Tag Archives: europe

Business/Economics, International, Technology, U.S.

World War 3 & Government Hypocricy: BP to be exempt from Iran oil embargo, proof the U.S. is controled by the British Empire

There are reports that say British Petroleum (BP) is to be exempted from the U.S. and EU oil embargoes.  It was part of the deal to get the European Union to impose sanctions against Iran.

BP was born out of the old British controlled Anglo-Iranian Oil Company. Despite the decades of sanctions against Iran (since the early 1980s) BP has still managed to do business with Iran.

BP, and a Norwegian company (Statoil), are currently running a natural gas operation in the Caspian Sea in co-operation with Iran, called Shah Deniz.  But back in the United Kingdom, sanctions forced BP to shut down a North Sea gas operation, because it was 50% owned by Iran!

British officials do not want anymore halts to BP operations, so they lobbied hard with the United States to get BP exempt from any European/U.S. oil embargo.

 

Business/Economics, International, Opinion, Technology, U.S.

White Horse & World War 3: European Union approves oil embargo on Iran, Libya part of plan to go after Iran

I looked, and there before me was a white horse! Its rider held a bow, and he was given a crown, and he rode out as a conqueror bent on conquest.

EU ambassadors have agreed upon an oil embargo against Iran, it must now be approved by EU foreign ministers.  The sanctions would ban the buying of Iranian petroleum products, and would halt all imports to EU members by July 1, 2012.

This follows new U.S. sanctions imposed at the beginning of January, 2012.  Taken together, the U.S. and EU oil embargoes could halt 2.6 million barrels of oil, driving oil prices up and adding to the overall instability of the world economy.

You’d think the Europeans would not want to do anything to stop Iranian oil, after all most of Iran’s oil goes to Europe.  But maybe that’s why the EU (with help from the U.S.) took over Libya’s oil in the fake revolution supported by NATO.  Now they can go after Iran without too much worry about oil supply.

International, U.S.

White Horse & World War 3: Russian navy protects Syria, Turkey seizes ship and trucks with ‘banned’ weapons

I looked, and there before me was a white horse! Its rider held a bow, and he was given a crown, and he rode out as a conqueror bent on conquest.

After a 48 hour stop over in a Syrian port, the Russian navy is now conducting maneuvers in the Mediterranean Sea. The Russian fleet is led by the aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov, which carries Su-33 fighter jets and Ka-27 anti-submarine helicopters.

The five ship fleet traveled 6,000 nautical miles (6,904 miles) to protect Syria. It also took part in war games with the Greek navy.

Also being reported is that a Russian cargo ship might have delivered military equipment to the Syrian government.  Turkish officials seized the Russian ship after it left Syria.  Turkish port authorities have only stated that they found “dangerous cargo” on the ship, which violated current European Union arms sanctions against Syria.  Because the Russian ship tried to dock in Turkey, Turkish officials say that gives them the right to seize the ship under EU arms sanctions (Turkey is not a full member of the EU, it is an “associate member”).

This action comes after Turkish Customs officials seized four trucks heading to Syria from Iran.  They claim the trucks were carrying weapons.  This is confusing info because the Iranian media continue to issue reports that Turkey supports Iran and Syria!

 

International, U.S.

White Horse & World War 3: Russia to make U.S. Missile Defense system a waste of U.S. taxpayer money

“It seems strange that it is Russia who is required to show flexibility. This is not our project. If an architect is building a house, it is up to him to offer a design which would not violate property rights, area design and neighbors’ interests. So it is our U.S. colleagues who should demonstrate miraculous flexibility to ensure that their AMD system does not violate the interests of other countries if it is to be located in Europe.”-Dmitri Rogozin, Deputy Prime Minister of Russia

Russians refer to the U.S. missile defense system in Europe as American Missile Defense (AMD).  It’s also known as EMD (European Missile Defense).  It is an extension of the U.S. National Missile Defense, which is why the Russians see it as an expansion of the Empire of the United States.  The U.S. has been expanding its missile defense system into Europe under the cloak of fighting “terrorism”!

“I will certainly ensure Russia will give a corresponding technical response if the AMD system endangers our national interests. This will result in the American AMD being considered a waste of money.”

I looked, and there before me was a white horse! Its rider held a bow, and he was given a crown, and he rode out as a conqueror bent on conquest.

International, U.S.

White Horse, Red Horse, Black Horse: The United States reveals its plans for conquest, war and slavery. Creation of new U.S. Joint Force of 2020. U.S. Congress could be military’s greatest enemy!

I looked, and there before me was a white horse! Its rider held a bow, and he was given a crown, and he rode out as a conqueror bent on conquest.

Then another horse came out, a fiery red one. Its rider was given power to take peace from the earth and to make men slay each other.

I looked, and there before me was a black horse! Its rider was holding a pair of scales in his hand. Then I heard what sounded like a voice among the four living creatures, saying, “A quart of wheat for a day’s wages, and three quarts of barley for a day’s wages, and do not damage the oil and the wine!”

            “I’d like to begin by thanking President Obama for coming here this morning, and for his vision, guidance and leadership as this Department went through the intensive review we undertook to develop the new strategic guidance we are releasing today.

“This guidance recognizes that this country is at a strategic turning point after a decade of war and large increases in defense spending. As the President mentioned, the U.S. military’s mission in Iraq has now ended, continued progress in Afghanistan is enabling a transition to Afghan security responsibility, the NATO effort in Libya has concluded with the fall of Qaddafi, targeted counterterrorism efforts have significantly weakened al Qaeda and decimated its leadership, and now as these events are occurring, the Congress has mandated that we achieve significant defense savings.

“But even as our large-scale military campaigns recede, the United States still faces a complex and growing array of security challenges across the globe, challenges that call for a reshaping of America’s defense priorities, focusing on the continuing threat of violent extremism, proliferation of lethal weapons and materials, the destabilizing behavior of Iran and North Korea, the rise of new powers across Asia, and the dramatic changes in the Middle East.

“All of this comes at a time when America confronts a serious deficit and debt problem which is itself a national security risk that is squeezing both the defense and domestic budgets. Even facing these considerable pressures, including the requirement of the Budget Control Act to reduce defense spending by $487 billion over 10 years, I do not believe that we must choose between national security and fiscal responsibility. The Department of Defense will play its part in helping the nation put its fiscal house in order.

“But the President has made clear, and I have made clear, that the savings we have been mandated to achieve must be driven by strategy and rigorous analysis, not by the numbers alone.

“Consequently, over the past few months, we have conducted an intensive review to guide defense priorities and spending over the coming decade, in light of strategic guidance from the President and the recommendations of this Department’s senior military and civilian leadership. This process has enabled us to assess risk, set priorities, and make hard choices. Let me be clear, this Department would need to make a strategic shift regardless of the nation’s fiscal situation. That is the reality of the world we live in.

“As difficult as it may be to achieve the mandated defense savings, this has also given us in the Department of Defense the opportunity to reshape our defense strategy and force structure to more effectively meet the challenges of the future, deter aggression, shape the security environment and decisively prevail in any conflict.

“From the beginning, I set out to ensure that this strategy review was inclusive. Chairman Dempsey and I met frequently with Departmental leaders, including my Under Secretaries, the Service Chiefs, Service Secretaries, Combatant Commanders and senior enlisted advisors. We’ve discussed this strategy and its implications with the President, with members of Congress, and with outside experts.

“Four overarching principles have guided our deliberations:

  • First, we must maintain the world’s finest military, one that supports and sustains the unique global leadership role of the United States;
  • Second, we must avoid hollowing out the force– a smaller, ready, and well-equipped military is preferable to a larger, ill-prepared force that has been arbitrarily cut across-the- board;
  • Third, savings must be achieved in a balanced manner with everything on the table, including politically sensitive areas that will likely provoke opposition from parts of Congress, industry, and advocacy groups;
  • Fourth, we must preserve the quality of our All-Volunteer Force and not break faith with our men and women in uniform or their families.

“With these principles in mind, I will focus on some of the significant strategic choices and shifts that are being made. But first, let me be clear that the U.S. military will remain capable across the spectrum. We will continue to conduct a complex set of missions ranging from countering terrorism and weapons of mass destruction to maintaining a safe, secure and effective nuclear deterrent. We will be fully prepared to protect our interests, defend our homeland and support civil authorities.

“Our goal is to achieve this U.S. force for the future with the following significant changes:

“First, the U.S. joint force [notice no explanation of what the “joint” U.S. force is] will be smaller and leaner, but its great strength will be that it is more agile, flexible, ready to deploy, innovative and technologically advanced.

“Second, as we move towards this new joint force, we are also rebalancing our global posture and presence, emphasizing the Pacific and the Middle East — these are the areas where we see the greatest challenges for the future. The U.S. military will increase its institutional weight and focus on enhanced presence, power projection, and deterrence in Asia-Pacific. This region is growing in importance to the future of the United States economy and our national security. This means, for instance, improving capabilities that maintain our military’s technological edge and freedom of action.

“At the same time, the United States will place a premium on maintaining our military presence and capabilities in the broader Middle East. The United States and our partners must remain capable of deterring and defeating aggression while supporting political progress and reform.

“Third, the United States will continue to strengthen its key alliances, build partnerships and develop innovative ways to sustain U.S. presence elsewhere in the world.

“The long history of close political and military cooperation with our European allies and partners will be critical to addressing the challenges of the 21st century. We will invest in the shared capabilities and responsibilities of NATO, our most effective military alliance. The U.S. military’s force posture in Europe will of necessity continue to adapt and evolve to meet new challenges and opportunities, particularly in light of the security needs of the continent relative to emerging strategic priorities elsewhere. We are committed to sustaining a presence that will meet Article 5 commitments, deter aggression, and the U.S. military will work closely with our allies to allow for the kinds of coalition operations NATO has undertaken in Libya and Afghanistan.

“In Latin America, Africa and elsewhere in the world, we will use innovative methods to sustain U.S. presence, maintaining key military-to-military relations and pursuing new security partnerships as needed. Whenever possible, we will develop low-cost and small-footprint approaches to achieve our security objectives, emphasizing rotational deployments and exercises, and other innovative approaches that maintain presence.

“Fourth, as we shift the size and composition of our ground, air, and naval forces, we must be capable of successfully confronting and defeating any aggressor and respond to the changing nature of warfare.

“Our strategy review concluded that the United States must have the capability to fight in several conflicts at the same time. We are not confronting the threats of the past. We are confronting the threats of the 21st century and that demands greater flexibility to shift and deploy forces to fight and defeat any enemy anywhere. How we defeat that enemy may vary across conflicts. But make no mistake — we will have the capability to confront and defeat more than one adversary at a time.

“As a global force, our military will never be doing only one thing — it will be responsible for a range of missions and activities across the globe of varying scope, duration, and strategic priority. This will place a premium on flexible and adaptable forces that can respond quickly and effectively to a variety of contingencies and potential adversaries.

“In addition to these forces, the United States will emphasize building the capacity of partners and allies to more effectively defend their own territory and interests through better use of diplomacy, development and security force assistance.

“In accordance with this construct and with the end of U.S. military commitments in Iraq, and the drawdown already underway in Afghanistan, the Army and Marine Corps will no longer need to be sized to support the large scale, long-term stability operations that dominated military priorities and force generation over the past decade.

“Lastly, as we reduce the overall defense budget, we will protect our investments in special operations forces, new technologies like ISR and unmanned systems, space and cyberspace capabilities and our capacity to quickly mobilize. These investments will help the military retain and continue to refine and institutionalize the expertise and capabilities that have been gained at such great cost over the last decade.

“Most importantly, we will structure and pace the reductions in the nation’s ground forces in such a way that they can surge, regenerate, and mobilize capabilities needed for any contingency. Building in reversibility and the ability to quickly mobilize will be key. That means reexamining the mix of elements in the active and reserve components, maintaining a strong National Guard and Reserve, retaining a healthy cadre of experienced NCOs and midgrade officers, and preserving the health and viability of the nation’s defense industrial base.

“This strategic guidance is a first step in this Department’s goal to build the Joint Force of 2020, a force sized and shaped differently than the military of the Cold War, the post-Cold War force of the 1990s, or the force built over the past decade to engage in large-scale ground wars.

“This strategy and vision will guide the more specific budget decisions that will be finalized and announced in the coming weeks as part of the President’s budget. In some cases we will be reducing capabilities no longer of top priority. In other cases we will invest in new capabilities to maintain a decisive military edge against a growing array of threats.

“There is no question that we have to make some tradeoffs, and that we will be taking on some level of additional but acceptable risk in the budget plan we release next month. These were not easy choices.

“We will continue aggressive efforts to weed out waste and reduce overhead, reform business practices, and consolidate duplicative operations. But budget reductions of this magnitude will inevitably impact the size and capabilities of our military. And as I’ve said before, true national security cannot be achieved through a strong military alone — it requires strong diplomatic, development, and intelligence efforts and, above all, it requires a strong economy, fiscal discipline and effective government.

“The capability, readiness and agility of the force will not be sustained if Congress fails to do its duty and the military is forced to accept far deeper cuts, in particular the arbitrary, across-the-board cuts currently scheduled to take effect in January of 2013 through the mechanism of sequester. That would force us to shed missions, commitments, and capabilities necessary to protect core U.S. national security interests, resulting in a demoralized and hollow force.

“And finally, I’d also like to address our men and women in uniform, and the civilian employees who support them, whom I know have been watching the budget debates here in Washington with concern about what it means for them and their families. You have done everything the country has asked you to do, and more.

“You have put your lives on the line, and fought to make our country safer and stronger. I believe this strategic guidance honors your sacrifices and strengthens the country by building a force equipped for the future. I have no higher responsibility than fighting to protect you and your families, just as you have fought and bled to protect our country.

“There is no doubt that the fiscal situation this country faces is difficult, and in many ways we are at a crisis point. But I believe that in every crisis, there is opportunity. Out of this crisis, we have the opportunity to end the old ways of doing business and build a modern force for the 21st century that can win today’s wars and successfully confront any enemy, and respond to any challenge of the future. Our responsibility is to protect the nation’s security and keep America safe. With this joint force [again, no clear explanation of “joint force”], I am confident we can effectively defend the United States of America.

“Thank you.”-Leon Panetta, Secretary of Defense for the United States

Business/Economics, International, U.S.

Global Economic War: China’s strong economy can not exist without outside supplies, like oil from Iran

Chinese officials reporting that their country is the biggest consumer of natural resources in the world, and most of those resources come from outside China.

Zhang Ping, director of the National Development and Reform Commission, said China uses double the world average in energy (based on GDP).  Also, more than 50% of China’s petroleum and iron ore comes from other countries (like Libya and Iran in the case of oil).

Still, the amount of energy usage is far behind China’s incredible economic growth: Domestic economic growth averaging an annual rate of 11.2%, while energy consumption remains at 6.6%.

 

International, Opinion, U.S.

World War 3 & One World Government: 12 Warning signs from Argentine Political Analyst

The following warning signs came from Adrian Salbuchi, a political analyst in Argentina.

1) Financial Meltdown. Since 2008, the Global Financial System continues on life-support. Ben Bernanke, Timothy Geithner and the US economic hit team – Robert Rubin, Larry Summers and Goldman Sachs, CitiGroup, JPMorganChase mega-bankers working with the Bank of England and the European Central Bank – have not and will not take any measures to help the populace and ailing economies.  They just funnel trillions to the banking elite, imposing the media myth that certain banks are “too big to fail” (Orwellian Newspeak for “too damn powerful to fail”). Why? Because it’s not governments overseeing, supervising and controlling Goldman Sachs, CitiCorp, HSBC, Deutsche Bank, JPMorganChase, but exactly the other way around…

2) Economic Crises.  Today, “Destructive Extreme Capitalism” [like Mitt Romney’s Bain Capital] is collapsing national and regional economies, reformatting them into international slave-labour Gulag-like entities that Joseph Stalin would envy.   Our woes lie not with the world’s real economy (mostly intact), but with the fake world of finance, banks, and speculation;

3) Social Upheavals.  Meltdowns in Greece, Ireland, Portugal, Iceland and – soon to come – Italy, Spain and others, trigger violent social uprisings, even in the US and UK;

4) Pandemics.  Get ready for more “flu surprises” leading to mandatory vaccinations: a discreet opportunity to slip RFID chips into our bodies and test “intelligent viruses” targeting specific DNA strains.  Racially and ethnically selective viruses as part of mass depopulation campaigns?

5) Global Warming. As the global economy sinks into zero growth mode, economic drivers shift from growth expansion to consumption contraction. Will coming “carbon credits” open the path to full societal control?

6) Terrorist “False Flag” Mega-Attacks. The Elite have this wildcard up their sleeve to jump-start new “crises” as short-cuts towards world government.  Will new “attacks” dwarfing 9/11 justify further global wars, invasions and genocide?  A nuclear weapon over a major city to be blamed on the Elite’s “enemies”?

7) Generalized War in the Middle East. As we speak, naval forces, bombers, entire armies are poised to attack and invade Syria, Iran…

8) Ecological/Environmental “Accidents”. The 1986 Chernobyl nuclear accident sparked the beginning of the end of the former USSR by showing the world and the Soviets themselves that their State could no longer manage their own nuclear facilities.  April 2010 saw the BP “Deepwater Horizon” oil rig eco-catastrophe in the Gulf of Mexico; since March 2011, Japan and the world have been grappling with a much larger nuclear accident in the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear complex.  Was foul play involved?

9) Assassination of a major political or religious figure to be blamed on an Elite enemy.  Mossad, CIA, MI6 are really good at playing this type of dirty trick;

10) Attacks on “Rogue States” – Iraq, Libya… Who’s next? Iran? Syria?  Venezuela?  North Korea?

11) Staged “Religious” Event. The growing need of the masses for meaning in their lives makes them easy victims of a Hollywood-staged, 3D virtual reality hologram show, orchestrating a “second coming”.  An electronically engineered “messianic figure” acting in sync with Elite global objectives?   Who would dare go against God himself?

12) Staged “Alien Contact.” This too may be in the works.  For decades, large sectors of world population have been programmed to believe in aliens.  Here too, hologram technology could stage a “space vehicle landing” – on the White House lawn, of course – highlighting the “need” for Mankind to have “unified representation” in the face of extraterrestrials.  Further justification for world government?

Business/Economics, Idaho, International, U.S.

Political Incompetence & Corporate Evil: Christian/Mormon Mitt Romney co-founded Bain Capital, which has been destroying jobs since 1984! Destroyed jobs in Chubbuck, Idaho. Demise of KB Toys connected to Toys “R” Us

“Mitt Romney’s history at Bain Capital is not going to help his image as a job creator.  Now, we want to disclose that NBC Universal and Bain Capital are each a part owner of the Weather Channel.  Bain Capital’s main business model is buying companies like American Pad and Paper and restructuring [industry code for ‘slash and burn’] them.  In many instances, Bain turned a profit by strip mining these companies.  American,  AMPAD is what it’s known, the stock was driven down [on purpose by Romney, I explain a little further in the article] and the company went bankrupt.  They fired hundreds of workers along the way.”-Ed Shultz, MSNBC

MSNBC is admitting that a company affiliated with NBC, Bain Capital  co-founded by Mitt Romney, has been destroying jobs, not creating jobs as Romney claims.

In 1984 Romney co-founded Bain Capital, which grew out of Bain & Company.  The soul purpose of the company is to buy out other companies, then gut them and sell them off piece by piece. Of course this means jobs are destroyed.

Interestingly, back in October, MSNBC’s Ed Shultz actually downplayed Romney’s connection to Bain Capital.  He and some of his guests, stated that a photo published in the Boston Globe was fake: “…it’s probablly a joke photo.”

Now Ed Shultz is backpedaling.  He, along with other MSNBC anchors and reporters, are revealing that Bain Capital has been behind many of the job loses in this country since the late 1980s!

The New York Times reported that Romney left Bain Capital in 1999, but, as part of his ‘retirement package’ is making money off their continued slashing and burning of U.S. jobs.  According to the article, Romney, 13 years after leaving Bain Capital, is still making millions of dollars off his retirement package!

old kb toys pine ridge mall

Former location of KB Toys, Pine Ridge Mall, Chubbuck, Idaho

Anybody remember KB Toys? I do. I was an employee of the Chubbuck, Idaho, Pine Ridge Mall at the time they closed down the KB Toys store in that mall. By 2004 KB Toys went bankrupt and 3,400 people lost their jobs! Guess what, one of Bain Capital’s affiliated companies was behind that!!!

pine ridge mall

Fading Pine Ridge Mall, Chubbuck, Idaho

Oh, and what about Romney’s connection to Massachusetts? Romney ‘retired’ from Bain Capital in 1999.  The Bain Capital partnership took over KB Toys in 2000.  KB Toys is headquartered in Pittsfield, Massachusetts. Romney became governor of Massachusetts in 2002.  In 2003 the Bain Capital partnership started shutting down KB Toys stores. Mmmm, connection?

Here are some more examples of deals that resulted in job losses at the hands of Romney’s Bain Capital (and affiliated companies like Holson Burnes Group): Clear Channel Communications, 2,500 job cuts.

Photo album factory in South Carolina, 150 jobs lost.

Sensata Technologies, a European company with U.S. operations, several hundred U.S. employees lost their jobs.

American Pad & Paper, or AMPAD, lost 185 jobs.

The case of AMPAD reveals how Romney’s Bain Capital works.  They buy up companies in the same market, then they whittle them down until there is only one or two in the market, who then become big money makers by default.  AMPAD’s competitor was Staples. Romney touts Staples as a good example of his management skills, but what the Boston Globe found out (and reported in a 2007 article) is that Romney simply bought out competitors and shut them down until Staples was just about the only game left in town.

Now how about the KB Toys deal? KB Toys and Toys “R” Us were the top toy stores in the United States.  A company connected to Bain Capital buys out KB Toys and shuts them down.  What about Toys “R” Us? Yes there’s a Bain Capital connection.  In 2005, one year after the KB Toys bankruptcy, Toys “R” Us was taken over by KKR Group, Vornado Realty Trust and Bain Capital for $6.6 billion!  In 2009 Toys “R” Us takes over what is left of KB Toys; website, trademarks, and intellectual property rights.  Mmmm, you seeing the pattern?

This goes against the principle of the free hand of capitalist competition.  The jobs lost because companies went out of business were not actually due to any ‘poor’ performance of the employees, or lack of sales, but because the ‘investors’ Romney & Co wanted it that way!

Also, Bain Capital works the same way the rest of Corporate America does, they don’t use their own money to take over companies, they take out huge loans from the too big to fail banks that got taxpayer bailouts!

One report said Romney’s “investments” have resulted in at least 12,000 U.S. jobs lost!  It’s probably more than that, the way Bain Capital and affiliated companies shut down businesses does not result in net jobs gained, but net jobs lost!  Anybody remember Oliver Stone’s 1987 movie Wall Street?

Opinion: MITT ROMNEY CONSTITUTIONALLY INCOMPETENT. RELIGION BASED MARRIAGE LAW WILL VIOLATE CONSTITUTION.

Washington DC BS: MITT’S MYSTERY MONEY NOT EXPLAINED BY LATEST ADMISSIONS

International, U.S.

Scotland moving fast towards independence from England, independence from NATO, could join Nordic Alliance, yet still be led by the Queen? The Royal Nordic Alliance is a revival of the Hanseatic League, and they’ve got big plans!

“The Scottish Government will of course publish a white paper in advance of the referendum, detailing independence, including the new relationship of equality with England, such as the Queen remaining as our head of state, and this will be the positive platform for Scotland’s future that people will be asked to approve.”-Scottish government statement

In an article found in the Scotsman, Scottish officials are working fast on legislation that would not only free them from the English tyranny but create their own military force.

Plans could also include leaving NATO in favor of a military partnership with the recently created Nordic Alliance. The Nordic Alliance is currently made up of Norway, Sweden and Denmark.

Despite what some bloggers say about Scotland not being Nordic, a check of Scottish history proves a direct connection with Nordic peoples (and lets not forget the even older pan-European Celtic peoples).

However, it’s now clear that while Scotland wants independence from England, it does still want to be part of the Monarchy. I don’t base that on just the official Scottish government statement, but the fact is that the current members of the Nordic Alliance are monarchies, with direct ties to the Queen of England.

So much for Scottish Independence.  In fact, this whole “independence” movement in Scotland could just be part of bigger plans to create a grand Royal Nordic Alliance, with the Queen of England in charge.

According to the HeraldScotland it’s all about money and control. Their article calls it a Scottish-Nordic financial institution that will eventually include Scotland, Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and possibly  Iceland, Greenland and the Faroe Islands.  These regions were all part of the Hanseatic League in the Middle Ages.

This new Nordic Alliance is part of an anti-government, pro-privatization (pro-business, modern day feudalism) movement:  “…the public sector is failing to engage with this [business, private] sector when it comes to procurement. There is also a serious funding gap, both the difficulty of obtaining ‘micro’ credit from banks and the total absence of any ‘microinvestment mechanism’.”-Anne-Grethe Eckman, Nordic Enterprise Trust

Supporters of the Nordic Alliance movement claim they are doing this for the good of small/micro businesses. They point to the fact that governments seem only interested in helping big businesses. That sounds good, but the major problem I have is the connection of the Nordic Alliance to the monarchies of northern Europe, like the Queen of England. History shows that the little guy always suffers by the hands of Royalty.

I also wonder if this Nordic Alliance movement is also part of a conspiracy to take down the European Union and replace it with a more corporate/private sector centered system.  (research Club of Rome, Trilateral Commission and Bilderberg)

Business/Economics, International, U.S.

What Economic Recovery? New York Times sells off 16 regional newspapers to sinister foreign company, hundreds of layoffs planned

“The sale of our Regional Media Group will enable The New York Times Company to continue our transformation to a multi-platform media company and further sharpen our focus on the development of our brands nationally, globally and in the northeastern U.S.”-New York Times, memo to employees

The New York Times has been in business since 1851, it even survived the Great Depression, now it has sold off its Regional Media Group to raise much needed cash!  But was it for economic reasons?

Late December 27, the New York Times announced it made a deal to sell Regional Media Group to Halifax Media Holdings (aka Halifax Media Group), for $143 million in cash.

Regional Media Group consists of 16 regional newspapers and other related businesses.  Those newspapers and other publishing businesses are spread from the southeastern U.S. to California.

Halifax Media Holdings is reportedly a foreign company, but is listed as based in Florida. The State of Florida’s Division of Corporations says Halifax Media Holdings didn’t register with them until October 2009.  Since the news of the deal was first leaked last week, Halifax Media Holdings removed their website from the internet (website was listed as Halifax Media Group)!

Even though the State of Florida shows Halifax Media registering in October 2009, the Daytona Beach News Journal (owned by Halifax Media) claims the corporation was founded in 2010: “Founded in 2010, Halifax Media is headquartered in Daytona Beach, Florida. The company’s investment group includes Stephens Capital Partners LLC, Jaarsss Media, and Redding Investments. Halifax’s strategy is to invest long-term capital in quality companies positioned in strong markets that are closely connected to the community.”  

The various forms of company names using ‘Halifax Media’ in the title adds to the sinisterness.  There is also a Halifax Media Co-op in Nova Scotia, Canada, which began in February 2009.  It claims to be part of a grassroots socialist media movement started by The Dominion News Cooperative in 2003.

The Dominion News Cooperative does not have any corporate headquarters, they are decentralized and operate ‘guerrilla’ style.  They claim to be anti-corporation which would make them unlikely to be part of the Halifax Media Group.  However their stated purpose of conducting media operations at grass roots level is similar to the Halifax Media Group’s desire to take over media operations “…that are closely connected to the community.”

Whether or not Halifax Media Holdings (aka Halifax Media Group, aka Halifax Media Acquisition) is connected to Halifax Media Co-op, it’s interesting that since 2009 (when Halfax Media Co-op started in Canada) this secretive, possibly foreign controlled corporation, has been quietly buying up U.S. newspaper publishers.

Halifax Media has also given warning to the hundreds of employees of Regional Media Group.  The Atlantic published an article with the full New York Times memo to its employees, which include statements like:“…you will be notified within the next 48 hours whether the buyer will be offering you employment. The New York Times Company has not been involved in that decision.”

Also, in the official New York Times memo, company officials stated they did not put Regional Media Group up for sale, it was Halifax Media that came to them demanding to buy it: “While it [the sale of Regional Media Group] was not planned, we were approached by Halifax Media Holdings LLC.”

Mmmm