FEBRUARY/MARCH 2006

Alan Greenspan agrees to be an adviser to the UK Treasury the day after stepping down from the US Federal Reserve BBC WORLD NEWS

Former US central bank chief Alan Greenspan has agreed to become an honorary adviser to the UK Treasury.

The announcement by Chancellor Gordon Brown came less than seven hours after Mr Greenspan's near 19-year tenure as Federal Reserve chairman ended.

Mr Brown said his new adviser would help the Treasury in the UK develop its thinking in areas relating to global economic change.

Mr Greenspan has also launched a new consulting firm, Greenspan Associates.

WOLFOWITZ AT THE WORLD BANK; TAKE THIS ALARM SERIOUSLY

The honeymoon is over. On the cost of the Iraqi war, it is becoming more and more obvious that Wolfowitz's predictions are, at best, a joke approaching the fanciful, and, at worse, outright intentionally misleading. When White House economic advisor Lawrence Lindsay forwarded an estimate (September 2002) of the Iraq war at a higher level of $100-$200 billion, the administration dismissed his analysis as "likely very, very high" and promptly fired him (another person who lost his job because he did it conscientiously and professionally). Now it turns out that even his figures were wildly low. According to Joseph Stiglitz, professor at Columbia University and Nobel Prize winner in economics, and Linda Blimes, a Harvard budget expert, the war in Iraq is likely to cost up to $2 trillion. The American Conservative magazine says: "What is certain is that before hiring him to run the World Bank, someone should have recalled Paul Wolfowitz's prediction that Iraq would fund the operation itself." Normal people under normal circumstances would have been fired, but not "Wolfie!"

However, even with this grim history in mind which they fear will impact on their ability to address their global clients' needs and fulfil their mission of addressing world poverty, World Bank staff have even more immediate worries to contend with. What everybody in the Bank perceives most evidently is the increasing rift between Wolfowitz and his inner cabal of advisors and the staff at large. The problem is manifesting itself on several levels.

In recent months, there had been a massive exodus of top talent from the World Bank. The senior ethics officer of the bank has departed. Also on the exit roster are the vice president for East Asia and the Pacific, the chief legal counsel, the vice president for environmentally and socially sustainable development, the bank's top managing director, the director of institutional integrity (who monitors internal and external corruption), and the head of the information solutions group.

Steve Clemons says in the Washington Note : "It looks as if Wolfowitz is gut- punching the most talented teams at the Bank and morale is plummeting. A lot of good people are leaving."

What has Wolfowitz done to start this serious wave of negative sentiment? He appointed Kevin Kellems, former communications director and spokesman for Vice President Cheney, to a newly created post of director of communication strategy in addition to his position as advisor to the president, effectively sidelining the vice president of communication, UN and External Affairs at the Bank. While one could question Kellems' professional ability and record in view of his previous position and the miscommunication that flowed from Cheney's office over the years, the immediate issue for Bank staff is that he was imposed following a Wolfowitz presidential fiat. Wolfowitz in effect, forced a political appointment at the director level, which is rather unheard of, especially since directorships are lower in the administrative stratosphere and are traditionally filled following an open competitive process based on merit, not political imposition.

Another glaring example of presidential fiat came with the appointment of the Bank's new corruption czar, Suzanne Rich Folsom, as the new head of "institutional integrity". Her catapulting prompted the courageous and highly respected chairwoman of the Bank's Staff Association, Alison Cave, to issue an open letter of protest to all staff. Ms Rich, married to a powerful Republican leader and a powerful Republican lobbyist in her own right, was also appointed with no concern for clear and open competitive process. She also has the title of "Counsellor to the President". A clear conflict of interest if there was ever one.

Another example involves the appointment of Karl Jackson, an old friend of Wolfowitz and colleague from Johns Hopkins University as well as government, as an advisor to the president, and who apparently has been handed the portfolio of the International Finance Corporation (IFC), the Bank's private sector supporting arm.

Perhaps the most stunning example of Wolfowitz's cronyism and complete lack of regard for the principles of the institution he has been handed to govern, not to mention the obvious appearance of conflict of interest, involves the ever-growing role of his senior counsellor, Robin Cleveland. Ms Cleveland left the Bush administration under a cloud after it emerged that she attempted to use her connections to get a relative a job at a large defence corporation while she was negotiating a contract on behalf of the US government with them. However, even this apparently has not tarnished her stature in the neocon's books, as it is said that Ms Cleveland effectively is now running the Bank.

All these examples are only serving to fuel Bank staff's growing doubt with the stewardship of Wolfowitz. One key senior official called it "utter shamelessness". Another old time Bank staffer said "the fight against global poverty is essentially a moral cause; if we lose the moral high ground, by disregarding transparency, competence, and integrity in our own institution, nothing else is left."

Others are saying he is appointing political hacks to positions that should be filled by highly qualified professionals through a competitive and transparent process. Senior Bank staff sees Wolfowitz withdrawing from the Bank's senior professionals and relying instead on a group of political operatives, zealots and ideologues. The current confusion and concern of the staff of the Bank over the direction of this global institution is best reflected in the results of the institution's own staff survey, released only last week. When asked: "Do you have a good understanding of the direction in which World Bank Group senior management is leading the institution?" only 48 per cent of respondents answered favourably, in contrast to a 67 per cent favourable response during the previous staff survey in 2003.

No one is comparing Wolfowitz with any of the former Bank presidents any more. Everyone is saying that he is building his "cabal" of supporters at the highest levels of the institution and confirming all their worst fears of foisting a Bush administration agenda on the world's premier development agency. Meanwhile, the board of executive directors, which represents the 184 member countries of the World Bank, remains scandalously silent. Quel domage!

Mohamed Hakki is a former member of the staff of the World Bank.

This article originally ran in Al-Ahram.

[Commercial_Redemption] Rumour has it that US is to issue US notes to replace FRNs?
Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2006 22:48:10 -0000
mailto:Commercial_Redemption@yahoogroups.com
Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 12:38:14 +0100 (CET)

US to issue United States Notes to escape the debt trap?

>From some sources US is about to issue US Notes instead of Federal Reserve Notes to catch up with the debt issue. i.e. the US gov is supposed to reclassify the debt asking to audit the Federal Reserve balance. It seems that the FR is cooking the books by putting the face value of banknotes in the liability side of the balance, instead of the profit side. * US gov will ask them to rewrite the books and to _ pay taxes on the seigniorage earned from the Fed Notes _.* A major classified investigation is underway. The United States Notes are banknotes with the seigniorage held by the government instead of being withheld by the shadowly private owners of the FR. If the debt will be reclassified, i.e. on the cent on the dollar, it may shrink from the actual figure of 8+ trillions dollars to a few million dollars. A minimum of a 98% shrink is expected. Smart move. Now I
understand why the Fed issued this warning:

FRB: H.6 Release--Discontinuance of M3
"http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/h6/discm3.htm" That would be a miracle in the Bush-43 Adm. It would be a good idea for the US or any Govt to do that. It takes away the power of the big international bankers, who profit extremely from the big banking games. Abe Lincoln and JFK both wanted to implement that type banking in the US to cut those big banking types out of taking the money away from the country. They were going to cut the cream that the Rothschilds and Bilderburg types were milking from the US. Everyone knows the Rule of 70 for interest. It says that if the prime rate is 7% then the money on loan for that interest doubles every 10 years. So, every decade the big banks double their money at the expense of the citizens. In the US, it is mainly the Fed Reserve system and the Alan Greenspan game that pulls wealth out of the US Govt at an alarming rate. They make more when they start wars and run up the national debts. If the US becomes the lending institution, then these funds that double about every 10-20 years go back
into the US treasury to the benefit of the American Public.

That the Govt. does not do this means everyone pays higher taxes and those taxes go right into the coffers of the Big International Bankers. This bleeds wealth from the citizens of the US. In the time that the Fed. Res. has been installed since the ideas were hatched at Jekyll Island by the Rockefellers and other big bankers, thousands of times the US net worth have been pulled from the US citizens. There is one power that is larger than the "US Superpower" and it is this rich banking system that formed in Europe from the Rothschilds holdings of most of Europe's "blue- blood" money.

This system of wealth pulled off a loan to the UK, where the promise note was the Balfour Letter. This note was converted into payment when the UK divided Palestine in half and made Israel. Recall the Rothschilds and most of the big banking systems in Europe were Jewish in orientation. The US is paying Israel around 2 billion a year, plus now several billion to back the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and perhaps soon the Iran and Syria war games.

Basically, all the big problems we have today are rooted in this corrupted system of wealth that seeks to take the US and really the whole world economic hostage. The US needs to start it sown money system that keeps for the citizens control of their money and cuts taxes.