No More Federal than Federal Express
As we’ve reported for over 4 years, the Federal Reserve banks are private, not government agencies.
As Matt Stoller points out, they have just done so again … in the AIG trial. Specifically, government lawyers said:
Now, some of the documents … were not actually produced by the United States, they were produced by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, which is a third party.
On a trip to visit family in Seoul in April, I was approached by a man and a woman who claimed to be North Korean defectors. They presented me with a DVD that recently came into their possession and asked me to translate it. They also asked me to post the completed film on the Internet so that it could reach a worldwide audience. I believed what I was told and an agreement was made to protect their identities (and mine).
Despite my concerns about what I was viewing when I returned home, I proceeded to translate and post the film on You Tube because of the film’s extraordinary content. I have now made public my belief that this film was never intended for a domestic audience in the DPRK. Instead, I believe that these people, who presented themselves as ‘defectors’ specifically targeted me because of my reputation as a translator and interpreter.
Furthermore, I now believe these people work for the DPRK. The fact that I have continued to translate and post the film in spite of this belief does not make me complicit in their intention to spread their ideology. I chose to keep posting this film because – regardless of who made it – I believe people should see it because of the issues it raises and I stand by my right to post it for people to share and discuss freely with each other.
It’s not hard to see how american medicine’s rabid promotion of MGM figures into the social control agenda of the uberclass.
To date, numerous attempts to protect against Ebola infection using a variety of strategies have failed. However, in 2003 a National Institutes of Health (NIH) study published in Nature demonstrated that a single dose of a recombinant vaccine provided solid protection against an otherwise deadly infection in animal models. Based on these results, we decided to develop an Ebola vaccine using the same approach. Furthermore, the Ebola virus is on the US government’s Category “A” list of bioterror agents. In 2003 the US government announced that, once available, an Ebola vaccine may be stockpiled as part of its preparation for bio-terror attacks under Project Bioshield. The Bioshield Act was enacted in July 2004, with a total appropriation of US$ 5.6 billion across all programs.
In 2002, we entered into a Collaborative Research and Development Agreement (CRADA) with the VRC of the NIH to develop jointly, test and manufacture an adenovirus-based Ebola vaccine. Under the terms of the agreement, we have an option for exclusive worldwide commercialization rights to the Ebola vaccine resulting from this collaboration. In August 2002, the CRADA was extended to cover vaccines against Marburg and Lassa infections.
In experiments conducted in 2004 by the VRC together with the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID), our vaccine candidate confirmed single-dose protection of monkeys against Ebola. Our results are distinct from the earlier trials in that our vaccine is based on PER.C6® cells, making it suitable for large-scale manfacturing.
In 2005, we extended the CRADA with the VRC of the NIH to develop and produce vaccines against Ebola, Marburg and Lassa infections. Crucell was also granted an exclusive license to patents owned by the NIH to develop and commercialize vaccines against Ebola. Furthermore, Crucell signed a contract of up to €21.4 million with the NIH to produce Ebola vaccines.
Crucell’s Ebola vaccine entered Phase I studies in Q3 2006. For this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, two groups of 16 healthy volunteers were enrolled and vaccinated. The study showed safety and immunogegicity at the doses evaluated.
Based on these results, a second Phase I study is anticipated. This will use alternative multivalent adenovirus vectors that are able to bypass pre-existing immunity against the more commonly used adenovirus serotype 5 (Ad5).
In October 2008, Crucell announced that it had secured a NIAID/NIH award to advance the development of Ebola and Marburg vaccines, with the ultimate aim of developing a multivalent filovirus vaccine. The award provides funding of up to $30 million, with additional options worth a further $40 million. Under this award, the use of alternative multivalent adenovirus vectors that are able to bypass pre-existing immunity against Ad5 will be evaluated.
Perhaps the NIH had a head start because they were in the loop on the development of the marburg bioweapons virus. Marburg, the site of the first filovirus outbreak, is in germany, not africa.
Infectious Disease Experts, Safety Experts, Doctors and Nurses All Say the CDC Has Been Messing Up the Ebola Response
Healthcare experts throughout the U.S. are strongly criticizing the Centers for Disease Control for its handling of Ebola. For example:
- Infectious disease experts say the CDC is blaming nurses for their exposure to Ebola when the CDC has given faulty instructions on how to handle Ebola patients
- Many doctors say the CDC has given false reassurances and underplayed the severity of the disease
- Public health experts also criticize the CDC’s statement that any hospital in the U.S. can handle Ebola patients
- Experts also criticize the CDC for failing to encourage the buddy system for healthcare workers treating Ebola patients, and for including other common-sense protocols for containing infection
- And nurses are calling the CDC hypocrites for saying that cloth masks and goggles are sufficient … while CDC personnel wear respirators and full hazardous materials suits when visiting hospitals with Ebola patients
A bit dated (8/12/2014) but still valuable.
Un Bee Lievable. This was supposed to be a reform? This is a classic false flag payoff: the people who caused the crisis will get first dibs on the carcass of the US economy.
Concerns are growing that we are heading for another banking crisis, one that could be far worse than in 2008. But this time, there will be no government bailouts. Instead, per the Dodd-Frank Act, bankrupt banks will be confiscating (or “bailing in”) their customers’ deposits.
That includes local government deposits. The fact that public funds are secured with collateral may not protect them, as explained earlier here. Derivative claims now get paid first in a bank bankruptcy; and derivative losses could be huge, wiping out the collateral for other claims.
In a September 24tharticle titled “5 U.S. Banks Each Have More Than 40 Trillion Dollars In Exposure To Derivatives, Michael Snyder warns:
Trading in derivatives is basically just a form of legalized gambling, and the “too big to fail” banks have transformed Wall Street into the largest casino in the history of the planet. When this derivatives bubble bursts (and as surely as I am writing this it will), the pain that it will cause the global economy will be greater than words can describe.
The too-big-to-fail banks have collectively grown 37% larger since 2008. Five banks now account for 42% of all US loans, and six banks control 67% of all banking assets.
Besides their reckless derivatives gambling, these monster-sized banks have earned our distrust by being caught in a litany of frauds. In an article in Forbes titled “Big Banks and Derivatives: Why Another Financial Crisis Is Inevitable,” Steve Denning lists rigging municipal bond interest rates, LIBOR price-fixing, foreclosure abuses, money laundering, tax evasion, and misleading clients with worthless securities.
Particularly harmful to local governments have been interest rate swaps misrepresented as protecting government agencies from higher rates.
Yet as Michael Snyder observes:
At this point our economic system is so completely dependent on these banks that there is no way that it can function without them. . . . We are steamrolling toward the greatest financial disaster in world history, and nobody is doing much of anything to stop it.
Sidestepping the Steamroller
California Governor Jerry Brown sees it coming. Rather than rebuilding the state’s crumbling infrastructure, rehiring teachers and other public employees, and taking other steps to restore the Golden State to its former prosperity, he has proposed a constitutional amendment requiring all excess state revenues to go into a rainy day fund to prepare for the next crisis.
But there is a better way forward.
In North Dakota — the only state to post a budget surplus every year since 2001 — the state owns its own bank. When the state last went over-budget in 2001 due to the Dot.com crisis, it merely issued itself an extra dividend through the Bank of North Dakota — the only state-owned depository bank in the country — and the next year it was back on track.
Other local governments would do well to follow suit, not just for the promising profit potential, but as protection against a “bail in” of public deposits. ….
This will work well as an interim measure but the long term solution is public control of the monetary system, which is currently run for the benefit of the predators that have brought us to this point.