Truly influential people and mass media rapists know that only constant crisis can bring them ultimate power. Once achieved, the actual realisation of this power releases waves of endorphins into their chaos-addicted brains:

In comparing these two videos, I find the first relatively harmless.

NCUA says that, after having completed a ‘stress test’ for each of its members, it had found “an unacceptably high concentration of risk” in these two in particular. To this author, what’s truly amazing about this development is the deliberate sober-mindedness of the whole thing. Seems as harmless as a ‘bank transfer’

Well… what do you want to do? A few months ago this would have been a catastrophic event in financial markets – now it’s no more than an eyebrow-raiser. It is to be expected, however, that the NCUA will eventually relinquish direct control of these institutions; or they will move to merge one or both into other institutions not under direct control.

Or is this just a sign? Coming just a couple of days after support by the U.S. for a new world currency based on IMF SDR’s (see article below pre-dating public U.S. involvement) and therefore even more credit expansion, it stands to reason that the powers that be see a lot more trouble on the horizon than we would all like to think about in a sober state.

But that was before the currency crisis. Now, things really seem to be shifting into high gear.

Just last week, the President of Kazakhstan proposed a “new world currency” called ‘Acmetal’. (No, it’s not supposed to remind us of Wiley Coyote and the Road Runner – the name is derived from ‘acme’ -Greek for ‘summit’- and ‘capital’.) What’s especially interesting about this particular proposal, though, is the fact that none other than Robert Mundell, the Canadian-born Stanford economist who basically founded the Euro, who told the Australian News: “I must say that I agree with President Nazarbayev on his statement and many of the things he said in his plan, the project he made for the world currency, and I believe I’m right on track with what he is saying.”

Now, a study group will be called at the G-20 Summit in April to investigate the idea; but Kazakhstan, less known for economical than for comical revelations as home of the fictional ‘Borat’ character, is hardly regarded the world over as a monetary policy think tank. It seems rather obvious to this author that Kazakhstan made itself available as the initiator – the one calling for such an idea to be put on the table.  Now who could have been behind this interesting move?

Eureka! Monday, The Kremlin (a.k.a. Vladimir Putin, who has in the past ‘threatened’ to sell Russian oil in euros to avoid dollar instability) published its agenda for the G-20 Summit. Among other things, Russia will request of the IMF to create a world reserve currency by either expanding the list of reserve currencies or by using its Special Drawing Reserves (SDR’s) as a “superreserve currency accepted by the whole of the international community.” The SDR is an international reserve asset, created by the IMF in 1969 to supplement the existing official reserves of member countries. According to Wikipedia, SDRs are defined in terms of a basket of major currencies used in international trade and finance. Read more here.

Since the creation of the Euro, however, the significance of SDRs have waned – along with the outlook on future Russian monetary influence. So, given the current money mayhem, there’s no better time for Russia to act than now as, clearly, Russia would rather see a “fair” option than a U.S. or Euro dominated world economy. Only that way can Russia use its large natural energy reserves and still-impressive military strength to leverage influence on international monetary affairs. Otherwise, Russia fears it may be cast about for all eternity – not exactly comfortable for this former Superpower turned Superspoiler aspiring to become the next Elite Economy.

This author does not expect much to come of this idea, if for no other reason than that the strength of a currency depends alone on the strength of the economy from which it originates. A world currency would try to support the weaknesses of some economies with the strengths of other economies as an internally-manipulated solution without the benefit of direct control over a ; Europe by comparison is rather heavily integrated, while the U.S., since the Civil War, is totally integrated. Furthermore, in case of crisis, which always comes sooner or later, there would be no easy way out…no other currencies as safe havens, while alternative means of exchange (online gold/silver-based transactions) would be outlawed or heavily regulated in order to maintain the ‘integrity’ of the ‘new world currency’. Just as they are in the U.S. today.

Let’s keep our eyes peeled, though. Borat notwithstanding: Truth is stranger than fiction!

…the real problem is, these things are so darn ugly!

Okay, let’s talk about what everyone really cares about: Their wallets. ‘Energy-saving’ light bulbs cost around 4 to 7 euros apiece which is, according to the EU, “affordable”. The implication is that energy savings of up to 80 percent per bulb will result in lower energy costs. This is true: For a normal household, these savings can reach up to a whopping 4 or 5 euros per month – but wait… assuming that a few do in fact burn out or break per year, now we’re talking about a savings of 3 euros per month. That’s around $4.00.

What about the folks who aren’t all that stingy? Maybe they’re thinking something more along the lines that it’ll cost about a hundred euros to light a mid-sized apartment, they emit “cold” light (high blue content) which makes them sort of depressing…

…and by God they’re so ugly!

Regardless, as of September 1, 2009, conventional 100-watt bulbs as well as all matte bulbs, regardless of watt power, will by EU Ordinance* no longer be found on shelves all across the European Union! By September 2010 any conventional bulbs above 75 watts, by September 2011 60 watts and by September 2012 all remaining types are to be forbidden for sale within the EU.

Needless to say, public disapproval is mounting – fast. But, as the European Union is led by non-elected officials appointed by their own home parliaments and/or themselves, why should they care too much? After all, at least they’re ‘doing something’ about the enviroment, and acting as an example to energy ‘sinners’ like the U.S. – the Land of Endless Lobbying. Sure, European giants Philips and Siemens have invested hundreds of millions in ‘energy-saving’ lighting only to watch future earnings evaporate due to market inacceptance and rapid advances in LED technology, but… Hey, wait… You don’t suppose…

Naaaaaahhhh…

*”Directives” have to be approved on the national level. “Ordinances,” like executive orders in the U.S., do not.

Only three hours ago, former U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney appeared on CNN’s “State of the Union”. In an interview environment, he made the following comment about the Obama administration:

“I worry a lot that they’re using the current set of economic difficulties to try to justify a massive expansion in the government, and much more authority for the government over the private sector. I don’t think that’s good. I don’t think that’s going to solve the problem.”

He also said,

“We had, in fact, tried to deal with the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac some years before, with major reforms that were blocked by Democrats on the Hill – [House Financial Services Chairman] Barney Frank and [Senate Banking Chairman] Chris Dodd. So I think the notion that you can just sort of throw it off on the prior administration – that’s interesting rhetoric, but I don’t think anybody really cares a lot about that. What they care about is what’s going to work, and how we’re going to get out of these difficulties.”

Here’s the entire text of a strategically innacurate rape-port on Mr. Cheney’s interview placed on the news wires right away by THE ASSOCIATED PRESS:

“Don’t blame the Bush administration for all the country’s economic problems. That’s the message from former Vice President Dick Cheney…
President Barack Obama constantly talks about the enormous economic troubles that he inherited when he took office in January. Cheney agrees that Obama did indeed came into power amid very difficult economic circumstances.
But Cheney says he doesn’t think the Bush administration can be blamed for creating the economic woes. Cheney says it’s a global financial problem. He says the idea that fault can assigned to the previous administration is ‘interesting rhetoric’ but he doesn’t think people care about that.
Cheney spoke on CNN’s ‘State of the Union’.”

For now not concentrating on the actual reasons for the economic crisis, The Associated Press isn’t happy with merely earning a fortune reporting the news to the world. That’s because AP much prefers trying to shape public opinion wherever it can.

Take the recent AP article ‘covering’ a speech given by Vaclav Klaus, the president of the Czech Republic which is currently holding the European Union’s rotating presidency. Despite ample video showing Klaus’ cool demeanor throughout, and totally disregarding the ready availability of the entire text of his speech, a particularly irritated and very appropriately named rape-porter, Constant Brand, imparts to us some truly high-quality rape-porting:

“In a startling diatribe before EU legislators Thursday, Czech President Vaclav Klaus, whose country assumed the rotating EU helm in January from France, branded the club an undemocratic and elitist project comparable to Soviet-era dictatorships that forbade free thought. ‘Not so long ago,’ Klaus thundered, ‘in our part of Europe we lived in a political system that permitted no alternatives and therefore also no parliamentary opposition.’ Despite the uproar, this is hardly uncharacteristic of a deeply Euroskeptic leader…”

Visions of “startling diatribe” or “thundering” hardly describe what was in fact polite composure. Mr. Brand wasn’t happy with this, though. Obviously a very, very important person, he insults the Czech Republic

“But the Czechs are EU minnows with little of the clout of heavyweights like France or Germany.”

provides an adventurously innacurate account of demographic reality among the MP’s present (enthusiasm for the speech was actually about 50/50 among MP’s)

“His speech provoked boos from many lawmakers, some of whom walked out, but applause from a minority of nationalists and other anti-EU legislators.”

and went to great lengths to give us a good cross-section of EU political reaction by quoting:

“Lawmakers were aghast at Klaus’ attempt to compare the EU to the Soviet bloc. ‘Mr. Klaus outlined a completely twisted and manipulated view of European reality,’ said Green leader Daniel Cohn-Bendit. ‘To seriously compare the decision-making process in the EU with that of the Soviet Union indicates that the man has lost all touch with reality.’”

Am I wrong, or hasn’t The Associates Press always been the world’s most influential news wire service to which other news media outlets across the globe subscribe for accurate reporting of current events?

I guess I’m wrong.

REDUCE YOUR CHANCES OF BEING TARGETED BY MASS MEDIA RAPISTS:

Carry mace in your hip pack, hold your car keys in your fist, read “RapeTheMasses” every day and:

1. Open Google in your web browser.
2. Enter the current news topic you want to know more about – but instead of pushing the “Google Search” button, go to the top and press the “News” link.
3. Read to inform yourself!

Stranger things have happened – and a lot of strange things have been happening lately. But none stranger than on this Friday the 13th, 2009, when Switzerland’s National Parliament voted to loosen Switzerland’s centuries-old bank secrecy laws.

This in the wake of tiny Liechtenstein’s revelation yesterday that it intends to “cooperate with foreign authorities” in cases of suspected tax evasion by foreigners, and equally sobering assertions from Austria – an embattled vanguard of private banking since 1918 – and Luxembourg that they will now release information in “well-documented cases”. Along with the traditionally safe havens of Belgium, Hong Kong, Singapore and Andorra, all seem to have finally given in to the demands of the EU, U.S. and OECD to rearrange the international playing field. All within one week.

If this is true, then the unofficial system of checks and balances in the international taxation arena has been effectively washed out. Now, governments everywhere can raise taxes as they like – and while Switzerland  and other former tax havens will endeavor to retain as much of their traditional tax-avoidance business as they can by reminding foreign customers that they only reveal account information based on “serious suspicion”, those customers’ governments can in effect use these quiet, decent nations as mouse traps for their own citizens.

Will this happen?

Let us not forget that, in the end, it’s all about the cash. Everyone is scrambling for it right now, and Brussels is full of professional deal-makers, but it could well turn out that the EU and OECD have, again, gotten themselves into a bit of a pickle.

Switzerland, Austria, Luxembourg and Liechtenstein are, if nothing else, very professional about protecting their banking secrecy. Someone once explained to me “The Swiss Dance” – making commitments dependent upon other, seemingly fair-enough conditions which are later almost impossible to realize – leading to a stalemate and, finally, to the U.S., Europe, OECD or whomever just dropping the whole darn thing in exchange for some minor concessions. A lot of trouble, but it stands to reason that tax havens are rather unlikely to give up billions in foreign deposits that easily.

Right now, although Switzerland and Liechtenstein are the key focus in the news, Austria and Luxembourg are the EU insiders that will determine whether or not France, Germany, England, Italy, etc. can get whatever information they want out of their nationals’ bank accounts in those countries whenever they think they might want it (the so-called ‘automatic exchange’), or whether those interested governments will first have to show a lot of convincing documentation.

Enter the EU’s big mouth. Forgetting the fact that not one Brussels representative is directly elected, and despite being regarded in a very bad light for trying to slip the new EU “Contract” past the European people, then browbeating the rotating Czech presidency, the EU’s spokesperson stated today in no uncertain terms that it expects such an automatic exchange of bank information to be the norm in the future. Meanwhile Luxembourg, a full-fledged EU member and key to European history, specifically requires the permanent exclusion of such automatic exchange as a prerequisite to its signing any kind of agreement. Period. So, unlike Belgium whose banking secrecy laws do not come close, Austria is unlikely to agree to the automatic exchange of bank account information if Luxembourg does not.

Given the fact that the U.K. itself has yet to force its own tax haven protectorates to follow suite, to this author, and at this point in time, it looks like the EU and OECD have done a very good job of herding a group of irritated cheetahs into a pig stall without a Plan B. As usual.

And assuming the deal does go through – what’s to stop other EU member countries from demanding the same rights?

Maybe it’s wishful thinking, or maybe just nostalgia, but nonetheless: Let the 2009 Swiss Dance begin!