President Trump has a nearly impossible job. The Mexican President, Nieto, spit in Trump’s face yesterday. Mexico says that they will refuse to negotiate with the Trump administration so long as they insist that Mexico will build the wall.
The simple thing to do seems to consist of canceling NAFTA. Mexico enjoys a $60 billion dollar trade surplus . They play home to millions of manufacturing jobs that used to go to Americans. Some economists will quietly say that this costs the United States almost a trillion dollars per year. This means lower wages, higher taxes and a declining standard of living for America.
To add insult to injury, the tens of millions of illegal immigrants that have flooded into America sent home $25 billion to Mexican private interests in 2015. This money is not taxed. The labor represented by this amount, which does not account for the under-the-table money that is sent to Mexico, is only a drop in the bucket. Conservatively, and this is a gross under-representation of the actual money that America is bleeding. The labor represented in this amount is not taxed, none of this goes to unemploymetn compensation, workmen’s compensation, social security and medicare. This greatly increases the burden on American citizens to cover these needs.
Mexico will never build the wall unless this movement of money is controlled and taxed. However, Trump is taking on an entire global economic empire. If you wondered why the media vilifies Trump at every turn, their six owners of the entire media profit greatly from all free trade agreements. This is what Trump is trying to undo. However, what most Americans don’t realize is the entire American economy is controlled by a few men who controls goverment and virutally every major industry in America.
Below is just a partial snapshot of how monolithic the corporate interests that controls our daily lives have beccome. Until Trump was elected, nothing ever happened without their approval. They own it all, they control it all. Take a look.
Six Corporations Control Almost Everything You Hear, See, Read and Ultimately Think-The 6 Masters of the Media Own All of the Food, Auto, Big Pharma, Managed Health Care, Clothing, etc.
14 Corporations Controls Almost Everything You Drive
Ten Corporations Controls Almost Everything You Eat
Please keep in mind that this is just the tip of the iceberg. The entire American economy is owned by fewer than 40 men, except for the dwindling number of small businesss that were devastated by the Obama administration.
These corporate giants dominate every aspect of your life and they own the media that tells what to think and how to behave. They control the voting process that stole about 20% of the popular vote. Yet, they still could not defeat Donald Trump and the American people.
Donald Trump can shut down NAFTA and cause Mexico to lose $60 billion a year in lost revenue, courtesy of Americans, and they can be taxed on the $25 billion that leaves the country, in the form of wire transfers from America to Mexico. However, it is critical to remember, this is a drop in the bucket.
These corporations benefit from bringing in cheap labor because they cannot export every job out of America. This is why we have massive illegal immigration. Your wages are lower and your working conditions are poor because the corporations have you where they want you. Ironically, they will NEVER allow immigrants to become citizens because they don’t want to pay employement costs of medicare, social security, unemployment compensation and workmen’s comp. The corporations are the biggest abuser of immigrants and yet, the media they control will never report this.
For Trump to be successful in negating free trade agreements, he needs our help. Congress must be made to feel the heat. Any Congressmen supporting the anti-Trump movement needs to be removed from office because they are costing you and your kids a decent wage and standard of living.
I have long advocated on shopping local, trading and bartering and removing your participation, as much as possible, from the corporate controlled economy. Eat out at Mel’s Diner and not Outback, for example. Go to Joe’s Hardware store and not Ace Hardware.
The American people are caught in a war. We face politicans who are bought and paid for by the very corporations that enslave us. We face a media that is relentless in their propaganda. And we have become conditioned to be apathetic and uninvolved.
With Rogoff, Stiglitz, Summers et al. all calling for the end of cash - because only terrorists and drug-dealers need cash (nothing at all to do with totalitarian control over a nation's wealth) - we are not surprised that this proposal from the European Commission (sanctuary of statism) would appear...
The Commission published on 2 February 2016 a Communication to the Council and the Parliament on an Action Plan to further step up the fight against the financing of terrorism (COM (2016) 50). The Action Plan builds on existing EU rules to adapt to new threats and aims at updating EU policies in line with international standards. In the context of the Commission's action to extent the scope of the Regulation on the controls of cash entering or leaving the Community, reference is made to the appropriateness to explore the relevance of potential upper limits to cash payments.
The Action Plan states that "Payments in cash are widely used in the financing of terrorist activities… In this context, the relevance of potential upper limits to cash payments could also be explored. Several Member States have in place prohibitions for cash payments above a specific threshold."
Cash has the important feature of offering anonymity to transactions. Such anonymity may be desired for legitimate reason (e.g. protection of privacy). But, such anonymity can also be misused for money laundering and terrorist financing purposes. The possibility to conduct large cash payments facilitates money laundering and terrorist financing activities because of the difficulty to control cash payment transactions.
Potential restrictions to cash payments would be a mean to fight criminal activities entailing large payment transactions in cash by organised criminal networks. Restricting large payments in cash, in addition to cash declarations and other AML obligations, would hamper the operation of terrorist networks, and other criminal activities, i.e. have a preventive effect. It would also facilitate further investigations to track financial transactions in the course of terrorist activities. Effective investigations are hindered as cash payments transactions are anonymous. Thus restrictions on cash payments would facilitate investigations. However, as cash transactions are moved to the financial system, it is essential that financial institutions have adequate controls and procedures in place that enable them to know the person with whom they are dealing. Adequate due diligence on new and existing customers is a key part of these controls in, line with the AMLD.
Terrorists use cash to sustain their illegal activities, not only for illegal transactions (e.g. the acquisition of explosives) but also for payments which are in appearance legal (e.g. transactions for accommodation or transport). While a restriction on payments in cash would certainly be ignored for transactions that are in any case already illegal, the restriction could create a significant hindrance to the conduct of transactions that are ancillary to terrorist activities.
Organised crime and terrorism financing rely on cash for payments for carrying out their illegal activities and benefitting from them. By restricting the possibilities to use cash, the proposal would contribute to disrupt the financing of terrorism, as the need to use non anonymous means of payment would either deter the activity or contribute to its easier detection and investigation. Any such proposal would also aim at harmonising restrictions across the Union, thus creating a level playing field for businesses and removing distortions of competition in the internal market. It would additionally foster the fight against money laundering, tax fraud and organised crime.
And then right at the end, they mention "fundamental rights"...
While being allowed to pay in cash does not constitute a fundamental right, the objective of the initiative, which is to prevent the anonymity that cash payments allow, might be viewed as an infringement of the right to privacy enshrined in Article 7 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. However, as complemented by article 52 of the Charter, limitations may be made subject to the principle of proportionality if they are necessary and genuinely meet objectives of general interest recognised by the Union or the need to protect the rights and freedoms of others. The objectives of potential restrictions to cash payments could fit such description. It should also be observed that national restrictions to cash payments were never successfully challenged based on an infringement to fundamental rights.
The world today is overwhelmed with problems. Policymakers seem to be confused and at a loss.
But no problem is more urgent today than the militarization of politics and the new arms race. Stopping and reversing this ruinous race must be our top priority.
The current situation is too dangerous. More troops, tanks and armored personnel carriers are being brought to Europe. NATO and Russian forces and weapons that used to be deployed at a distance are now placed closer to each other, as if to shoot point-blank.
While state budgets are struggling to fund people’s essential social needs, military spending is growing. Money is easily found for sophisticated weapons whose destructive power is comparable to that of the weapons of mass destruction; for submarines whose single salvo is capable of devastating half a continent; for missile defense systems that undermine strategic stability.
Politicians and military leaders sound increasingly belligerent and defense doctrines more dangerous. Commentators and TV personalities are joining the bellicose chorus. It all looks as if the world is preparing for war.
It could have been different In the second half of the 1980s, together with the U.S., we launched a process of reducing nuclear weapons and lowering the nuclear threat. By now, as Russia and the U.S. reported to the Non-proliferation Treaty Review Conference, 80% of the nuclear weapons accumulated during the years of the Cold War have been decommissioned and destroyed. No one’s security has been diminished, and the danger of nuclear war starting as a result of technical failure or accident has been reduced.
This was made possible, above all, by the awareness of the leaders of major nuclear powers that nuclear war is unacceptable.
In November 1985, at the first summit in Geneva, the leaders of the Soviet Union and the U.S. declared: Nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought. Our two nations will not seek military superiority. This statement was met with a sigh of relief worldwide.
I recall a Politburo meeting in 1986 at which the defense doctrine was discussed. The proposed draft contained the following language: "Respond to attack with all available means." Members of the politburo objected to this formula. All agreed that nuclear weapons must serve only one purpose: preventing war. And the ultimate goal should be a world without nuclear weapons.
Breaking out of the vicious circle Today, however, the nuclear threat once again seems real. Relations between the great powers have been going from bad to worse for several years now. The advocates for arms build-up and the military-industrial complex are rubbing their hands.
We must break out of this situation. We need to resume political dialogue aiming at joint decisions and joint action.
There is a view that the dialogue should focus on fighting terrorism. This is indeed an important, urgent task. But, as a core of a normal relationship and eventually partnership, it is not enough.
The focus should once again be on preventing war, phasing out the arms race, and reducing weapons arsenals. The goal should be to agree, not just on nuclear weapons levels and ceilings, but also on missile defense and strategic stability.
In modern world, wars must be outlawed, because none of the global problems we are facing can be resolved by war — not poverty, nor the environment, migration, population growth, or shortages of resources.
Take the first step I urge the members of the U.N. Security Council — the body that bears primary responsibility for international peace and security — to take the first step. Specifically, I propose that a Security Council meeting at the level of heads of state adopt a resolution stating that nuclear war is unacceptable and must never be fought.
I think the initiative to adopt such a resolution should come from Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin — the Presidents of two nations that hold over 90% of the world’s nuclear arsenals and therefore bear a special responsibility.
President Franklin D. Roosevelt once said that one of the main freedoms is freedom from fear. Today, the burden of fear and the stress of bearing it is felt by millions of people, and the main reason for it is militarism, armed conflicts, the arms race, and the nuclear Sword of Damocles. Ridding the world of this fear means making people freer. This should become a common goal. Many other problems would then be easier to resolve.The time to decide and act is now.
Jihad Watch had this story on Monday. We reported that the Swedish publication NyheterIdag said that the attackers were “nysvenskar,” that is, “new Swedes,” which is the establishment media euphemism for Muslim migrants. Now the attackers have indeed been identified as Afghan migrants.
The Qur’an teaches that Infidel women can be lawfully taken for sexual use (cf. its allowancefor a man to take “captives of the right hand,” 4:3, 4:24, 23:1-6, 33:50, 70:30). The Qur’an says: “O Prophet, tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to bring down over themselves of their outer garments. That is more suitable that they will be known and not be abused. And ever is Allah Forgiving and Merciful.” (33:59) The implication there is that if women do not cover themselves adequately with their outer garments, they may be abused, and that such abuse would be justified.
An update on this story. “Two Afghan migrants revealed as those arrested over horrific three-hour rape streamed on Facebook Live in Sweden,” by Patrick Knox, The Sun, January 26, 2017:
TWO migrants from Afghanistan have reportedly been arrested over the three-hour gang rape of a woman that was broadcast on Facebook Live.
The two men, aged 18 and 20, who are both from Afghanistan, were arrested in the city at the weekend after police were tipped off by social media users, it was reported by The Local newspaper.