Was financial collapse an orchestrated event?

I came across this post on the website of American Free Press and found it very interesting. Read on to know more…..

Written by: Mark Glenn

In an admission stunning for its frankness Rep. Paul Kanjorski, (D-Pa.) chairman of the House Capitol Markets subcommittee admitted on C-SPAN that the current economic problems were the result of an “electronic run on the bank” that resulted in the hemorrhaging of $550 billion in just “an hour or two.”

Kanjorski was accosted by an irate American caller charging that the economic stimulus package is solely for the benefit of fat cats on Wall Street rather than for Joe Six-pack on Main Street. With barely concealed panic in his voice, the congressman tried explaining the severity of the financial problem with the following comments:

Why did we do that? We did that because. . . .Look, I was there when the secretary of the treasury and chairman of the Federal Reserve came and talked with members of Congress about what was going on, it was about Sept. 15. . . . Here’s the facts; and we don’t even talk about these things.

“On the previous Thursday [Sept. 11] at about 11 a.m. the Federal Reserve noticed a tremendous drawdown of money market accounts in the United States to the tune of 550 billion dollars, being drawn out in the matter of about an hour or two. The Treasury opened up its window to help, pumped $105 billion in the system and quickly realized they could not stem the tide. . . . We were having an electronic run on the banks. They decided to close the operation, close down the money accounts and announce a guarantee of $250,000 per account so there wouldn’t be further panic out there. If they had not done this, their estimation was that by 2 o’clock that afternoon, 5.5 trillion dollars would have been drawn out of the money market system of the United States, [which] would have collapsed the entire economy of the United States, and within 24 hours the world economy would have collapsed….

We talked about what would happen — it would have been the end of our economic and political system as we know it, and that’s why we had to act and do things quickly. Why? Because if you don’t have a banking system you don’t have an economy, and although we did that it wasn’t enough. The economy has been falling and we’re really no better off today than we were three months ago, as other assets are going sour by the moment…

Somebody threw us in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean without a life raft and we’re trying to determine which is the closest shore and whether there’s any chance in the world to swim that far. We don’t know. . . .”

Put in less “gentle” terms, the 2-hour/half-a trillion dollar/$4.6 billion-per-minute event Kanjorski described was the equivalent of having a major economic artery “Jack-the-Rippered” in a way that threatened the very existence of not only the U.S. but the entire world whose economies and political stability are intrinsically tied to the monetary good mood of the land of the free and home of the brave. According to some of the economic experts interviewed for this piece (who insisted upon anonymity, due to the “sensitive” nature of the topic) it is one of the largest — if not the largest — singular transfers of money in history in such a short time frame.

Furthermore, the general consensus of those interviewed is that had the bloodletting been permitted to run its course — meaning the evaporation of 5.5 trillion dollars — it would have resulted in the elimination of 90% percent of America’s liquidity (again the “blood” that keeps the economic body alive) in the span of just five hours.

Based upon the unnerving words of the congressman in this television exchange, what is known is as follows:

First, that the potentially apocalyptic events leading up to the bailout of America’s banks are not “talked about,” something to remember when President Obama or his monetary magicians are promising “this and that” with regard to curing America’s economic ills. By the very words of Rep. Paul “Vallachi” Kanjorski, a “code of silence” exists among the “made members” of the political and financial elite preventing them from telling the truth. The fact that it took close to five months for this information concerning a deliberate run on the banks to be made public is proof that the captain and crew of the Titanic have decided to allow the passengers to go about their lives unencumbered while they try to find a way to “deal with” the current situation.

Second, that on Sept. 15, Treasury Secretary Paulson and Chairman of the Federal Reserve Ben Shalom Bernanke testified before Congress that on the previous Thursday, Sept. 11, an “electronic run” on the U.S. banking system took place between the hours of 9 and 11 am. . . . That had stop-gaps not been executed, by 2 p.m. (again, on Sept. 11) the hemorrhaging of “$5.5 trillion” would have taken place, resulting in the collapse of not only “the entire economy” of the United States but as well of the world within just “24 hours,” leading to “the end of our economic and political system as we know it.”

Eliminating the possibility that the event was all part of some fluke or “market correction,” the congressman ended his comments by saying “someone” was responsible for the slashing of that financial jugular that nearly bled America to death, as well as indicating the worries on the part of the power elite in Washington as to whether or not at the end of the day America would survive it, despite the unprecedented transfusions.

The date on which the hemorrhaging is said to have taken place, Sept. 11, is the same date America’s financial headquarters were attacked seven years earlier. It started the “war on terror” benefiting a certain ethno-theocratic state in the Middle East. The time frame this monetary hemorrhaging is said to have taken place was between 9 and 11 a.m., which coincides with the time frame of the terror attacks of Sept. 11, 2001,* with the first tower being struck by an airliner shortly before 9 a.m. and the second tower collapsing at roughly 10:30 a.m.

People who note the hundreds of “odd” items dealing with 9-11, including but not limited to the arrest of hundreds of Israeli intelligence operatives, some seen cheering as the Twin Towers were crumbling, will consider that the current financial crisis — rather than being an “accident” — may be another act of sabotage on the part of the same malicious entity.

(Published in the American Free Press; Issue # 9 and 10, March 2 & 9, 2009)

Sharif’s US visit during Kargil conflict

Former Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif recently blamed the country’s former president General Pervez Musharraf for the Kargil misadventure.

Addressing the Pakistan Peoples Party – Nawaz (PML-N) general council meeting at his residence in Lahore, Sharif again reiterated that Kargil was planned and executed by the Pakistani Army and its chief Pervez Musharraf without his knowledge. I don’t want to go into the merits of former Pakistani PM’s claims that he was kept in dark about the entire episode.

The interesting bits in his marathon speech were about the visit he undertook to the US to resolve the crisis. and save the region from a nuclear war. Sharif said that Musharraf pleaded with him to talk to then US President Bill Clinton to end the conflict.

Different versions of what happened, who planned it, who knew about it, have already been put out by Musharraf, Sharif and many others in Pakistan.

One of the most interesting episode in the entire drama was Sharif’s US visit. A policy paper published by the University of Pennsylvania in 2002 throws light on one of the most important day in the South Asian history. The paper was written by Bruce Riedel, who was President Clinton’s Special Assistant and Senior Director for Near East and South Asia Affairs in the National Security Council at the White House. Riedel was present with the US President during his meeting with Nawaz Sharif.

According to the document, “July 4th, 1999 was probably the most unusual July 4th in American diplomatic history, certainly among the most eventful.  President Clinton engaged in one of the most sensitive diplomatic high wire acts of any administration, successfully persuading Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif to pull back Pakistani backed fighters from a confrontation with India that could threaten to escalate into a nuclear war between the world’s two newest nuclear powers. “

Seeking US intervention

The Pakistani premier had requested American intervention to stop the Indian counterattack but the US had made it clear that unless Pakistan withdraws behind the Line of Control (LoC) the US would not help.

On July 2, 1999 Sharif called President Clinton and requested him to intervene. The President also consulted with then Indian Prime Minister A B Vajpayee who clearly stated that India will not negotiate “under the threat of aggression” and that withdrawal of Pakistani forces was essential.

Sharif again called President Clinton on July 3 and told him that he was ready to come to Washington. The President warned him that without agreeing to withdraw Pakistani forces behind the LoC, the visit will not yield any results. Sharif told him that he was coming to the US on July 4.

According to the policy paper, the White House and the State Department prepared two documents before Sharif’s visit. The first was a draft statement President Clinton would issue if Sharif agreed to withdraw Pakistani forces behind the LoC. The second draft was a statement the President would issue if Sharif refuse to withdraw the forces. The latter draft clearly stated that Pakistan was solely responsible for the crisis in South Asia.

The paper states that the US had evidence that “Pakistan was preparing their nuclear arsenals for possible deployment”. The US government also took help from Saudi Arabia, Britain, and China to pressurize Pakistan to back down from Kargil. Before the meeting, President Clinton’s advisers briefed him and suggested that the President should not be alone with Sharif at any time during the meeting. According to them a record of all the conversations was very critical.

Firm US response

During the meeting with President Clinton, Sharif kept on playing the old Kashmir tune. But the US President made it clear that the issue at hand was withdrawal of Pakistani forces behind the LoC and that there was no point in raking up old issues at this point.

The paper further states that Sharif then requested twice to be left alone with President Clinton. But the President insisted that he wanted a record of the event and asked Bruce Riedel to be present with him.

Sharif told President Clinton that he needed a face saving formula to withdraw the Pakistani forces otherwise the fundamentalists in his country would use the opportunity to topple him.

The Pakistani PM once again asked for a one-on-one discussion with President Clinton, which was dismissed. The paper states: “The President dismissed this with a wave of his hand and then told Sharif that he warned him on the second not to come to Washington unless he was ready to withdraw without any precondition or quid pro quo.  Sharif had been warned by others as well.  The President said he had a draft statement ready to issue that would pin all the blame for the Kargil crisis on Pakistan tonight.”

President Clinton reminded Sharif that despite making commitments about helping the US locate Osama bin Laden he has done nothing. Instead, the Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) was conniving with bin Laden and the Taliban in spreading terror. The President also warned him that his draft statement would also mention Pakistan’s role in supporting terrorism in Afghanistan and India.

The two leaders took a break after the first round of talks and met again. President Clinton presented a draft statement for the press that the two leaders would jointly issue.

The key element in the draft read “the Prime Minister has agreed to take concrete and immediate steps for the restoration of the LoC.”

“The statement also called for a ceasefire once the withdrawal was completed and restoration of the Lahore process.  Finally, the statement included a reaffirmation of the President’s long standing plans to visit South Asia,” the paper states.

Sharif read the statement and again took a break to discuss it with his team of advisers. Finally he accepted the draft statement with one addition of his own.

According to the paper, Sharif wanted a sentence which would say, “The President would take personal interest to encourage an expeditious resumption and intensification of the bilateral efforts (i.e. Lahore) once the sanctity of the LoC had been fully restored.”

Finally the announcement was made. Pakistan withdrew its forces behind the LoC.

Joint Statement

Following is the full text of the joint statement issued by the US President Bill Clinton and the Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif after their talks:

President Clinton and Prime Minister Sharif share the view that the current fighting in the Kargil region of Kashmir is dangerous and contains the seeds of a wider conflict. They also agreed that it was vital for the peace of South Asia that the Line of Control in Kashmir be respected by both parties, in accordance with the 1972 Shimla accord.

It was agreed between the President and the Prime Minister that concrete steps will be taken for the restoration of the Line of Control in accordance with the Shimla Agreement. The President urged an immediate cessation of the hostilities once these steps are taken. The Prime Minister and President agreed that the bilateral dialogue begun in Lahore in February provides the best forum for resolving all issues dividing India and Pakistan, including Kashmir. The President said he would take a personal interest in encouraging an expeditious resumption and intensification of those bilateral efforts, once the sanctity of the Line of Control has been fully restored.

The President reaffirmed his intent to pay an early visit to South Asia.

Pak finally admits role in Mumbai attacks

The Pakistan government finally agreed to the fact that elements in their country had a role in the Mumbai terror attacks.

Although Pakistani Interior Minister Rehman Malik claimed that the terror acts were carried out by “non-state actors”, intelligence inputs before the 26/11 Mumbai attacks had pointed a finger towards Pakistan’s notorious Inter-Services Intelligence.

An intelligence report by India’s Intelligence Bureau in December 2006 states that ISI, in cooperation with Pakistan Navy, is imparting navigational training to Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) terrorists.

The report further states that the training is for 12 to 18 months and is divided into three phases. The first phase deals with learning swimming.

The second phase of the training involved tasks like handling large boats, laying of mines in coastal zones, and planting of explosives under dams, bridges, and ships among others.

In the third and final phase terrorists were being taught navigational techniques, rescue operations, surveillance methods, concealment of explosives and underwater attack on enemy’s coastal targets and vessels.

The most vital and worrying bit of information that the report reveals is that around 500-600 terrorists have already received this navigational training, and are already planning to infiltrate into Indian coastlines and island territories under the guise of fishermen.

Around two years after this intelligence report, ten terrorists struck in Mumbai on November 26, 2008.