4th of july



Slum Doggy-Style Millionaire – We Got To Stop Taking It In The Butt and Start Giving It Gently

Altruism Looks Good On You!

Altruism Looks Good On You!

If it can be asserted that microlending as an institution is successfully effective and that such monolithic agencies as the IMF or the World Bank effectively keep third world nations mired in a constant state of debt and exposed to corporate exploitation, why would any rational individual or society consent to having their tax dollars given to a centralized global bank?

With a tiny loan of several hundred dollars, you could arrange for a peer-to-peer transaction giving a small loan to a micro-entrepreneur.  With that money, an individual wallowing in poverty could finance an a humble enterprise and rise above poverty.  This might seem unlikely, but when compared economically to the poverty-stricken of the third world, even the most modest of Americans is comparatively wealthy.  Altruistic American junior high students could reasonably raise a small amount of capital selling candy bars to fellow classmates, arrange a peer-to-peer microloan through one of many organizations and effectively finance a small business in Madhya Pradesh which would enormously and forever change the standard of living of not one person, but that person’s family and community for the unforeseeable future.  You could be your own charity, be your own Sally Struthers.  The idea is simple and the reality is beautiful.

The economic reality and effect of current global banks such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund is the photographic and spiritual negative of microlending.  These are the centralized, international banks that crush nations with their explotative macrolending policies.  Their agents cajole, bribe, blackmail or threaten leaders of the third world to take these loans on behalf of their poor nation.  The money is either taken from tax revenue or more realistically printed fresh by the US Federal Reserve, never truly channeling through the borrower nation, but funneling directly to the international corporations who are contracted to build the borrower nation’s infrastructure.  What the corporations actually do is build infrastructure which will allow these corporations to monopolize the natural resources of the borrower nation.  The government of the borrower nation is now expected to make payments on the loan but most likely will not be able to afford payments on the interest.  If all goes according to plan, the borrower nation will hopefully be unable to make payments and go into default.  If that happens, one or many central banks, be it the US Federal Reserve, the World Bank or the IMF, will bailout the nation.  This will cause more fiat money to be printed at the cost of the American people but the profit of the central banks and sink the borrower nation so deeply in debt, that it is left at the mercy and under the influence of the imperial, hegemonic desire of the United States government.  The corporations are getting richer and richer plundering the country side, the US will expect perks from the defaulted nation such as loyal votes in the United Nations, land to build US military bases, et cetera, as the lending international banking agency keeps collecting money and the local national economy plummets into dire poverty.  If a populist leader of the borrower nation protests or attempts to nationalize the production of his nation’s natural resources, that leader is dealt blackmail, bribes or threats.  If that leader is an individual of principle and resolve, he is then dealt assassination, coup d’état or military junto.  If those measures fail, the US military invades.  Ordinarily in these situations, warlords generally rise to power; immoral and violent individuals who do not blanch at the opportunity of bullying their nation’s population into submission as corporations plunder, the international bank tallies the usury and the imperial US military stands sentry.  If microlending is simple and beautiful, macrolending is complex and terrible.

Imagine a world where we did not have a government that laundered hundreds of billions of US dollars every year to international, central banks which shackles third world nations forever in debt and forever vulnerable to exploitation.  Imagine a world where we did not live in a nation that required forty-one military bases across the globe to enforce its imperial hegemony and to defend favored criminal, multinational corporations who plunder and defile the most vulnerable in the world.  Imagine a world where we do not have to fear such concepts as “blowback” or the that the rest of the world hates us.  Imagine a world where we did not have to fear terrorists inspired by of our government immoral intervention.  Imagine the enormous amount of private capital which would be spared from taxation and inflation, which would not support this international, racketeer operation, which could be spent on anything we so desired.  Imagine but the tiniest fraction of that saved capital and how it could afford a peer-to-peer loan.  Imagine knowing and fostering a relationship based on friendship and respect with an individual thousands of miles across the globe, knowing their family, exchanging letters and pictures, hope.  Imagine the positive effect becoming like a cascade of social dominos; as more individuals rise from poverty, they could make future microloans of their own to needy others in own local communities.  Imagine a world economy not supported by neo-Liberal exploitation but a true free market.  It would be beautiful.  We can change our world but it is going to take vision and courage.  We need to stop consenting to criminal government and central banking policies.  We need to change the way our society solves immense issues because sometimes the biggest questions have the littlest answers.

The Viennagram – Lucky Money Funeral Paper

We Like War

Demand Peace!

Want peace in the Middle East? Want a democratic Iran? Want to travel the world and once again feel as an individual, you represent liberty, democracy, justice and constitutional governance? Do you want terrorists, warlords and despots to vanish from the political landscape? Demand an end to U.S. intervention in the Middle East. If you want peace, demand peace. We are still the people, we still have the power.

Bill Moyers, The Secret Government

Bill Moyer’s The Secret Government, pt 2.

This is a series of videos which comprise of the 1987 Bill Moyers documentary, The Secret Government, which touches on historic events such as Operation Ajax, the Iran-Contra Affair, Watergate and the Vietnam Conflict which demonstrates secret agencies working for an over-empowered executive office undermines the domestic and international democratic processes, erodes our U.S. Constitution since these with clandestine actions are highly unconstitutional and shows how American intervention disrupts social, political and economic stability in foreign sovereign states in which the “secret government” tampers with. This is another example for the condemnation of the current unconstitutional invasion and occupation of Iraq and a harbinger to anyone who would suggest that the U.S. government take a covert or subvert action in the current Iranian political arena.

There is nine total segments all averaging about ten minutes in length.  The first and last video segments do not have audio since the audio tracks have not been authorized by WMG, thusly one can assume the opening thesis and conclusion stated by Moyers is choice.  The supporting videos which make up the seven middle segments are quite informative, compelling and should be watched lest we forget the lessons of recent history.

Bill Moyer’s The Secret Government, pt 3.

Bill Moyer’s The Secret Government, pt 4.

Bill Moyer’s The Secret Government, pt 5.

Bill Moyer’s The Secret Government, pt 6.

Bill Moyer’s The Secret Government, pt 7.

Bill Moyer’s The Secret Government, pt 8.

Democracy Can Only Blossom From The People

Mohammad Mosaddaq, Iranian reformer disposed by American intervention which led to decades of despotism.

Mohammad Mosaddaq, Iranian reformer disposed by American intervention, leads to despotism

The etiology of the word compassion means “to suffer with, to share the pain of another.” Compassion is a noble and beautiful emotion. When we view the televised reports of the Iranian color revolution, we as Americans should feel compassion with the masses of people taking to streets in the face of tyranny to demand their democratic voice be heard but we, the American people, should be more concerned with the affairs of our country and the state of our republic’s democracy. We must remember all of the historic failures of king-making and nation building in our nation’s past. The fruits of these labors are nothing but civil war, despotism, terrorism, corruption and social and economic instability which only inspires eventual anti-American sentiment. No good can come of any U.S. involvement in Iran’s political future. If at this crux of history, the popular masses of Iran is demanding a democracy, then for the sake of the people of Iranian, let this blossom of democracy bloom on its own rather than being trampled by American intervention as it has in the past.

In early 1950’s, Iran once had a prime minister who was enormously popular with the people. Mohammed Mosaddeq’s popularity stemmed from his successful nationalization of the rich Iranian oil fields and wresting control of the country’s natural resources from the British corporation, Anglo-Iranian Oil Company. Iran had been defeated recently in World War II to Allied Forces and was still currently occupied. Resentment grew from an eight-year Allied occupation and a growing consciousness of how little Iran profited from Anglo-Iranian Oil Company’s drilling. In his speech explaining nationalization of the oil fields to the people, Mosaddeq stated:

“Our long years of negotiations with foreign countries… have yielded no results this far. With the oil revenues we could meet our entire budget and combat poverty, disease, and backwardness among our people. Another important consideration is that by the elimination of the power of the British company, we would also eliminate corruption and intrigue, by means of which the internal affairs of our country have been influenced. Once this tutelage has ceased, Iran will have achieved its economic and political independence… The Iranian state prefers to take over the production of petroleum itself. The company should do nothing else but return its property to the rightful owners. The nationalization law provide that 25% of the net profits on oil be set aside to meet all the legitimate claims of the company for compensation.”

Iran once aspired for self-determination and was lead by a popular, reformist leader. Mosaddeq successfully pressed parliament to grant the prime minister, an democratically elected position, more powers which directly limited the unconstitutional power of the monarchist Shahs and enacted land reforms to give more share of production to the peasants, abolishing centuries-old feudal agriculture laws and weakening landed aristocracy. Did our government try to foster this budding democracy as it sprouted in Iran or did the United States government conspire with the the United Kingdom to upset Iran’s national stability and dispose Mosaddeq? In response to the nationalization of the Iranian oil fields, AIOC* evacuated all of its technicians, employees, and ceased oil production. AIOC also informed off-shore tankers that Iranian oil would not be accepted on the world market. Britain sailed in ships to bolster and bloat the U.K. warship presence already in the Persian Gulf. The entire oil production in Iran essentially came to a standstill in 1952 Iran produced only 10.6 million barrels of oil whereas only two years earlier, the nation produced 241.4 million barrels. This also brought the economy to an essential standstill. The country now starved, the landscape was now ripe to sow seeds of dissent and political animosity towards Mosaddeq. Although Mosaddeq had open disdain of socialism, Britain involved U.S. interest by convincing Eisenhower’s cabinet that a Mosaddeq-led government was leaning towards Soviet influence. The newly conceived Central Intelligence Agency then launched a successful campaign, Operation Ajax, to oust Iran’s prime minister through the use of propaganda, provocation, intrigue and corruption; ironically everything Mossadaq hoped to end with the nationalization of the Iranian oil fields. After the violent military coup d’état lead by the C.I.A. disposed of Mossadaq, the monarchist Shah was re-enstated by U.S. government intervention. What followed was two decades of the U.S. and the U.K. enjoying the lion’s share of profits generated by Iranian oil produciton and a corrupt puppet government, a monarchist dictatorship of the royal Shah, propped up in power by an army and secret police generously funded by the U.S. and British governments. So corrupt and cruel was this government hatched by American and British intervention, the masses of Iran turned to the radical and authoritarian leadership of the Ayatollah Khomeine in the 1979 Iranian Revolution in part because of strong anti-American sentiment.

One may briefly examine any example from recent history and come to the same conclusion every time: The more the American government intervenes in the Middle East, the more combustible and unstable the political landscape becomes. If one is concerned for the political destiny of Iran, for her delicate democratic aspirations, one should hope and demand our government does not become involved covertly or overtly in any fashion at this present moment in Iran for simply the sake of Iranian democracy. If one is so suffering with the pain of Iran, take action humbly, simply and locally; boycott British Petroleum more commonly known as B.P. and which was once called the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company. If one needs gas while driving past a B.P. filling station, keep driving. If one begins to hear his or her elected representative in the House or Senate rattling the oratory saber crying that the U.S. should intervene on behalf of the Iranian people to “spread democracy,” one should immediately contact his or her elected representative and demand they cease with the misdirected political theater and allow the Iranian people the freedom to determine and secure their own political destiny. If one should hear another on the street commonly saying it would be best if the American government should intervene in Iranian politics on behalf of the Iranian people, one should enlighten and educate this misguided individual of whom Mohammad Mosaddeq was and how the U.S. has mettled long enough in frustrating the growth and spread of democracy in Iran. One should not let their heart, so filled with compassion, blind them from seeing rationally and intelligently what history has to teach us. Democracy can only blossom from the people, not from the intervention of a foreign state.

God bless Iran. God bless the people. God bless America. A salaam alaikum.

* Anglo-Iranian Oil Company, also known as AIOC and now known as British Petroleum or B.P.