure.

As we had documented years ago, Soros has long viewed Special Drawing Rights as a variation of a global tax to finance more foreign aid. Expanding the use of SDRs is another obvious effort to drain wealth away from the United States.

The two annexes to the G 20 document are full of detailed recommendations for regulating such matters as pay and compensation at financial institutions and “international standards in relation to tax transparency.” One of the main objectives is to reduce the ability of people and corporations to avoid high tax rates.

“We reaffirm our commitment to address the threat of irreversible climate change, based on the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities, and to reach agreement at the UN Climate Change conference in Copenhagen in December 2009,” the document states. This is a commitment to sign a new global warming treaty that could cost the U.S. economy even more trillions of dollars. But this agreement would also require Congressional approval.

In a virtual throwaway line, the document calls for extending “regulation and oversight to all systemically important financial institutions, instruments and markets,” including “for the first time, systemically important hedge funds...”

If such a proposal were actually implemented, and there are strong doubts that it ever would be, such supervision could possibly shed some light on the mysterious behind-the-scenes activities of George Soros himself, one of Obama’s biggest backers, who was convicted of insider trading in France.

While decrying the lack of regulation, Soros has made billions of dollars operating a secretive off-shore financial hedge fund and manipulating international financial markets and foreign currencies.

Known as “the man who almost broke the Bank of England” and described by some as “extremely evil,” Soros engaged in a complex financial transaction that resulted in the Bank of England losing billions of dollars defending the British pound before having to devalue it. He has controversial investments in places like Colombia, where the banks have been penetrated by drug cartels eager to launder their drug money.

In a major court case filed by the law offices of David H. Relkin, Soros has recently been charged with “money laundering, bankruptcy fraud, and bid rigging” and of having a “pattern of money laundering activities” that includes the investment in the Colombian bank and using an off-shore tax haven that protects the identity of investors from disclosure. A Soros representative was quoted by the Reuters news agency as saying that the lawsuit was completely without merit.

The Soros role in the U.S. housing market collapse continues to be the subject of speculation, interest and even Congressional hearings. The collapse of the financial system in mid-September greatly damaged the electoral chances of John McCain and Sarah Palin, who were ahead in the polls at the time, and paved the way for Obama’s victory.

In 2008, Soros was once again on the list of highest-paid hedge fund managers, according to Institutional Investor magazine’s Alpha publication. He made $1.1 billion during the economic collapse and recession.

(4) Reader Feedback | Subscribe

Cliff Kincaid Most recent columns

Cliff Kincaid is the Editor of the AIM Report.

Cliff can be reached at cliff.kincaid@aim.org

[Alfonso Jones]

Galt -

I continue to be amazed at what the looter-in-chief (Obama) is saying and doing.

Every time I react in shock and say "I can't believe he did that. Surely that's the limit!" he proves me wrong, within a matter of days.

Bill P

[galtgulch]

Galt -

I continue to be amazed at what the looter-in-chief (Obama) is saying and doing.

Every time I react in shock and say "I can't believe he did that. Surely that's the limit!" he proves me wrong, within a matter of days.

Bill P

Bill P,

What troubles me as I ask people whom I encounter is that many have a passive, wait and see, attitude. I ask if they think Obama knows what he is doing. One gentleman today said we have to be patient and give him time.

It brings to mind the way to boil a frog!

Someday these folks will wake up in a dictatorship on its way to becoming a totalitarian one at that largely because of their passivity and ignorance.

I just read that the popularity of the Nazi Party was just 3% in 1928 but after the depression hit with disconcerting inflation its popularity shot up. Obama will set the stage with the help of Bernanke.

Did you notice the profound demonstration by Geithner of his utter ignorance of the source of his powers? Go to www.youtube.com and enter Michelle Bachmann Geithner Bernanke and watch! Too bad Bernanke managed to avoid the question posed to him.

www.campaignforliberty.com 4Apr 10PM 138226; 5Apr 6AM 138344; 9 Apr 140695

gulch

Edited April 9, 2009 by galtgulch

[Alfonso Jones]

Galt -

I continue to be amazed at what the looter-in-chief (Obama) is saying and doing.

Every time I react in shock and say "I can't believe he did that. Surely that's the limit!" he proves me wrong, within a matter of days.

Bill P

Bill P,

What troubles me as I ask people whom I encounter is that many have a passive, wait and see, attitude. I ask if they think Obama knows what he is doing. One gentleman today said we have to be patient and give him time.

It brings to mind the way to boil a frog!

Someday these folks will wake up in a dictatorship on its way to becoming a totalitarian one at that largely because of their passivity and ignorance.

I just read that the popularity of the Nazi Party was just 3% in 1928 but after the depression hit with disconcerting inflation its popularity shot up. Obama will set the stage with the help of Bernanke.

Did you notice the profound demonstration by Geithner of his utter ignorance of the source of his powers? Go to www.youtube.com and enter Michelle Bachmann Geithner Bernanke and watch! Too bad Bernanke managed to avoid the question posed to him.

www.campaignforliberty.com 4Apr 10PM 138226

gulch

On the boiling frog, check out:

http://www.snopes.com/critters/wild/frogboil.asp

Yes, I've see the debacle of Geithner not having a clue of where he derives the authority. (Of course - there is no valid root!)

Bill P

[Chris Grieb]

Another myth shot down.

[tjohnson]

Someday these folks will wake up in a dictatorship on its way to becoming a totalitarian one at that largely because of their passivity and ignorance.

Do you think the American military would support a dictatorship?

[galtgulch]

Someday these folks will wake up in a dictatorship on its way to becoming a totalitarian one at that largely because of their passivity and ignorance.

Do you think the American military would support a dictatorship?

Gen Sem,

So many things are going on now which smack of tyranny. Confiscatory taxation for one. Is there any other kind?

Asset forfeiture enables police to seize your cash, car, house and property if they suspect you of certain crimes. They can auction off your house and keep the proceeds even if you are not convicted and you have to sue to reclaim any of it.

Many convicted of drug possession and other victimless "crimes" are serving time in prison and many in law enforcement support that.

You refer to the military which is an abstraction. Actually there are only individuals of various ranks in the military and so it is hard to generalize. I imagine some could be found who would support the involuntary servitude of the draft.

IF you or I printed up dollar bills we would be guilty of counterfeiting which is a federal offense found outlawed in the Constitution, yet Obama and presidents before him endorse the creation of paper currency by the Fed despite their oath to uphold the Constitution.

How close are we? The trick will be to keep it from happening, not to wait for it to happen and then try to undo it.

www.campaignforliberty.com 5Apr 11AM 138474, 1PM 138568, 2PM 138639 and counting.

gulch

Edited April 5, 2009 by galtgulch

[tjohnson]

You refer to the military which is an abstraction. Actually there are only individuals of various ranks in the military and so it is hard to generalize. I imagine some could be found who would support the involuntary servitude of the draft.

A dictatorship requires a military force which includes everyone from a private up to a general following orders. I would be very surprised if the US military would obey the orders of a dictator.

[galtgulch]

You refer to the military which is an abstraction. Actually there are only individuals of various ranks in the military and so it is hard to generalize. I imagine some could be found who would support the involuntary servitude of the draft.

A dictatorship requires a military force which includes everyone from a private up to a general following orders. I would be very surprised if the US military would obey the orders of a dictator.

GS,

As I recall Hitler had several layers of police, the Gestapo, the SS, Brownshirts etc.

I agree that the military might be less inclined to follow orders but many police have been corrupted by years of enforcement of the egregious War on Drugs.

Besides Obama has the gift of gab and would make it sound like those who disobey among the ordinary citizenry are unpatriotic, and I am sure he would find many other choice words which would justify his brand of oppression.

www.campaignforliberty.com 5Apr 2PM 138639, 4PM 138745; 9 Apr 140695

gulch

Edited April 9, 2009 by galtgulch