Saturday, September 23, 2017
Search

corporate fraud - search results

If you're not happy with the results, please do another search

Whistleblowers: IRS officials behind ‘fraudulent’ multi-billion dollar corporate tax giveaways

NAFEEZ AHMED A 10-year veteran Internal Revenue Service (IRS) attorney has demanded a Congressional audit of the IRS to investigate the agency’s alleged role in...

Corporate Media Acknowledges Voter Fraud, But Reports Falsehoods

J. CHRISTIAN ADAMS Sometimes voter fraud deniers are forced to discuss the truth of voter fraud. This happened today at the Washington Post. (“Fairfax officials say...

Corporate Behavior in Vermont: How Lockheed Martin Defrauds American Taxpayers

On October 2, 2009 Senator Bernie Sanders made one of his classic fiery speeches on the floor of the US Senate. This time...

Governments-Bank-Corporate sector fraudulently create deficits and then impose austerity measures-Part 2 (Final)

Governments-Bank-Corporate sector fraudulently create deficits and then impose austerity measures-Part 2 (Final) Fraud from an Australian perspective These senior politicians and all State Premiers were/are aware of massive fraud and corruption that is ongoing within Australia as are all the authorities that are supposed to investigate and stop such fraud i.e. Federal Police and ASIC […]

Governments-Bank-Corporate sector fraudulently create deficits and then impose austerity measures

Governments fraudulently create deficits and then impose austerity measures This article will use Australia as an example but be assured the same story exists all over the world It may appear to be rather complex and more of a jig-saw puzzle to most but to those that understand the workings of the share market, financial, […]

Voting Fraud Ignored by the Corporate Media

Michael Snyder, The Truth |  Why is the mainstream media saying nothing about election fraud even though there are eyewitness reports from all over the country of...

Going Soft on Corporate Crime a Bipartisan Affair

Donald Trump is not a fan of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), the law that says it’s illegal for any person — corporate...

Reuters vs. UN Cancer Agency: Are Corporate Ties Influencing Science Coverage?

Ever since they classified the world’s most widely used herbicide as “probably carcinogenic to humans,” a team of international scientists at the World Health...

A Grain of Truth: RCEP and the Corporate Hijack of Indian Agriculture

The plight of farmers in India has been well documented. A combination of debt, economic liberalisation, subsidised imports, rising input costs and a shift...

Donald Trump’s Deepest Fraud

Eric Zuesse, originally posted at strategic-culture.org U.S. President Donald Trump came into office promising to “drain the swamp” of corruption, and to restore the American...

Message to John Beddington and the Oxford Martin Commission: A System of Food and...

Sir John Beddington is Senior Advisor and Professor of Natural Resources Management at the Oxford Martin School in Oxford, UK. He also belongs to...

Bernie Sanders: Trump 'Is a Fraud' Sending Nation in 'Authoritarian Direction'

"I don't mean to be disrespectful," Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) told CNN's Jake Tapper on Sunday morning, "but this guy's a fraud." The immediate reference...

‘We Can Stop Committing Interstate Job Fraud’ – CounterSpin interview with Greg LeRoy on...

Janine Jackson interviewed Greg LeRoy about Trump’s Carrier deal for the December 9, 2016, episode of CounterSpin. This is a lightly edited transcript. Greg LeRoy:...

GM Mustard in India: “fudged data,” “unremitting fraud” and “monumentally bogus”

Colin Todhunter The case of genetically modified (GM) mustard in India has reached the Supreme Court. The government has said it will bow to the...

Bought and Paid For: The Corporate Media Riggs Elections

(RINF) - The 2016 Republican presidential primary was rigged. It wasn't rigged by the Republicans, the Democrats, Russians, space aliens, or voters. It was...

Corporate Plunder and Conquest of the Governed

The US presidential debacle is rolling out like hyped up reality TV. Scandals of Trump’s graphic sex talks and Hillary’s leaked Goldman Sachs speeches...

The Great Libya War Fraud

National newspapers were ‘unimpressed by Jeremy Corbyn’s victory’ in the Labour leadership election, Roy Greenslade noted in the Guardian, surprising no-one. Corbyn secured almost...

Toxic Allegiances and Corporate Power: Open Letter to the Oxford Martin Commission

Colin Todhunter The Oxford Martin School is based at Oxford University in the UK. In what seems to be a laudable aim, the school has...

Insatiable: the Democrats Must Attack Democracy to Serve Corporate Power

You might think that pervasive election fraud, the conversion of mass media into propaganda, and the already insignificant role that everyday people play in...

Alleged scamming HBOS bankers linked to £35 million fraud, finally on trial

The first trial for bankers suspected of being partly responsible for the 2008 banking crisis...

‘Invisibilizing the Workers Who Actually Do the Work’ – Transcript of CounterSpin's special Labor...

Janine Jackson assembled some of CounterSpin‘s best segments on workers and media for a special September 2, 2016, episode for Labor Day. This is...

Corporate Welfare

Isn’t it about time that American corporate leaders who lie, cheat, mislead, and defraud the public be held accountable? Wall Street was the high-water...

The Great Iraq War Fraud

Last week, seven years after the Iraq Inquiry was set up, Sir John Chilcot finally delivered his long-awaited report. Although it stopped short of...

Paul Ryan’s Hot New Idea: More Rank Corporate Giveaways

Attention people, there’s big news out of Washington: Paul Ryan, the Republican speaker of the House, has announced that he has an idea! This is...

Modi, Monsanto, Bayer and Cargill: Doing Business or Corporate Imperialism?  

Colin Todhunter Describing itself as a major ‘global communications, stakeholder engagement and business strategy’ company, APCO Worldwide is a lobby/PR agency with firm links to the Wall...

The Unique Risks of GM Crops: Science Trumps PR, Fraud and Smear Campaigns

The purpose of this piece is to draw readers’ attention to an important chapter from a document by Aruna Rodrigues that discusses the unique...

Was a TIME Front-Cover ‘Hero’ a Fraud?

Eric Zuesse A court ruling, on March 10th, in a Southern District of New York (Manhattan) lawsuit, raises serious question as to whether Preet Bharara,...

Gates Foundation’s “Corporate Merry-go-round”: Spearheading the Neo-liberal Plunder of African Agriculture

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF) is dangerously and unaccountably distorting the direction of international development, according to a new report by the...

GMOs and “Unremitting Fraud” in India: Petition Filed for Contempt of Court Against Members...

  A petition has been filed by activist and campaigner Aruna Rodrigues against three persons of the Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee (GEAC). The GEAC is...

‘These Are the Crimes That Really Matter’ – CounterSpin interview with Brandon Garrett on...

Janine Jackson interviewed Brandon Garrett about drug prices for the September 25 CounterSpin. This is a lightly edited transcript. ...

Corporate Press Fails to Trump Bigotry

Depiction of Donald Trump in the LA Times, which described the candidate as “polarizing.” (photo: Robert Gauthier / LAT) The outlandish rhetoric of Republican presidential...

Fraud charges and shareholder revolt at Deutsche Bank

By Verena Nees (WSWS) - The annual general meeting of Deutsche Bank on May 21 took place against a background of severe turbulence due to the numerous...

TTIP: the Corporate Empowerment Act

Paul Craig Roberts  (RINF) - The Transatlantic and Transpacific Trade and Investment Partnerships have nothing to do with free trade. “Free trade” is used as...

Groups Add to Evidence in “Whistleblower” Tax Fraud Claim Against ALEC

Many Corporate Members Admit Joining ALEC to Advance Legislation Benefitting Them, Despite Group's Claim That It Doesn't Lobby WASHINGTON - Common Cause and the Center...

Politics, Financial Fraud and the “Big Three” Credit Ratings Agencies

China and Russia to Launch Credit Rating Agency that will Challenge U.S. Financial System Timothy Alexander Guzman (RINF) — The “Big Three” Credit rating Agencies Moody’s, Standard...

GMO critics vindicated: Biotech corporations were pushing fraud all along

The sordid sequence of events that opened the floodgates for the genetic takeover of the American food supply – that is, the mass introduction...

Not Science, Just Lies And Propaganda: The Massive Fraud Behind GMOs Exposed

Counterpunch, RINF, Global Research, Countercurrents, The 4th Media, Morning Star

This is not what the GMO industry wanted to see: banner headlines in major newspapers and across the internet exposing the fraud behind GMOs. But this constitutes much more than a PR nightmare. The story behind the headlines shakes the very foundations upon which the industry is built.

‘Altered Genes, Twisted Truth’ is a new book by the US public interest lawyer Steve Druker. The book is the result of more than 15 years of intensive research and investigation by Druker, who initiated a lawsuit against the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that forced it to divulge its files on GM foods. Those files revealed that GM foods first achieved commercialisation in 1992 but only because the FDA covered up the extensive warnings of its own scientists about their dangers, lied about the facts and then violated federal food safety law by permitting these foods to be marketed without having been proven safe through standard testing.

If the FDA had heeded its own experts’ advice and publicly acknowledged their warnings that GM foods entailed higher risks than their conventional counterparts, Druker says that the GM food venture would have imploded and never gained traction anywhere.

He also argues that that many well-placed scientists have repeatedly issued misleading statements about GM foods, and so have leading scientific institutions such as the US National Academy of Sciences, the American Association for the Advancement of Science and the UK’s Royal Society.

Druker states that contrary to the claims of biotech advocates, humans have indeed been harmed by consuming the output of genetic engineering. The technology’s first ingestible product (a food supplement of the essential amino acid, L-tryptophan) caused dozens of deaths and seriously sickened thousands of people (permanently disabling many of them). Moreover, the evidence points to the genetic alteration as the most likely cause of the unusual contamination that rendered the supplement toxic.

He explains that laboratory animals have also suffered from eating products of genetic engineering, and well-conducted tests with GM crops have yielded many troubling results, including intestinal abnormalities, liver disturbances, and impaired immune systems.
Druker says:
“Contrary to the assertions of its proponents, the massive enterprise to reconfigure the genetic core of the world’s food supply is not based on sound science but on the systematic subversion of science – and it would collapse if subjected to an open airing of the facts.”
Eminent environmentalist and anthropologist Jane Goodall has written the foreword to the book and states that Steven Druker is a hero for exposing this massive fraud and is worthy of a Nobel prize for lifting the lid on the truth about GM.

She goes on to state that the industry worked to:
“convince the public and government officials, through the dissemination of false information, that there was an overwhelming expert consensus, based on solid evidence, that the new foods were safe. Yet this, as Druker points out, was clearly not true.”
Goodall adds that the companies have spread disinformation to try and win public support. 

She states:
“Druker describes how amazingly successful the biotech lobby has been – and the extent to which the general public and government decision makers have been hoodwinked by the clever and methodical twisting of the facts and the propagation of many myths. Moreover, it appears that a number of respected scientific institutions, as well as many eminent scientists, were complicit in this relentless spreading of disinformation.”
Jane Goodall is best known for her 55-year study of social and family interactions of wild chimpanzees in Gombe Stream National Park, Tanzania. She holds many awards for her environmental and humanitarian work, including the Benjamin Franklin Medal in Life Science, the French Legion of Honour, Japan’s Kyoto Prize and the Tyler Prize for Environmental Achievement.

She describes Druker’s work as one of the most important books of the last 50 years, and adds:
“It will go a long way toward dispelling the confusion and delusion that has been created regarding the genetic engineering process and the foods it creates. Although this book tells a story that’s in many ways distressing, it’s important that it has finally been told because so much confusion has been spread and so many important decision-makers have apparently been deluded.”
Steven Druker gave a press conference in London on Wednesday and has challenged Britain’s Royal Society to apologise for its pro-GM stance and its part in rubbishing scientists who have safety doubts over the crops and food. (Perhaps the likes of Owen Paterson and Anne Glover should too for their role in dismissing legitimate concerns about GMOs, especially Paterson for his recent tirade against critics see this and this.)

His work highlights research which has found tumours, liver and kidney harm in animals given GM feed in trials. And he complains, that researchers who dare to raise these problems have been pilloried.

He said:
“Contrary to the assertions of its proponents, the massive enterprise to reconfigure the genetic core of the world’s food supply is not based on sound science but on the systematic subversion of science – and it would collapse if subjected to an open airing of the facts.”
With the TTIP having the potential to open the floodgates to allow GMOs into Europe, Pat Thomas, director of the campaigning group Beyond GM, said:
“Steven Druker’s investigation into the history of fraud and deceit that ushered in the era of GM deserves serious consideration before we take actions that will irreversibly alter the European food supply.”

Not Science, Just Lies and Propaganda: The Massive Fraud Behind GMOs Exposed

This is not what the GMO industry wanted to see: banner headlines today in major newspapers and across the internet exposing the fraud behind...

Chris Hedges: The Corporate State Gets Stronger Every Time a Cop Kills a Citizen...

Mayor Bill de Blasio’s plans to launch a pilot program in New York City to place body cameras on police officers and conduct training...

Obama: War Criminal, Tyrant, Torturer, Racist, Corporate Tool, World-Class Thug

Stephen Lendman  RINF Alternative News His record speaks for itself. Ideologically over-the-top. Lawless. Reckless. Ruthless by any standard. Reflecting the worst of rogue leadership. Mocking democratic values....

Corporate Destruction of Free Markets Rules Us

Ralph Nader The ruling dogma of our political economy is corporatism. Corporatism claims to draw legitimacy from the free market theory that all vendors who...

Big Business Institutionalised Corruption and Financial Fraud in the European Union

Colin Todhunter  RINF Alternative News The Alliance for Lobbying Transparency and Ethics Regulation (ALTER-EU) is a coalition of about 200 civil society groups, trade unions, academics...

Warning: Corporate Interests Are Not Public Interests

Mark Taliano The modern-day conflation of corporate and public interests forms the bedrock of what is likely the most dangerous ideology to afflict humanity. Domestically, it...

Corporate Gag Orders Have a Chilling Effect on Whistleblowers

Washington Post investigation reveals corporations are trying to prevent employees from reporting wrongdoing Deirdre Fulton Corporations are using overly broad and limiting nondisclosure agreements to prevent...

Our Fraudulent Two-Tiered Justice System

Carl Gibson We’re all familiar with the golden rule, right? I’m not talking about the “do unto others” bit from The Bible, but the “He...

The Powerful Forces Shredding Our Constitution: Preface to “The Rise of the American Corporate...

Beatrice Edwards In the United States today, we have good reason to be afraid. Our democracy and our freedoms are impaired. Many Americans have lost...

Charter Schools Gone Wild: Study Finds Widespread Fraud, Mismanagement and Waste

Joshua Holland Charter school operators want to have it both ways. When they’re answering critics of school privatization, they say charter schools are public –...

Corporate Media Covers Up CIA Assault On Democracy

Patrick Martin RINF Alternative News Today marks one week since the speech by Dianne Feinstein on the floor of the US Senate in which the...

Bias Towards Power *Is* Corporate Media ‘Objectivity’

David Cromwell  RINF Alternative News The key to what is precisely wrong with corporate journalism is explained in this nutshell by the US commentator Michael Parenti: ‘Bias in favor...

The Corporate Global Banking Elite v Humanity

Justin Walker  RINF Alternative News The Bradbury Pound Centenary (1914-2014) has been launched with the signing of a House of Commons Early Day Motion by five...

Blood and Eggs and Corporate Vampirism

Lenin Nightingale  RINF Alternative News There are 15 collection facilities straddling the USA/Mexico border, where the poor are connected to machines that suck the liquid part...

The fraud of Governor Snyder’s “rescue package” for Detroit

Lawrence Porter  RINF Alternative News The following statement was issued by Lawrence Porter, the assistant national secretary of the Socialist Equality Party and chairman of the...

Divide and Conquer: Politics and the Left/Right Fraud

by James Corbett BoilingFrogsPost.com January 28, 2014 From education to the environment, business to banking, housing to health care, it seems that there is no issue in the world that the industrialized western democracies cannot reduce to a simplisti...

Power Takeover: Are Smart Meters Part of the Largest Corporate Scam in History?

 Josh del Sol On January 17, 2008, President Barack Obama famously said, “Under my plan of a cap-and-trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.”...

Obama’s Fraudulent Defense of the Unemployed

Andre Damon As Congress reassembles following the holiday break, the White House and the Democratic Party are seeking to perpetrate a political fraud on the...

How Elizabeth Warren’s Privacy Rules Will Fight the Corporate Snoops

Warren and her colleagues are fighting...

Rigging Foreign Exchange Markets. Finance Capital’s “Control Fraud”

Stephen Lendman RINF Alternative News It's the world's largest financial market. It trades around $5 trillion daily. It's more than all global equity markets combined. It...

Syria: Media Disinformation, War Propaganda and the Corporate Media’s “Independent Bloggers”

A glaring example of one of the major pitfalls emerging in supposed “new media” has arisen during the conflict in Syria. Most notably in...

WATCH: Stewart Lambasts Paltry Penalties for Major Corporate Crimes

"You're not even allowed to do...

Biotechnology, GMO and Scientific Analysis: The Powers of Corporate Manipulation

The biotech sector often yells for “peer review” when the anti-GMO movement refers to analyses or research-based findings to state its case. Despite Professor...

Obama proposes “fix” to pro-corporate health care overhaul

By Kate Randall15 November 2013 Amidst sharply falling poll numbers and a growing political crisis for the administration, US president Barack Obama announced on...

More CRIMINAL Fraud: ‘Obamacare’ Transfers $100-$300 Billion/Year from 99% to 1%

I wrote in 2010 that so-called “Obamacare” is economic fascism because it dictatorially transfers $100 billion to $300 billion every year from the 99%...

Corporate Profits Soar. The Super Wealthy Reinvent American Capitalism

As U.S. corporate profits soar to record highs, food stamps for the neediest were quietly cut. The politicians who are demanding endless cuts to...

President Obama, administration officials defend pro-corporate health care overhaul

By Thomas Gaist31 October 2013 US President Barack Obama and Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius defended the Affordable Care Act (ACA) Wednesday,...

Chevron Charges Opposing Attorney with Fraud in Landmark Lawsuit

After nearly 20 years of defending itself against charges that its drilling operations in the Amazon jungle in Ecuador caused all manner of environmental...

Justice and Financial Fraud: The Blanket Settlement with JPMorgan: A $13 Billion Cover-up

US newspapers on Sunday led with reports of a tentative settlement between JPMorgan Chase and the Obama Justice Department of numerous investigations into the...

The Mainstream Corporate Media and the US Government Shill for Toxic Monsanto

Recently Truthout reposted an article by Belén Fernández that reported on "Monsanto, Rural Debt and the Suicide Epidemic in India" to focus on just...

‘Corporate US needs a regime change’

Mike Harris, a financial editor at Veterans Today, says that the United States needs a œregime change” because it is a œcorporate fascist state”. œWe™re...

The US-Al Qaeda alliance in Syria and the fraud of the war on terror

  6 September 2013 ...

Despite Corporate Failure, Executives’ Pay on 'Inexorable Upward Climb'

Top US chief executives who have performed poorly – and blatantly so – have consistently populated the ranks of our nation’s top-paid CEOs over...

'Caught Cheating': Bennett Resignation Exposes Corruption of Corporate-Ed Agenda

Former Indiana and current Florida schools chief Tony Bennett built his national star by promising to hold "failing" schools accountable. But when it appeared...

The EU’s fraudulent “call to action” on youth unemployment

  29 June 2013 ...

Surveillance and the Corporate State

With all of the fear mongering the subject has received in recent decades, Americans have in fact had remarkably little to fear directly from...

Corporate Welfare or Education?

“Who needs the Cayman Islands?” That’s how a May 22 New York Timesarticle began as it described “Tax-Free NY,” a plan zealously promoted by New...

A fraudulent campaign for “climate justice”

  The “Ecosocialist” conference in New York ...

There Are No More Corporate Criminals

There Are No More Corporate Criminals Email   Print   Share Posted on May 7, 2013 Image via Shutterstock By Thomas Hedges This report first appeared on Policy...

America’s Draconian Computer Fraud And Abuse Act

Innocuous activities become crimes. Misstating age on Facebook can be criminalized. The website's Rights and Responsibilities make users promise not to "provide any false personal information."

Clinton’s Policy of Not Prosecuting Bank Fraud Continues

Transcript

PAUL JAY, SENIOR EDITOR, TRNN: Welcome to The Real News Network. I'm Paul Jay in Baltimore. And welcome to this week's edition of The Black Financial and Fraud Report with Bill Black, who now joins us from Kansas City, Missouri.

Bill's an associate professor of economics and law at the University of Missouri–Kansas City. He's a white-collar criminologist, a former financial regulator, author of the book The Best Way to Rob a Bank Is to Own One.

Thanks for joining us again, Bill.

BILL BLACK, ASSOC. PROF. ECONOMICS AND LAW, UMKC: Thank you.

JAY: So what are you working on this week?

BLACK: So I got to play historical detective, and the question was, we had just gotten through this savings and loan debacle. We were up to over 1,000 felony convictions of—just in major cases. George Akerlof and Paul Romer had said, hey, now we know how to prevent these crises.

JAY: What year are we in?

BLACK: We're in 1993. The national commission to investigate the causes of crisis says that fraud was invariably present at the typical large failure. And the new administration comes in, Bill Clinton and Al Gore, and they want to reinvent government.

So, what's been the big success story that all the public administration scholars are writing up? Well, it's been the effort to re-regulate the savings and loans. This is the greatest success against elite white-collar criminals, and it's a sexy story because we take on all these powerful politicians and such.

And so the mystery I was trying to investigate is why right at that time does the administration turn its back on preventing frauds and start adopting exactly the practices that we had warned were bound to produce widescale looting.

JAY: Okay. Let me add quickly a little bit of context here. And make sure—and tell me if I'm wrong here, Bill. Bill was a financial regulator. He was involved in investigating the whole savings and loans crisis. And so you were in the middle of all of this.

BLACK: That's right. We had led this effort, and we, you know, went up against the Keating Five, the five U.S. senators who tried to prevent us from cracking down on Charles Keating, and they removed our jurisdiction. And this was in all of the media. It was a really big deal, and it was treated as the great success story.

And then comes in the Clinton administration, and they want to reinvent government and make it much more effective. And you're going, hey, we are the folks who've done exactly that. The media is praising us. The public administration scholars are praising us. The white-collar criminologists are praising us. The economists are praising us. And instead they do a 180 when they come in and they move completely away from the things that work against fraud and they move completely to the things we warned produce a criminogenic environment that produces widescale fraud.

JAY: For example?

BLACK: So, for example, they deregulate it. So Akerlof and Romer, their famous line is that the economists lacked a theory before 1993 about fraud, and so they didn't see what the regulators in the field saw from the beginning, that deregulation was bound to produce looting—"bound" is their word, "looting" is their word. And then, of course, they supply that theory in 1993.

So this is exactly the same time the new administration comes in. And it now has the theory, has the benefit of what causes disaster, and it has the benefit of knowing what prevents the disaster and how you take on these elite frauds. And so you might think they would say, hey, this is a great model; we want to reinvent government; let's do it along these lines. Instead, they do exactly the opposite.

So, what do they do? They deregulate. And they start by doing what the agencies can do on their own. And so they get rid of the underwriting requirements as their very first thing they do in financial regulation. That's the worst possible thing. That's what makes possible the liar's loans that you see. And remember, this is right after our success in 1990, 1991 in cleansing the industry of liar's loans and preventing that crisis in savings and loans.

What's the next thing they do? They come and they instruct us—and I personally witnessed this—that we are to refer to the banks and the savings and loans as our customers, we the regulators, and we are to think of the banks and the savings and loans as our customers, and we are to think of how we can provide service—those are all direct quotations from how we were trained. And, of course, we rebelled and said this was obscene, this, completely improper; it will destroy effective regulation and such.

What else did they do? Well, they closed down the prosecution of savings and loan frauds. Now, we [inaud.] many times about having over 1,000 felony convictions in major cases alone, but that pipeline was still going. There would have been thousands of additional convictions, but the Clinton administration took away the FBI agents and most of the prosecutors and reassigned them to other things, which largely brought an end to the prosecutions and such. So they did everything in every possible way.

So I'm wondering what could cause this. And it turns out there's actually books by the people that were in charge of the reinventing effort, and they explain—and this is a book by Bob Stone, Confessions of a [Civil] Servant or something like that, who says, we had a meeting with Al Gore right at the beginning of the reinvention effort, and I told Al Gore my three lessons for how to reinvent a large entity like the federal government.

Now, the first two are just propaganda things. You know, tell simple stories with props and repeat them over and over and over again. But the third was: don't waste one second worrying about fraud, waste, and abuse. Now, that is an almost word-for-word quotation of what he told Al Gore. And after Al Gore heard that, Al Gore put Mr. Stone in charge of the reinvention of government effort.

JAY: And what's the explanation of why one shouldn't spend one cent on this?

BLACK: One second.

JAY: One second.

BLACK: One second of time on it. Stone isn't big on explanations, right? These are just diktats that he comes up with. They don't come from theory. They don't come from any real experience. He just doesn't much like anybody who worries about fraud.

And his—there was a second guy at the meeting, and this guy got made a major leader in reinvention as well by Al Gore at the end of this meeting on the strength of the following statement, which again is in Bob Stone's book. And the statement was, to Gore, that the United States of America was the last bastion of communism, the U.S. government was. Right? So this is the land—.

JAY: What is that supposed to mean?

BLACK: Well, that was supposed to mean that the U.S. government still had monopolies. Right? So there were some things that only the U.S. government did, and that supposedly made us Bolsheviks. It's the bizarrest thing you can imagine.

JAY: Okay. Well, let me ask you this, 'cause, I mean, that's pretty nutty. This idea that you shouldn't spend one second going after fraud and the big banks, there seemed to have been a bit of a theory to it (I've heard, at any rate), which is that you need this ability—if you crack down on fraud, you'll limit innovation in the finance field, and for the American banks to be competitive and deal with this global, complex structure, they need to be innovative, so live with fraud. So if I have that rationale right, how much is that still the rationale of the Obama administration?

BLACK: Well, it isn't—they actually don't make that rationale. He does launch an attack on the inspector generals using that ground, and he says, you know, they worry about fraud within the government, and that's very bad, because they imperil innovation. And you are correct that that remains, in the Obama administration, one of the excuses for why we shouldn't take fraud seriously.

But this is the intellectual history, and this is where much of the damage was done that the Bush administration then compounded, and produced the most criminogenic environment in history for this widescale fraud. And that's only the Clinton side of it, and then eventually some Bush.

But simultaneously what's happening on the Republican side is that Alan Greenspan is going around giving his favorite stump speech as a chairman of the Federal Reserve, which the lesson of it is also don't worry about fraud, fraud takes care of itself. And that comes from Chicago school economists—or, actually, law and econ folks, who actually didn't have degrees in economics, Easterbook and Fischel. Fischel eventually becomes dean of the UChicago Law School; Easterbrook, Seventh Circuit jurist, former UChicago law professor. And their famous line is a rule against fraud is not necessary or even particularly important in the securities context.

Now, they're coming from the side that the markets instantly and reliably remove all fraud. And that, by the way, if there was any intellectual input at all to the Clinton administration's thing on fraud, that's probably the same thing, because you see from these readings, this detective work I did, they are just in thrall to the private industry. They assume—in fact, they're nastier by far than President Reagan in describing the federal government, and they just love the private sector, and in particular they love all the things about the private sector that were building up to produce one fraud epidemic after another.

JAY: And has that changed at all in the current administration?

BLACK: No. In particular what they loved was performance pay, which of course is not really tied to performance and creates both the incentive to loot and the method to loot through a seemingly normal corporate mechanism that makes it far harder to prosecute. And so their big recommendation inside the government was to bring performance pay within the government. And their rationale for how to use that was then that you should—and this is a quotation from the granddaddy of all of this, who, by the way, is a journalist, Mr. Osborn—you should not ever, quote, "tolerate resistance," unquote.

JAY: And let me just—again, in terms of the Obama administration, any change in this culture?

BLACK: A strong embrace of the culture, even after the Enron-era frauds, even after the current level of frauds. And by the way, the book that I've been quoting from in substantial part, Mr. Stone's book, was published, hardcover, in 2002, soft cover in 2004, and has no mea culpas about, you know, we missed all of this, and doesn't even, for example, mention Enron's failure, so just does not take into account the disasters that occurred when they used this so-called performance pay.

But, again, that's—as a social scientist, that's the big motif. This is consistently written as propaganda, as journalistic stories. And this is not data-driven, it's not theory-driven. It was a bunch of just-so stories. And it was dishonest just-so stories, where all the contrary stories, you know, that disproved it and were vastly larger were simply ignored.

JAY: Alright. Thanks for joining us, Bill.

BLACK: Thank you.

JAY: And thank you for joining us on The Real News Network.

End

DISCLAIMER: Please note that transcripts for The Real News Network are typed from a recording of the program. TRNN cannot guarantee their complete accuracy.

The Climate Change Corporate Lobby Threatens the Environment

At a recent Washington climate change rally, who is demanding action? Demanding action from whom? What action?

In reality, the diminutive, corporate-media inflated rally in DC was organized by the very corporate-financier special interests that have been wreaking terrible havoc on both the human population and the environment of this planet for decades. They are demanding action from a government that already represents their interests. Their demands are policies, particularly financial tax schemes that they themselves created and are are best positioned to benefit from while making no discernible impact on the very real environmental threats we collectively face.

Image: Rampant CO2, high global temperatures, rising sea levels. A look into the future? No, this is Mesozoic North America 250-65 million years ago. Climate change has happened long before humanity’s emergence, it will happen again, with or without us. The key to preserving what we as humans value, including not only our cities, towns, and countrysides, but also ecosystems and species – is to devise technical, pragmatic solutions to ensure no matter what the climate does, we can not only survive, but thrive.

….


It was an exercise in manufacturing consent for policies already long-ago devised and simply waiting for piecemeal implementation.

Yahoo! News’ report, “40,000 People Reported at Climate Change Rally,” mentions 350.org as one of the rally’s organizers and key representatives. Upon 350.org‘s “Friends & Allies” page, an extensive list of human rights and environmental racketeers can be found, all either linked, or directly connected to big-oil, big-finance, big-agri, and big-defense.

The World Wildlife Fund (WWF) and its “Earth Hour” for instance, includes Fortune 500 corporations (page 24, .pdf) (and here) Walmart, Unilever, Coca-Cola, draconian intellectual property racketeer Christopher Dodd representing the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) as a director, Bank of America, Google, and others.

While the WWF claims having big corporations as partners is “good news” for the environment, implying that they are shifting toward environmental responsibility – in reality it is exactly the other way around. Corporations are co-opting genuine concern for the environment to further enrich themselves and to create global frameworks that eliminate indigenous competition over resources they themselves are already exploiting and plan to continue exploiting.

The lack of real, pragmatic solutions, or even an honest scientific discussion on issues like climate change are particularly telling. This collection of organizations falling under the 350.org website have also been key in pushing other establishment agendas, most notably regime change and political subversion worldwide, couching a corporate-fascist warmongering agenda behind liberal concerns for “freedom,” “democracy,” and “human rights.”

Real Environmental Threats

The climate of Earth has always changed throughout its natural history, and many times before the existence of man, has changed so dramatically that it has caused mass extinction events. 65 million years ago, for example, Antarctica was a thriving ecosystem covered in temperate forests inhabited by dinosaurs. The global temperatures were higher, sea levels were higher, and carbon dioxide (CO2) levels were many times higher than they are today. Higher temperatures, sea levels, and CO2 levels made the planet more habitable, not less. This changed however, and to the detriment of many species that are now extinct.

Before the Cretaceous period, there have been many points throughout Earth’s natural history, that were we as humans to travel back, would find uninhabitable. The atmosphere has been in a state of perpetual change, the biology driven by this change has likewise continuously evolved. There is no “norm” in terms of geology, biology, or climate. The only constant is the inevitability of its constant change.

The climate will change with or without us. To ensure the survival of what we value in terms of human society, history, and infrastructure, as well as ecosystems and individual species we desire to preserve, we must come up with something better than “carbon neutrality” implemented by giving bankers yet another derivative to trade, and energy companies a legal framework to maintain monopolies over powering human civilization.

Part of the solution is not only leveraging technology to protect our towns, cities, and countrysides from adverse weather, flooding, and changes in temperature through innovative infrastructure projects, but undermining, decentralizing, and eventually eliminating permanently these corporate monopolies that are demonstrably destroying the environment.

Strange that 350.org wasn’t marching against genetically modified organisms (GMO) and Monsanto’s pursuit of overwriting the planet genetically. Could a planet face a more dire threat than being overwritten genetically, its very essence mutilated by profiteering corporations? Strange that 350.org‘s “Friends & Allies” don’t demand an end to profiteering wars around the planet that see tons of depleted uranium, with a half-life of billions of years, being dumped in both human and natural habitats the world over. Strange that 350.org, and “Friends & Allies” like WWF have in fact partnered with Fortune 500 corporations that perpetuate global monopolies, centralized manufacturing and distribution (and profits) that encourage wasteful supply chains, unhealthy socioeconomic trends, incur large amounts of garbage, and require the very petroleum and CO2 producing processes they allegedly were in Washington to oppose.

Indeed, 350.org and partners like the WWF do not represent corporations joining environmentalists, but rather represent environmentalists being co-opted and manipulated by the very special interests committing real harm to this planet.

Don’t Demand Action – Be the Action 

Waving around placards as part of a big-business rally couched behind environmentalism, demanding action from a government big-business already fully owns, simply legitimizes and manufacturers public consent for more of the same. More schemes, more waste, more fraud, more abuse, while the environment continues to unravel and a host of problems both directly and indirectly related continue to grow.

Real solutions generally don’t involve corporations or governments, in fact, as a necessity must exclude them. The marriage between corporate interests and government regulations should be something all of us can agree on, regardless of where we sit on the political or environmental spectrum.

Real solutions involve a real education in science, technology, design, and manufacturing. This empowers people in all levels of society to accurately assess problems and apply local solutions. This, coupled with modern manufacturing technology enables more to be done on a local level, short-circuiting the petroleum intensive logistical chains WWF sponsors like Walmart couldn’t live without.

Organic farming on a local level coupled with local farmers’ markets eliminates entirely the need for Monsanto poison, fertilizers, and genetically modified franken-crops, along with the replacement of the petroleum intensive logistical networks that distribute big-agri’s products. 3D printing, computer-controlled manufacturing, and local hackerspaces that encourage local entrepreneurship accelerate technological development and solutions that allow us to live the lives we wish to lead while doing so more efficiently in terms of energy, waste, and environmental impact.

In fact, when you think about it, almost all of these real solutions involve real community and local action, not placard-waving trips to Washington. These are not solutions that involve policies, taxes, and regulations, but rather technology, education, constructive, pragmatic, technical solutions that not only would make our environment more livable, but make our local economies and communities more viable and self-sufficient. The catch is, and the reason why this isn’t being done, you will notice that none of these activities require WWF sponsors like Walmart, Nike, IBM, Toyota, Bank of America, Coca-Cola, HSBC, Citi, IKEA, Nokia, etc.

We all desire cleaner air, healthier food, safer water, and greener parks. Waiting for a corporate-financier establishment to give it to us, when they themselves are the ones that have denied us of these essentials is the height of both naivety and futility.

Does it make sense then, to see why real problems and their solutions have become the target of hijackers like the corporate conglomeration that is 350.org and the WWF? Does it make sense to see them offering “alternative” centralized, corporate dependent solutions that replace local activism and tangible, technological solutions?

Why travel to Washington D.C. and demand non-solutions to real problems when you can organize locally and begin making this planet livable in very real, tangible, pragmatic, and measurable ways?

Progressive Grassroots Coalition Takes on ‘Fix The Debt’ Fraud

(Photo: Flip the Debt via Facebook)On Monday, a grassroots, anti–corporate tax-dodging coalition called Flip the Debt crashed a "Fix the Debt" party at St. Anselm's College in New Hampshire hosted by Honeywell CEO David Cote to tell the gathered deficit hawk disciples that paying their "damn taxes" would be a better solution than crippling the nation with fiscal austerity measures.

The CEO-led Fix the Debt campaign promotes fear over the national debt as a guise for lowering the corporate income tax rate and cutting necessary social support programs like Social Security and Medicare.

Three minutes into Cote's keynote address, the first protestor stood up in the conference room and spoke out

Fix the Debt claims to seek bipartisan solutions to reduce the deficit, but Fix the Debt is nothing more than a CEO lobby whose real objective is huge corporate tax breaks and drastic cuts in Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. David Cote and his CEO friends receive a lot from government: In 2011, Honeywell received $725 million in government deals, making it the 35th largest federal contractor. However, Honeywell and other companies pay next to nothing in taxes. Honeywell's tax rate from 2008-2011 was 2 percent. Does anyone in this room pay 2 percent?

"Fix the Debt is going to be met by opposition everywhere it goes, because everyone knows it's a fraud" another added, before leading the group in the chant: "Read our lips. Pay your taxes!"

The group kicked off two weeks ago with the launch of a 'debt clock' and rally in New York City. The clock has thus far calculated that at least $2.3 trillion has been stolen by corporations and the top 1% (heavily represented within Fix the Debt) who exploit "loopholes, tax havens and tax cuts." That figure, according to the group, grows by nearly $100 billion annually.

Laying out the goals of the group, Flip the Debt co-founder Gan Golan said, "We will disrupt Fix the Debt meetings across the country to elevate our message that the biggest corporations in the country aren't paying taxes, and now they want the rest of us to pay for it."

On their website, the group adds: “We wouldn’t have to make these cuts, and we could invest in putting America back to work, if only [corporations] pay their fair share. So we say, rather than ‘fix the debt,’ let’s ‘flip the debt’ and put responsibility where it belongs. Hey 1%! Pay your damn taxes.”

One of the protestors produced this video of Monday's demonstration.

Sandy Hook Tragedy: Corporate Media’s “Lone Gunman” Storyline Losing Ground

Sandy_Hook_Elementary_School

A cross section of kill-to-injury ratios of major mass shootings suggests that if Adam Lanza acted alone in carrying out the Sandy Hook Elementary School carnage he was among the most accurate killers in modern history, exceeding even the lethal damage meted out by Al Capone’s machine gun-wielding henchmen in the infamous St. Valentine’s Day Massacre.

Incident, # of shooters, weapon(s) used Shot Killed Wounded Kill-to-wounded ratio
SANDY HOOK (2012) 1 shooter, AR-15, .223 27 26 (96.2%) 1 (3.8%) 26:1
Aurora, CO (2012) 1 shooter, AR-15, .223 71 12 (16.9%) 59 (83%) 1:5
Tucson, AZ (2011) 1 shooter, Glock 9mm 14 6 (42.8%) 8 (57.1%) 1:1.2
N. Ill. U (2008) 1 shooter, 9mm 26 5 (20%) 21 ((80%) 1:4
Virginia Tech (2007) 1 shooter, 9mm pistol 49 32 (68%) 17 (32%) 2:1
Columbine, CO (1999) 2 shooters, 12 ga., 9mm 33 12 (36%) 21 (64%) 1:2
U. Iowa (1991) 1 shooter/.38 spec. 6 5 (83%) 1 (16%) 5:1
Stockton, CA (1989) 1 shooter AK-47 35 5 (14%) 30 (86%) 1:6
École Polytechnique/Montreal  Massacre (1989) 1 shooter, Ruger Mini 14 .223 27 14 (52%) 13 (48%) 1.1:1
Cal. St. Fullerton (1976) 1 shooter .22 LR semi-auto 9 7 (78%) 2 (22%) 3.5:1
U. Texas Tower (1966) 1 shooter 48 16 (33%) 32 (67%) 1:2
St. Valentine’s Day Massacre (1929) 2 shooters, .45 submachine guns 7 6 (85.8%) 1 (14.2%) 6:1

Never mind the facts, however. The public has been repeatedly told by corporate news media that the December 14, 2012 incident was exclusively carried out by the awkward 20-year-old man with virtually no firearms or military training.

“The debate over gun violence gained urgency after a gunman killed 20 first-graders and six adults on December 14 at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut,” Reuters observed as recently as February 7. “The killer, 20-year-old Adam Lanza, used a Bushmaster AR-15 type assault rifle to shoot his victims before killing himself.”[1]

Over the past seven weeks mainstream media have spoken in one earsplitting voice to drive home the now familiar “lone gunman” storyline ostensibly proffered by law enforcement while dismissing a multitude of important evidence indicating a far more complex scenario.

Indeed, as information recently pointed to by Digital Journal indicates,[2] in a widescale rush to judgment major news media have neglected vital information and statements from Connecticut state authorities suggesting that Lanza may have had accomplices.

In a December 26 court plea to postpone release of contents yielded through five search warrant, Connecticut State Attorney General Stephen Sedensky argued that unsealing such findings might “seriously jeopardize” the investigation by divulging evidence heretofore known only to other “potential suspects.”

Pointing to “information in the search warrant affidavits that is not known to the general public,”  Sedensky also argued that opening the warrants would “identify persons cooperating with the investigation, thus possibly jeopardizing their personal safety and well-being.”

The prosecutor’s statement came less than two weeks after Connecticut State Police Lieutenant J. Paul Vance told reporters how there were “some cards that we’re holding close to our vest.”

In light of the above and alongside a wealth of additional evidence calling the “official story” into question, the corporate news media’s long-running and continued emphasis of the “lone gunman” narrative appears increasingly fraudulent. The question remains whether this is merely a case of slipshod reporting or part of a more intentional mass deception against the American public.

Notes

[1] Thomas Ferraro and Richard Cohen, “House Democrats to Unveil Gun Control Package; Mirrors Obama’s,” NBC/Reuters, February 7, 2013.

[2] Ralph Lopez, “Sandy Hook DA Cites ‘Potential Suspects,’ Fears Witness Safety,” Digital Journal, February 5, 2013.

The Srebrenica Massacre was a Gigantic Political Fraud

edward_herman

Renowned author Dr. Edward Herman spoke with the Voice of Russia regarding the facts surrounding the Srebrenica Massacre, the pretext for the “humanitarian” invasion of the former Yugoslavia, and takes apart the “official” ; version that has always been promoted by the West.

Dr. Herman reveals that there were in fact multiple massacres at Srebrenica, and that the killing of Bosnian-Muslim soldiers at Srebrenica (the West’s pretext) was in response to the killing of over 2,000 Serb civilians, mostly women and children, at the location.

Robles: My first question is about “The Srebrenica massacre” and the way that the establishment manipulated the media. Can you tell us, or give us some insights, on that?

Herman: The Srebrenica massacre, actually I always put it in quote marks, because actually there were lots of massacres in the Srebrenica area, the one before July 1995 there were vast numbers of Serbs killed by Muslim, Bosnian Muslim, forces who went out of Srebrenica.

One estimate is that there were more than 150 Serbs villages that were totally wiped out and one study gives actually gives the names of 2,383 Serb civilians who were killed between 1992 and July, 1995. So then we’d call that “the first Srebrenica massacre”. Then in July 1995…

Robles: Just to be very clear, these were Serbs, that were being killed.

Herman: Yes! We’re talking about 2,383 Serb civilians killed before July 1995. And the Bosnian Serb Army took over Srebrenica in July, 1995, and there were deaths and executions after that. That’s what’s called in the West “the Srebrenica massacre”, but, in fact, that’s really mainly a political construct.

The numbers executed there were probably in the order of between 500 and 1,000. In other words, less than half of the number of Serbs civilians killed before July, 1995.

And the Western claim is that 8,000 men and boys were executed in the quote Srebrenica massacre, but notice these were men, always men, all men, they were all soldiers, whereas those 2,383 civilians killed included very large numbers of women and children.

We’re talking about the execution in the second massacre of essentially army people. And of course they had never proved that there were 7,000 or 8,000, even men and boys killed. The bodies in the graves added up to something like 2,500.

A lot of those bodies were combat deaths. One of the beauties of the Western propaganda system is that all the bodies they found after July, 1995, they count as executed, even though we know very well that a large number were killed in combat.

Reminder

Herman: Also another important fact about the Srebrenica massacre is that all those killings of Serbs took place coming out of an area that was supposed to be a “safe haven”. Srebrenica was a safe place, a safe haven. It was supposed to be demilitarized, but it never was.

So the Bosnian Muslim soldiers would come out to Srebrenica and they would kill Serb civilians. This is all completely ignored in the Western media. It’s as if the Serbs came in July and started to kill arbitrarily.

In fact, the U.N. military in that area, a French offical name Phillip Movion, was asked by the Yugoslav tribunal, “Why the Serbs did it?”

He said he’s absolutely convinced that they did it because of what the commander of Srebrenica’s Bosnian Muslims did to the Serbs before July 1995.

This is the UN Army head, but you won’t see that in the Western press!

In other words, the first massacre is what led to the lesser second massacre of namely military aged people.

The whole business of the Srebrenica massacre is a gigantic political fraud. There was a massacre, but it was a responsive vengeance massacre, women and children were not killed.

One of the features of the “quote” Srebrenica massacre, that is the second one, is that 20,000 Srebrenica women and children were bussed to safety by the Serb army. Women and children were not killed, only military aged people and a very large fraction of those that did die, died in combat.

So my own estimate, as I said, is that maybe there were 500 to 1,000 executions. Vengeance executions.

Robles: I’m sorry. How many?

Herman: 500 to 1,000 I would say.

Robles: 500 to 1,000.

Herman: Yes. So there was a significant massacre, but put it in its context! This was a war, this was an army that had seen their own civilians massacred on a much larger scale. That is completely suppressed in the West, as if the Serbs came in to Srebrenica and started to kill because of a blood lust! It’s absolutely a fraud!

So, I regard the Srebrenica massacre as a tremendous propaganda triumph. The West wanted to go after Serbia and they avoided peace. They needed this massacre.

Robles: You said, about 2,380 civilians, women and children mainly…

Herman: Serbian women and children, yes.

Robles: … were killed initially. This was the Srebrenica…

Herman: The first massacre between 1992 and July 1995. These were Serb civilians. There were also hundreds of Serb military killed in that period, I am just talking about civilians!

Robles: The civilians, right! And then in retaliation approximately 2,500 Muslim… Bosnian Muslims soldiers were killed.

That’s misleading, because the thrust of the 8,000 claim is that they were executed but those 2000-plus that were killed, a very large fraction were killed in combat.

Robles: In combat. Okay, I see. I see.

Herman: Yes, and the executions were, as I say probably in the order of 500 to 1,000.

Robles: Okay. So those were Bosnian Muslims who were found to be directly responsible for killing massive numbers of Serbian civilians. Right?

Herman: The Serbs actually had lists of Bosnian Muslim soldiers they wanted to get, but I can’t honestly say they were the only ones who were executed. But certainly, a significant number of those executed were on those lists, those vengeance lists.

Edward S. Herman is an American economist and media analyst with a specialty in corporate and regulatory issues as well as political economy and the media.

He’s a Professor Emeritus of Finance at the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania. He’s also the author of several books, namely “Manufacturing Consent” which he wrote with Noam Chomsky and “The Srebrenica Massacre: Evidence, Context and Politics”.

Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/stopnato/ messages

Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff. wordpress. com

Obama Administration Fails to Prosecute Banking Fraud to “Save the System”

James S. Henry commenting on PBS documentary "The Untouchables": If one of these institutions was indicted and made an example of, it would have a profound affect on the whole industry - but Obama raises money on Wall St.

Obama Admin. Fails to Prosecute Banking Fraud to ‘Save the System’

Context: As yet there are no context links for this item.

Bio

James S. Henry is a leading economist, attorney and investigative journalist who has written extensively about global issues. James served as Chief Economist at the international consultancy firm McKinsey & Co and as an investigative journalist his work has appeared in numerous publications like Forbes, The Nation, and the The New York Times. He was the lead researcher of the recently released report titled “'The Price of Offshore Revisited.'

Transcript

PAUL JAY, SENIOR EDITOR, TRNN: Welcome to The Real News Network. I'm Paul Jay in Baltimore.

Lanny Breuer, who's head of the Criminal Justice Division at the Justice Department, has announced he's stepping down. According to The Washington Post, quote, Breuer is widely credited with aggressively going after white-collar crime in the aftermath of the crisis. Well, a recent PBS documentary suggests a somewhat different description of how Breuer has done on this front. Here's a clip towards the end of the film.~~~MARTIN SMITH, CORRESPONDENT, PBS FRONTLINE: You gave a speech before the New York Bar Association, and in that speech you made a reference to losing sleep at night worrying about what a lawsuit might result in at a large financial institution. Is that really the job of a prosecutor, to worry about anything other than simply pursuing justice?LANNY BREUER, ASSIST. ATTORNEY GENERAL, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE: Well, I think I am pursuing justice, because if I bring a case against institution A, and as a result of bring that case there's some huge economic effect, if it creates a ripple effect so that suddenly counterparties and other financial institutions or other companies that had nothing to do with this are affected badly, it's a factor we need to know and understand.TED KAUFMAN, FMR. U.S. SENATOR (D-DE): That was very disturbing to me, very disturbing. That was never raised at any time during any of our discussions. That is not the job of a prosecutor, to worry about the health of the banks, in my opinion. The job of prosecutor is to prosecute criminal behavior. It's not to lie awake at night and kind of decide the future of the banks.NARRATOR (VOICEOVER): So far in civil proceedings the government has levied several billion dollars in penalties for misconduct in a crisis that's cost investors and homeowners many hundreds of billions of dollars. But to date not one senior Wall Street executive has been held criminally liable by the Department of Justice for activities related to the financial crisis.~~~JAY: Now joining us to talk about the record of the Justice Department in relation to this type of crime or fraud and prosecuting or lack of it is James Henry. James is a leading economist, attorney, investigative journalist who's written extensively about global issues. He served as the chief economist at the international consultancy firm McKinsey & Company. As an investigative journalist, his work has appeared in numerous publications like Forbes, Nation, and The New York Times. Thanks for joining us again, James.JAMES S. HENRY, ECONOMIST, LAWYER, AND INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALIST: You're quite welcome.JAY: So talk a bit about this, this conundrum, you could say, that Brewer says he was faced with, more or less that if he goes after executives from the big banks, even though he kind of acknowledges it was probably fraud and the FBI agent or FBI official in the film says, you know, if he thinks it was not unintentional the way banks did things—a pretty understated way to say it. But Breuer says he couldn't have done it, because the systemic implications were just too big—not his words, but that's what he's saying.HENRY: Yeah. I mean, that's what he made a statement in September of last year in a speech, saying that he was kind of up nights worrying about what would happen to these massive institutions if he indicted some of these senior executives criminally. I think a lot of outsiders would say that's nonsense, that, you know, you could clearly just put some of the executives in jail—and I think that's what they were actually expecting—without jeopardizing the institutions themselves. Maybe some of these institutions deserve to be corporately indicted and made examples of, and maybe the entire—you know, kind of the salutary effect on the banking system would be great enough to justify putting one of them out of its misery because of the effect it would have on all the others.So I think there's at least a strong argument that this Justice Department, when it came to large financial institutions, was asleep at the switch. And we have no indictments or prosecutions of any individual senior Wall Street executive in the last four years.JAY: What for you is the sort of two or three most outstanding examples of fraud that should have been prosecuted?HENRY: Well, we now see a lot of private lawsuits going on from investors in some of the securitized mortgage packages and people who bought things like CDOs from Goldman Sachs at the same time Goldman Sachs was shorting these securities themselves. So these private suits and the law firms that have been prosecuting them have managed to turn up, you know, reams of evidence of real fraud. And it's all emerging in the course of these private law suits which are about to unfold.It's ironic, given all that evidence, that the Justice Department, with its thousands of attorneys, and, you know, the SEC be able to help out as well, couldn't come to a similar kind of finding, couldn't turn up the whistleblowers that even in the PBS documentary, you know, investigative journalists were able to surface in a matter of weeks. And the New York State attorney general's office has piggybacked already on some of these private lawsuits and has—pursuing its own investigations of some of the largest firms on Wall Street, including Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan, Citibank, Bank of America.These major institutions have basically walked away from justice when it comes to the federal government, and it's been left to the private lawsuits and to the SEC, to the state of New York, to actually piggyback on these private lawsuits and make these cases. It begs the question of, you know, whether or Lenny Breuer and his team was really doing their job when it came to these major financial institutions. They seem to have a soft place in their hearts. And that also extends to other kinds of corporate crime, for example the settlements that they engaged in with HSBC and the money laundering, the tap on the wrist that UBS got for being at the heart of the Libor scandal. It's not just the bank crises; it's also these other kind of shenanigans. So, many of us have been expecting the Justice Department to act here, but they haven't.JAY: So let's talk a little bit about the bigger picture here. The power of finance seems to be such, the biggest financial institutions, their hold over Congress, their hold over the Obama administration, their hold over the Justice Department, it seems to be so deep and profound that they can't be regulated, they can't be prosecuted. Where does this lead? Where does this go?HENRY: I think you can't even get them out of the Treasury Department. I mean, Obama's pick for the successor to Tim Geithner this month is taking office at the Treasury, the secretary of Treasury, is Jacob Lew, who is the guy who was running Citibank's global private banking department in 2006, you know, and then moved on to the White House chief of staff. But here we have, right at the core of power, another senior Wall Street executive.Now, I think Ted Kaufman, who was a senator from Delaware in 2010, then retired, and was a big proponent of prosecutions, basically said that, you know, Wall Street calls the shots in Washington. Dick Durbin said they own this town. And I think that's not only due to financial influence and contributions; it's also due to the fact that there's this revolving-door policy of basically gifting the Treasury Department to former executives from the major banks. You know, we have Bill Daley from JPMorgan, vice chairman of JPMorgan, serving as Obama's chief of staff. It's hard to imagine those folks being tough on the institutions that have provided their bread and butter. And so the track record is entirely consistent with this evidence that we see from the Justice Department's failure to prosecute any of these major institutions.JAY: I mean, I don't think it's anything new with the Obama administration, but Barack Obama the candidate was heavily financed by Wall Street. Everyone was kind of surprised in the primaries that he was actually raising more money than Hillary Clinton was on Wall Street.HENRY: You know, Wall Street's contributions from 1990 to 2008 was an average of $2,500 per day per congressman. You know, it's just hard to compete with that kind of immediate financial clout.And I think there's also a kind of insidious influence on just the ideology. You know, we've had presidential candidate after presidential candidate basically arguing for hands off when it comes to financial regulation—don't really have a good explanation from those folks about what went wrong in 2008. I guess it was, you know, just bad weather. But, you know, to this day, we really haven't had a fundamental, deep examination of the role of the private sector financial institutions in the policies that led to that very, very costly collapse that we're still paying for.JAY: Isn't some of this kind of so inherent in the way the global capitalist system works right now—and it's not new, but it's reached new heights, meaning that the size of the global economy's just so big, there is so much capital moving back and forth, the enterprises, global companies, are so big and operate on such a scale that you need banks that can operate in massive ways? On the other hand, when they get so big, you can't regulate them—they're essentially above the law. I mean, it's a conundrum, is it not?HENRY: If one of these institutions were indicted corporately and made an example of and exposed to the world for their behavior, you'd have a very, very profound effect on the behavior of the whole industry, because they all—you know, they say that bankers could exchange strategies and no one would care, 'cause they all basically pursue the same strategies.JAY: But that's sort of my point, like, if one of them was indicted, if some modest legislation was passed. But my point is you can't even pass the modest reforms. You can't even indict one institution. You can't—the power finance has over the politics, you can't even get, you know, simple, modest things changed in terms [crosstalk]HENRY: Yeah, I think that's the dilemma, that this has been an issue where it's very difficult to mobilize masses of Americans to understand. You know, it's not like on the gun control issue we seem to be making some progress now because people are outraged at a relatively simple situation and they can understand what they need to do about it; in the case of the banking institutions, everyone believes it's so terribly complicated that we have to defer to, you know, the Illuminati. So that's kind of the problem.And then this is an ideal case for presidential leadership. This is exactly where the president should be focusing his attention, because he does have the intellectual horsepower and support in his own team to get this kind of legislation done.JAY: So far what we've seen, he appoints and nominates these people, not prosecute.HENRY: I think his basic interest is not in economics. It's in more political issues. And he's kind of put the Treasury on autopilot. He's trusted to Tim Geithner to run the Treasury. And, you know, he's the technocrat who's been not only head of the New York Fed, but also was a senior official at the IMF. So it's not an area that Obama really wants to worry about in addition to everything else in foreign policy and, you know, the complicated domestic issues that he faces anyway.So he wanted, I think, to assume—part of his stance here has been to say, okay, let Treasury run the economy. And that's been a mistake.JAY: Yeah. Well, it's been a mistake for most Americans. It may have been the right call for some of the mavens of Wall Street, but it wasn't a very good call for anybody else.HENRY: You know, as many of his, you know, people on his political team have been saying, well, this will help us raise money from Wall Street. And indeed it has. I mean, he basically raised a lot more than people expected, given that Romney was in the race, from the very people that have made this economic crisis.JAY: Right. Thanks for joining us, James.HENRY: You're quite welcome.JAY: And thank you for joining us on The Real News Network.

End

DISCLAIMER: Please note that transcripts for The Real News Network are typed from a recording of the program. TRNN cannot guarantee their complete accuracy.


Comments

Our automatic spam filter blocks comments with multiple links and multiple users using the same IP address. Please make thoughtful comments with minimal links using only one user name. If you think your comment has been mistakenly removed please email us at [email protected]

Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.

How Can We Reconcile Freedom-Loving Libertarianism with Tough Prosecution of Fraud?

 

Liberty and Justice Are Not Irreconcilable

I voted for Gary Johnson (and am a huge fan of Ron Paul), and respect and fully-support the libertarian passions for freedom and free markets.

But I am also a tireless crusader for enforcing the rule of law.

You might assume that these are opposite philosophies.  For example, a reader asks:

Your work on the dangers of the American nuclear industry has been really comprehensive, and you have drawn attention to the deception, manipulation, neglect, and willful ignorance of the nuclear industry. For example, I just watched the Al Jazeera video you posted earlier this year (3/12), in which the NRC and the nuclear industry are (rightly) criticized for waiting for harm to happen, instead of preventing it. At the same time, you identify as libertarian, and I believe you supported Gary Johnson in the presidential election. He is opposed to public regulation of industry and has said that post-harm lawsuits -- for example, in medical contexts -- are sufficient to encourage businesses to self-regulate for public safety. Could you please explain how you reconcile the libertarian position against regulation with your clear recognition that too-loose self-regulation of the nuclear industry imperils the public?

Nuclear Power Would Not Exist In a Free Market

Initially, it is undisputed that nuclear power plants would not exist if operators had to obtain funding and insurance through the free market. Private insurers won’t touch nuclear energy. Investors run the other way, because the odds of losing all of their investment are so high.

No private company in the world would operate a nuclear plant unless the government put a very low cap on liability. In many parts of the world, governments cap liability at a mere $13 billion dollars.

This is a little insane, given that “the risk of a nuclear catastrophe … could total trillions of dollars and even bankrupt a country”.

Indeed:

If there was a free market in energy, nuclear power would be over … immediately.

AP notes:

Nuclear power is a viable source for cheap energy only if it goes uninsured.

***

Governments that use nuclear energy are torn between the benefit of low-cost electricity and the risk of a nuclear catastrophe, which could total trillions of dollars and even bankrupt a country.

***

The cost of a worst-case nuclear accident at a plant in Germany, for example, has been estimated to total as much as €7.6 trillion ($11 trillion), while the mandatory reactor insurance is only €2.5 billion.

“The €2.5 billion will be just enough to buy the stamps for the letters of condolence,” said Olav Hohmeyer, an economist at the University of Flensburg who is also a member of the German government’s environmental advisory body.

The situation in the U.S., Japan, China, France and other countries is similar.

***

“Around the globe, nuclear risks — be it damages to power plants or the liability risks resulting from radiation accidents — are covered by the state. The private insurance industry is barely liable,” said Torsten Jeworrek, a board member at Munich Re, one of the world’s biggest reinsurance companies.

***

In financial terms, nuclear incidents can be so devastating that the cost of full insurance would be so high as to make nuclear energy more expensive than fossil fuels.

***

Ultimately, the decision to keep insurance on nuclear plants to a minimum is a way of supporting the industry.

“Capping the insurance was a clear decision to provide a non-negligible subsidy to the technology,” Klaus Toepfer, a former German environment minister and longtime head of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), said.

U.S. News and World Report reports:

The disaster insurance for nuclear power plants in the United States is currently underwritten by the federal government, Cooper says. Without that safeguard, “nuclear power is neither affordable nor worth the risk. If the owners and operators of nuclear reactors had to face the full liability of a Fukushima-style nuclear accident or go head-to-head with alternatives in a truly competitive marketplace, unfettered by subsidies, no one would have built a nuclear reactor in the past, no one would build one today, and anyone who owns a reactor would exit the nuclear business as quickly as possible.”

See this and this.

In other words, this is not a free market.  Instead, the public has funded the nuclear industry.  As such, we - the owners - should get some control over how nuclear plants operate.

Likewise, the government created the mega-banks, big oil and the other mega-corporations.

Free Market Champions Demand Prosecution of Fraud

A strong rule of law is the main determinant of prosperity.  On the other hand, failure to prosecute fraud is destroying our prosperity.

Nuclear meltdowns, the financial crisis and the Gulf oil spill all happened for the same reason:  fraud to make a few more pennies, and a subsequent cover-up to try to protect the wrongdoers and continue "business as usual". And see this.

This is not free market economics.

Indeed, the father of free market economics - Adam Smith  - leading Austrian economists, and other free market advocates are for the prosecution of fraud:

There is a widespread myth that free market supporters are against regulation or prosecuting fraud.

In fact, Adam Smith – the father of free market capitalism – was for regulation of banks, and believed that trust is vital for a healthy economy. Because strong enforcement of laws against fraud is a basic prerequisite for trust, Smith would be disgusted by the lack of prosecution of Wall Street fraudsters today.

Smith railed against monopolies and their corrupting influence. And Smith was pro-regulation, so long as the regulation benefited the little guy, as opposed to the wealthiest:

When the regulation, therefore, is in support of the workman, it is always just and equitable; but it is sometimes otherwise when in favour of the masters.

Richard Posner – one of the leading proponents over the course of many decades for removing the reach of the law from the economy – has now changed his mind.

So has another leading proponent of deregulation and turning a blind eye towards fraud: Alan Greenspan.

While some promoters of a fake version of Austrian economics are anti-regulation and against prosecuting fraud, the main Austrian economists were unambiguously for them.

William K. Black – professor of economics and law, and the senior regulator during the S&L crisis – notes that leading Austrian free market economists said that fraud must be prosecuted:

Real Austrian economists … hate elite frauds and want them prosecuted vigorously. Ludwig von Mises and Friederich Hayek are the two most famous Austrian economists.

Hayek, F.A. The Road to Serfdom

To create conditions in which competition will be as effective as possible, to prevent fraud and deception, to break up monopolies— these tasks provide a wide and unquestioned field for state activity.

The Constitution of Liberty

There remains, however, one other kind of harmful action that is generally thought desirable to prevent and which at first might seem distinct. This is fraud and deception. Yet, though it would be straining the meaning of words to call them ‘coercion,’ on examination it appears that the reasons why we want to prevent them are the same as those applying to coercion. Deception, like coercion, is a form of manipulating the data on which a person counts, in order to make him do what deceiver wants him to do. Where it is successful, the deceived becomes in the same manner the unwilling tool, serving another man’s ends without advancing his own. Though we have no single word to cover both, all we have said of coercion applies equally to fraud and deception.

With this correction, it seems that freedom demands no more than that coercion and violence, fraud and deception, be prevented, except for the use of coercion by government for the sole purpose of enforcing known rules intended to ensure the best conditions under which the individual may give his activities a coherent, rational pattern…..

Liberty not only means that the individual has both the opportunity and the burden of choice; it also means that he must bear the consequences of his actions…. Liberty and responsibility are inseparable.

Mises, L.

Government ought to protect the individuals within the country against the violent and fraudulent attacks of gangsters, and it should defend the country against foreign enemies.

Black also notes that fraud is a leading cause of financial bubbles and malinvestment – two of the greatest sins which Austrian economists rightly fight against.

Unless financial fraud is prosecuted, bubbles will be blown … and when they burst, the economy will tank. Fraud – along with bad Federal Reserve policy – is what causes bubbles in the first place.

The Proof Is In the Pudding: Fewer Prosecutions Equals a Worse Economy

Obama has prosecuted fewer financial crimes than any president in decades – less than Ronald Reagan, less than George H.W. Bush, less than Bill Clinton, and less than George W. Bush.

The economy is worse than it has been since the Great Depression, if not before.

See the connection? See this and this.

Everyone Supports Laws Protecting Contract and Private Property Rights

Even the most radical free market advocates support laws protecting contract and private property rights. In other words, they support the judicial branch of government and the basic laws Congress passes to support such rights.

There are obviously good, pro-competitive laws and bad, anti-competitive laws.

Paul Craig Roberts – a true conservative, who was a Wall Street Journal editor and Assistant Secretary of the Treasury under Ronald Reagan, and is widely credited with being the “father of supply-side economics” – points out:

Regulation can increase economic efficiency and … without regulation external costs can offset the value of production.

***

 

Thirty-three years ago in an article in the Journal of Monetary Economics (August 1978), “Idealism in Public Choice Theory,” I developed a model to assess the benefits and costs of regulation. I argued that well-thought-out regulation could be a factor of production that increases GNP. For example, regulation that contributed to the quality and safety of food and medicines contributed to specialization in production and lower costs, and regulations enforcing contracts and private property rights add to economic efficiency.

 

On the other hand, bureaucracies build their empires and extend their regulations into the realm of negative returns. Moreover, as regulations increase, economic managers spend more time in red tape and less in productive activity. As rules proliferate, they become contradictory and result in paralysis.

I had hopes that my analysis would result in a more thoughtful approach to regulation, but to no avail. Liberals continued to argue that more regulation was better, and libertarians maintained than none was best.

Do Anti-Law Advocates Really Want Anarchy?

All sports need a referee. Some players will be bigger or more talented than others, which is great. They have a better chance of outcompeting the other guy and winning.

But without basic rules and referees, ruthless players might use a knife or kick the other guy in the knee. Perhaps we could suspend all rules, and maybe everyone would whip out a knife break the other guy’s kneecap. That’s fine … but that’s not the game of football.

Radicals who believe that we should not have any laws against fraud are implicitly arguing for anarchy. They might not use that word, but that is what they’re arguing for.

But the same Founding Father who argued for periodic revolutions to keep the government honest also argued against tearing down something unless you have something better in mind to replace it? Thomas Jefferson, the most vocal advocate of the citizens’ right to revolt to ensure honest government also cautioned against tearing something down unless it was for the express purpose of replacing it with something better.

Real, deep-thinking anarchists (as opposed to those using fake anarchy philosophy in order to promote lawlessness by the super-elite) are not for destroying all organization.  Instead, they argue for self-organization and self-regulation. See this, this and this.

JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs aren’t reining in one another’s fraud.  Bank of America and MF Global didn’t police each other’s fraud.   Tepco and BP didn’t make sure the companies made accurate reports about their safety measures.  Solyndra and Koch Industries didn’t guard against abuse by the other company.

So if one wants to argue that the Federal government should not regulate financial players, fine (perhaps our country is too big and complex to manage, and the federal government has become too corrupt) … but who should?

The states? Cities? Communities? Neighbors?

Human beings have the ability to form social contracts. Our D.C. government has largely breached it social contract with the people.

But we shouldn’t tear down the federal government unless we replace it with something better.

No one wants to tear down the state of organization so completely that we go back to monkeys (without the ability to talk), or one-celled critters . . . so the question is how do we want to organize?

Do you want to live as a “savage”? In reality, the natives had survival skills, cultural traditions, and knowledge developed over many hundreds or thousands of years (including knowledge gained before the migration from Asia to America), stored in the database of oral traditions. The settlers had traditions and knowledge as well. If we tear away all of that organization, life is going to be pretty challenging.

It is easy for a teenager to criticize his parents, but a lot harder to actually create a better adult life for himself. A teenager looks silly and immature when he criticizes everything his parents do without understanding the challenges he’ll face as an adult. But a young person who rebels against his parents and then creates a better adult life is doing important and heroic work.

In other words, anarchy as an economic model could work if economic players organized in such a way as to police against fraud and criminal behavior (the equivalent of pulling out a knife or taking out someone’s kneecap in the middle of a football game).

This is a long-winded way of saying that we should not stop the government from enforcing fraud laws unless we come up with a more effective way to stop fraud.

The Real Problem ...

While liberals tend to distrust big corporations and conservatives tend to distrust the federal government, it is really the malignant, symbiotic relationship between the two is the root problem.

Too much government overreach? Giant unaccountable corporations?

Maybe ... but the root problem is that corrupt government officials and corrupt corporate fatcats have merged into a crime syndicate.

Do you get it?    Before we can have a real free market, we need to burst the bubble of fraud.

Before we can have a functioning government, we need to stand up to corrupt government officials.

We all need to step out of the left-right dichotomy which is distracting us and dumbing us down.

We need liberty and justice.

Your rating: None Average: 5 (1 vote)

Military Contracting: Our New Era of Corporate Mercenaries

Private military contracting has ballooned into an industry worth more than $100bn a year. (Photograph: Goran Tomasevic/Reuters)In early 1995, Sierra Leone was on the brink of collapse. A violent civil war had ravaged the country, leaving thousands dead and countless others wounded. The insurgent rebels, infamous for recruiting child soldiers, were just weeks from the beleaguered capital, Freetown, and appeared unassailable.

Several months later, however, the tide had turned: the government's authority was strengthened, rebel forces were repelled, and control over the country's major economic assets was restored. Executive Outcomes, a private military contractor armed with helicopters and state of the art artillery, helped change the course of the war.

Nearly every tool necessary to wage war can now be purchased: combat support, including the ability to conduct large-scale operations and surgical strikes; operational support, like training and intelligence gathering; and general support, like transportation services and paramedical assistance. The demand for these services, in turn, has ballooned: the gross revenue for the private military contractor industry is now in excess of $100bn a year.

The privatization of conflict is no longer a trend. It's the norm.

The United States relied so heavily on contractors during the recent Iraq war that no one knows with certainty how many were on the ground. In late 2010, the United Arab Emirates, fearful that the Arab uprisings might spread to the Gulf, paid Erik Prince, the founder of Blackwater Worldwide, $529m to create an elite force to safeguard the emirate. And today, Russia is openly considering forming a cadre of private military contractors to further its interests abroad.

Yet, the laws that govern this industry tell a different story. Instead of a transnational system with meaningful collaboration, we have a patchwork of state laws that allow companies to forum-shop and circumvent regulations. Contractors can likewise relocate, as they typically rent the equipment necessary to complete their contracts; their primary source of capital is human, not physical.

In addition to closing loopholes, states must monitor contractors, and prosecute them when they commit crimes. To this day, not a single contractor has been successfully prosecuted for its role in the Abu Ghraib prison atrocities or the Nisour Square massacre, in which 17 Iraqi civilians were killed.

Contractors claim that their services are market- and self-regulated. They contend that wanton violence would stop governments from seeking their assistance. Yet, the theatre of war often obscures their activities.

In its final report to the US Congress, the Commission on Wartime Contracting found that the US government lost more than $30bn to contractor waste and fraud in Afghanistan and Iraq. Also, corporations can rename and rebrand, thereby mitigating reputational harm. Consider Blackwater USA, which changed its name to Xe Services LLC, and then to Academi – all in the last four years.

The UN working group on the use of mercenaries has suggested that certain military functions, like combat services and interrogation, not be outsourced to private contractors. Its guidelines should be followed. Outsourcing foreign policy goals undermines democratic oversight because contractor activities, including casualties, typically escape public scrutiny. It can also allow states to evade legislative oversight.

The greatest check against war is the horror of war itself. Yet, as the physical distance between warring states grows, so does the temptation to loosen our moral compass. Violence that lacks immediacy is easier to ignore. Permitting third parties to wage war for profit risks a world in which war is not the last resort but an economic transaction in which the victims are faceless and nameless.

And so, we return to Sierra Leone. Although the intervention by Executive Outcomes is sometimes touted as illustrating the viability of military contractors, history suggests otherwise. The contractor was later accused of interfering in domestic politics to pursue financial gain, and an associated firm received payment through diamond mine concessions, which compromised the country's economic future.

Moreover, violence resumed after Executive Outcomes left Sierra Leone. It became clear that the government had over-relied on the contractor and undercut its own institutions.

The fog of war is hazy enough. We don't need additional, unregulated cloud cover.

© 2012 Guardian News and Media Limited

Arjun Sethi

Arjun Sethi is a lawyer in Washington, DC, and a frequent commentator on civil rights and social justice-related issues. He has written for the Washington Post, USA Today, and CNN, among other publications

Caterpillar Punked By Chinese Fraud, To Write Off Half Of Q4 Earnings

Fraudulent Chinese corporations are nothing new - we have been warning about them since late 2010, spurring the creation of a cottage industry focused exclusively on unmasking such public reverse merger companies (and generating trading profits along the way). One company, however, which apparently was completely unaware of the how pervasive Chinese corporate fraud, is industrial machine titan Caterpillar. This was made clear when, after hours on Friday night of course, the company revealed that it had been misled by "deliberate, multi-year, coordinated accounting misconduct" at a subsidiary of a Chinese company it acquired last summer, leading it to write off most of the value of the deal. In the process it would also take a $580 million, or $0.87 cent charge to earnings, which would wipe out more than half its expected earnings of $1.70 for the fourth quarter of 2012. One wonders, however, is there more to this story than just a case of a gentle, naive board duped by fraudulent, evil, cunning "Chinamen" which may have watched one too many episodes of Autonomy does Hewlett Packard?

Reuters has more details on the Fraud:

Caterpillar closed the purchase of ERA Mining Machinery Ltd and its subsidiary Siwei, China's fourth-largest maker of hydraulic roof supports, last June, paying HK$5.06 billion, or $653.4 million. ERA had been publicly traded in Hong Kong, doing business through Siwei, which is known for making equipment to support roofs in mines.

A member of the Caterpillar board during the course of the Siwei deal told Reuters the board was distracted at the time by a larger transaction and paid relatively little attention to the Siwei acquisition.

"It came as a complete surprise to us," the former board member said of the fraud, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the situation. "It was presented to us as a pretty straightforward transaction. It's a shame. It should have been investigated further."

The source said the driving force behind the deal was Ed Rapp, the former Caterpillar chief financial officer who now serves as a group president with responsibility for China, among other operations. The source said it was Rapp who presented the deal to the board and pushed for its completion.

A Caterpillar spokesman declined to comment on Rapp's role in the deal. Rapp could not be immediately located for comment.

...

In a statement, Caterpillar said an ongoing investigation launched after the deal closed "determined several Siwei senior managers engaged in deliberate misconduct beginning several years prior to Caterpillar's acquisition of Siwei."

According to a question-and-answer dialog Caterpillar included in its statement, the company found discrepancies in November between the inventory in Siwei's books and its actual physical inventory, triggering the probe.

The company also said it had replaced several senior managers at Siwei, adding that their conduct was "offensive and completely unacceptable."

So the board was "distracted"? Perhaps, the board was perfectly "tracted" and instead what the board did was pay close attention to what Hewlett-Packard did with Autonomy, where the allegations of fraud are still an open-ended case of he said, she said, and immediately saw an opportunity to use a tiny bolt on acquisition in a country which is the source of its entire marginal growth, as a scapegoat on which to pin everything that was going wrong in China, and maybe the world.

Recall from the Q2 CAT earnings release warning profusely about what is going on in China:

In China, we are lowering production levels and have started to export machines to other regions of the world.  However, the construction industry in China is still weak and our dealers are reducing their inventories of new machines, further reducing our shipments.  While our inventory of new machines in China increased, the combination of our finished inventory and dealer machine inventory was about flat with the end of the first quarter of 2012.  We are working to lower finished inventory, but given the weak construction equipment industry in China it will be a gradual reduction throughout 2012.  We are being appropriately cautious—we intend to lower inventory, but are considering our supply chain and are acting in an orderly manner.  In addition, we are trying to balance our actions—the industry in China has been weak over the past year, but can move quickly when it turns around.

As we began 2012, our expectations for sales in China were higher, and we built substantial new machine inventory in the first quarter to support what is usually a seasonally strong quarter.  First-quarter sales were lower than expected, and we ended the first quarter with higher inventory in China.  We developed and are executing a plan for an orderly reduction of China inventory that includes lower production, merchandising programs to improve sales and the export of machines from China to other parts of the world.

We remain very positive on long-term industry growth in China and our strategy to grow our business there.  Our plans for the remainder of 2012 reflect an orderly ramp down of production that considers our entire supply chain in China.  Given the current low rate of sales and the production ramp down, it will likely take the rest of 2012 to reduce inventory to appropriate levels.

Subsequently, in Q3 CAT did all it could to telegraph that things in China may finally be improving, so no need to change anything about how business is conducted there:

From an economic standpoint, we are expecting slightly better world growth in 2013 with modest improvement in the United States, China and most of the developing world, but continuing difficulty in Europe.

"We are taking a pragmatic view of 2013—we're not expecting rapid growth, and we're not predicting a global recession.  At this point, we expect 2013 sales will be similar overall to 2012, but with a slightly weaker first half and a slightly better second half.  While machine deliveries to end users have continued to hold up, our sales will probably remain relatively weak early in 2013 as dealers are likely to continue reducing inventories.  When expected dealer inventory reductions level off, and easing actions by central banks and governments around the world begin to improve economic growth, we expect our business will begin to improve.  While there's reason for optimism, and we're not expecting a global recession in 2013, we are prepared and stand ready to take action no matter what happens to the global economy," Oberhelman added.

Betting one's business model on the "easing actions by central bankers" - brilliant. But let's leave that for another day (yet one does wonder: was one of the "actions" the board was "prepared to take" in case of global recession, the release of news of massive fraud at a small Chinese subsidiary, thereby being excused for missing earnings by half?)

Reuters said as much:

The Siwei deal came as part of Caterpillar's larger ambitions in China. In early 2012, it added Jon Huntsman, the former U.S. ambassador to China, to its board of directors.

The company, which already has 23 manufacturing facilities in China and four more under construction, said the Siwei episode would not change its strategy in the country.

Of course it won't change the strategy: in fact, CAT will welcome the acquisition of futher such EPS-charge off enabling microcaps. After all, all it takes for the company to pull a get out of jail card by missing EPS by half in any given quarter, is for it to blame lax accounting and someone else's fraud for the problem.

Because who is to say what is really going on? Naturally, nobody will trust the Chinese side of the story now. As for CAT: well, let's say operating earnings were so horrible that not even all the GAAP accounting magic in the world could make the company beat earnings estimates. So what does the company do? It takes a "charge" which allows it to mask a whopping one-eighth of its entire full year EPS miss courtesy of a perfectly convenient scapegoat. As for what is really going on behind the scenes - it could be due to Chinese business imploding, or global economic conditions getting so bad the firm just can't find a way to offset the losses, or anything else. Alas, we will never know as the official spian has been released.

But in the meantime, business in China continues as usual of course, now that CAT has reset losses with enough of a buffer to last it one more quarter. And if Chinese growth, and by growth we mean the construction of empty cities and hollow malls, does not pick up, well then - some other "manager" will be thrown under the bus for pushing a "distracted" board to purchase yet another Chinese microcap, whose books everyone is shocked, shocked, to learn were cooked end to end.

We look forward to even more high flying companies whose stock price has been pulled artificially higher due to the relentless ramp in ES by prop desk of primary dealers, to come up with comparable excuses for why earnings will miss. Because if it is not some softward glitch's fault, it is some manager, or some auditor, or some accountant, or some M&A advisor, or some regulator.

Whose fault it never, ever is, is the ever declining global cash flow in a world in which the stock market and the economy have now hopelessly and laughably disconnected.

Your rating: None Average: 4.8 (4 votes)

The History of the London Inter-Bank Offer Rate (Libor): Financial Fraud and Market Manipulation

Sandwiched between revelations of mounting losses ($5.8 billion and rising) at JP Morgan in the face of bungled bets by a trader known as the London Whale, and allegations of money laundering for Mexican drug cartels and breaches of U.S. sanctions by HSBC, the disclosures of deliberate rigging of the Libor rate by Barclay’s Bank might appear mundane and a trifle boring in comparison. It is, however, this scandal about an arcane interest rate that most starkly exposes the rotten core of the global financial system.

Barclays paid a fine of $450 million and saw the ignominious exit of its CEO Bob Diamond in a deal with U.S. and British regulatory agencies that involves an agreement to defer prosecution and drop criminal charges in two years if the bank does not commit any federal crimes “after the execution of this agreement.” But this might just be the tip of the iceberg. About twenty other global banks are currently being probed, and the full scale of the scandal is yet to be seen. The Economist, while decrying the “casual dishonesty” revealed in the email exchanges of the “banksters” (including promises of expensive champagne in return for favors!), pronounced this global finance’s “tobacco moment,” when it is forced to acknowledge its destructive practices, with potentially huge settlement costs, reminiscent of the settlements of around $200 billion made by U.S. tobacco companies in 1998 following a protracted lawsuit.1 But the scandal is not simply one of colossal greed and hubris. It is about systemic failure. It is about the fictions and illusions that form the basis of today’s complex global financial system.

The Libor is the London Inter-Bank Offer Rate—the rate at which leading banks can borrow from each other in the London markets. It is, however, not simply the banking system’s cost of borrowing or obtaining funds; it has emerged as the anchor of about $800 trillion worth of international financial transactions.2 A brief outline of the history of the process by which the Libor has become a fulcrum of the global financial system is necessary if we are to understand the significance of the current scandal.

The Libor and the Dawn of Neoliberalism

The origin of the Libor is rooted in the explosion of private financial flows in the international monetary system and more specifically the Eurodollar market (constituted by dollar-denominated bank deposit liabilities held in foreign banks or foreign branches of U.S. banks) in the 1970s. This explosion was itself an outcome of the resurgence of finance and the rise of neoliberalism. The sharp hike in interest rates in the United States in 1979—the Volcker anti-inflation shock, aimed in part at lowering wage rates by increasing unemployment—signaled the aggressive promotion of financial openness and integration as a way out of the crisis of the 1970s.3 This agenda served to buttress the growing power of U.S. corporate and financial capital globally. This “coup of finance” hinged on preserving and extending the pivotal place of the United States in international financial markets, and securing the global hegemony of the dollar after the collapse of the Bretton Woods system of fixed exchange rates.4

The Eurodollar market emerged even as the U.S. government was attempting to restrict capital outflows to reduce growing balance of payments deficits. U.S. banks resorted to the Eurodollar markets (primarily in London) as a way of evading restrictive capital controls and protecting their earnings. This offshore market was also a profitable place for Germany and Russia to park their dollar surpluses. Although international financial business was now based more on dollars than sterling, Eurodollar deposits helped to preserve London as a financial center in the face of the erosion of sterling’s importance as an international reserve. At the same time, its ties to the international hegemony of the dollar were cemented5 and the United Kingdom was drawn more closely “into the American imperial embrace.”6

The Big Bang reforms of 1986 in Britain were an important milestone in this process. In the United States, financial deregulation had been set in motion with the Deregulation of Monetary Control Act of 1980. This culminated almost two decades later with the final dismantling of the regulatory framework of the Glass-Steagall Act (legislated in response to the Great Depression, it had separated commercial from investment banking) by means of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999, giving legislative sanction to the erosion of the regulatory firewall between security traders and deposit bankers. This deregulatory agenda was echoed in the Big Bang reforms of banking in Britain in 1986. These reforms blurred the distinction between stockbrokers, investment advisers, and “jobbers” who created the markets in shares. Britain’s permissive regime brought an influx of U.S. banks and huge bonanzas for bankers. The stodgy world of banking was transformed into a heady world of cutthroat deal-making.

Through the 1970s, the oil surpluses of the OPEC countries were channeled through the Eurodollar markets and recycled to developing countries, especially Latin America, in the form of syndicated offshore dollar loans. The floating of the dollar in 1973 also fostered the growth of futures and swaps: derivatives that allowed international investors to hedge the risks of exchange rate and interest rate fluctuations. The investors and bankers who sought to rake in earnings and fees in these rapidly growing markets for new and exotic instruments of loan syndication and financial derivatives found themselves in desperate need of a benchmark against which to price their deals. The payments in the syndicated sovereign loan market, for instance, were based on some measure of a benchmark risk-free borrowing rate plus a risk premium based on assessments of the borrowing country’s capacity to repay the loan.

A key requirement of a benchmark is that it must bear a stable relationship to the prices of other securities and that it be liquid.7 The U.S. Treasury bill rate was one such price, but the volatility of this market in the late 1970s, a period of high inflation in the United States, prompted a search for new benchmarks around which bankers could structure their deals. Futures contracts on the three-month U.S. Treasury bill were introduced in this context as a way to tame the turbulence of the U.S. Treasury bill markets. Even as the Latin American debt crisis brought the bonanza of syndicated sovereign loans to an abrupt halt in the 1980s, U.S. financial markets were further jolted by the failure of the Continental Illinois Bank in 1984. The sudden surge in demand for safe U.S. Treasury bills led to huge losses for those who had used them as hedges for their purchases of private financial assets (since the price of Treasury bills rose while that of private financial assets fell). Such episodes underscored finance’s search for an alternative benchmark more aligned with the prices of private assets.8

Eurodollar futures contracts had begun to be traded in London in the early 1980s. In 1982 the volume of three-month Eurodollar futures transactions (at around $8 billion) was about one-third the volume of futures transactions in three-month U.S. Treasury bills (around $25 billion). By 1986 the volume of Eurodollar futures had risen to about $50 billion (about ten times the volume of corresponding U.S. Treasury bill futures transactions).9 The percentage share of Eurodollar transactions to all money market transactions—from where the wider financial system draws its short-term liquidity funds—rose from less than 5 percent in 1980 to about 50 percent by 1985.10 Since Eurodollar deposits were emerging as a major source of short-term funding for banks, the offshore Eurodollar borrowing rate emerged as an obvious anchor (the risk-free rate) for the proliferating financial trading. Particularly since financial institutions were finding that the prices of derivatives based on these offshore Eurodollar rates were closely aligned to their own borrowing costs. But in the early 1980s, there were not enough trades for a market-based index for Eurodollar deposits, and the Federal Reserve could not set and enforce targets for this rate like it could for the Federal Funds rate (the rate at which banks could borrow reserves overnight from each other). International financial markets felt hampered by a lack of standard reference rates. The solution was found through the offices of the British Bankers’ Association (BBA), the leading lobbying group of London Banks, with the blessing of the Bank of England.

In 1986, the BBA introduced a new benchmark rate, based on the average of daily estimates from the leading banks. The primary purpose of this new benchmark, the Libor, was to set a rate for dollar deposits held outside the United States and also to serve as a reference rate for a range of securities. Banks seeking to reduce their risk in a context of volatile interest rates found a closer approximation to their actual borrowing costs in this benchmark. The newly introduced standard came to be adopted as the basis of a variety of securities and derivatives (like interest rate swaps) that the banks used to hedge their risky portfolios. It was also adopted as the basis for the resetting of rates on long-term loans in line with the banks’ actual variable costs of funds. The volume of three-month Eurodollar futures contracts doubled between 1986 and 1988 to about $100 billion, while the share of Eurodollar transactions in short-term money market activity crossed 75 percent.11 Facilitated by the surge in Eurodollar lending in the syndicated loans market, the huge interest rate swap market, and later the markets for newer and more complex securities and derivatives got a huge boost.

And so, privately mediated financial instruments came to eclipse the publicly issued U.S. Treasury bill as the source of unregulated liquidity generation for the bloating global financial system. This is not to suggest that the U.S. Treasury bill was completely displaced. As the credit crisis of 2008 revealed, it remained the safe haven when the privately mediated mechanisms of liquidity generation and funding crashed in the wake of the collapse of Lehman Brothers.12 It is at the apex of the monetary hierarchy. In fact, a key indicator of financial distress is the difference between the interest rate banks charge each other on three-month loans (the three-month Libor) and the interest rate on three-month U.S. Treasury bills. A widening spread reflects the higher costs of unsecured interbank lending in a situation of evaporating confidence and growing uncertainty. At the peak of the credit crisis in 2008, this spread had risen to about 450 basis points (4.5 percent) from normal levels of between fifty and one hundred basis points (0.5–1 percent). Banks were finding it harder and harder to borrow from other banks, and interbank lending, which is not based on collateral, dried up. The Federal Reserve had to step in to fund the failing banks and restore lending. Even though private agents are a primary driving force in the money market, these decentralized parallel monetary mechanisms are, in the final instance, backstopped by the state and the market for U.S. Treasury bills.

The Emperor Has No Clothes!

So how is the Libor actually set? There are now rates set for deposits in ten currencies with fifteen maturity periods, for a total of 150 Libor rates. The borrowing rate is set daily by the BBA, on the basis of submissions by a panel of banks, for each of these ten currencies and fifteen maturities. The three-month dollar Libor is one of the most important of these rates. It is supposed to indicate what a bank would pay to borrow dollars for three months from other banks, at 11:00 AM on the day it is set. There are currently eighteen banks on the dollar Libor panel (including Citibank, JP Morgan, and Bank of America).

Each participating bank has to answer the question: At what rate could you borrow funds, were you to do so by asking for and then accepting interbank offers in a reasonable market size, just prior to 11:00 AM? The top quarter and bottom quarter estimates are then discarded, and the Libor is the trimmed average of the remaining submissions, (also known as fixings) calculated and posted by Thomsons-Reuters, the leading business data provider. The idea is that this process of trimming will get rid of outliers and rogues, and the number churned out will be a reasonably accurate gauge of the market. Libor thus claims to measure the rate at which banks can borrow from one another.

But in the real world, banks do not generally lend to each other for longer periods without adequate collateral. Interbank lending takes place through money market funds, but only for short periods. This means that quotes for longer periods are based on estimates and not on actual flows. The submissions are the banks’ own estimates of what they think they would have to pay to borrow if they needed money, and the body charged with collecting this information is not an independent regulatory agency but the banking sector’s own lobby group—the BBA. The calculation is undertaken by a data provider that derives huge chunks of its earnings from the same banking sector! The Libor is an accurate reflection of the state of funding liquidity only if most of the banks submit an honest assessment of the rate at which they believe they can borrow on a given day. The self-regulatory process of rate setting itself provides no checks and balances but relies on the integrity and discipline of markets to ensure the calculations are in line with real market conditions.

What the Barclays settlement has shown is that the bank’s submissions “were over a long period tainted by self-interest, whether to help some of its derivatives traders or out of a desire to protect its reputation in the market.”13 Groups of traders actively conspired with brokers to influence the banks’ rate submissions for the London rate. Banks colluded to push the rates in desired directions. The BBA, a group that had in its 2011 internal newsletter bragged about its lobbying victories and spent an estimated $8 million on lobbying in 2011, is hardly a body that would crack the whip on the sector it represents.14

What this boils down to is the mind-boggling revelation: this crucial rate that is the pivot of trillions of dollars worth of derivatives and loans is in a sense a fiction. “There simply is not enough trading, particularly at longer six-month and twelve-month lending periods, to be sure that the rate genuinely reflects the market.”15 As a senior trader said, “you have this vast overhang of financial instruments that hang their own fixes off a rate that doesn’t actually exist.”16 To make things even murkier, those involved in setting the rates had every incentive to lie, since not only did their banks stand to profit or lose, depending on the level at which the Libor was set each day, their own earnings hinged on these numbers. The Financial Services Authority “has identified price-rigging dating back to 2005, yet some current and former traders say that problems go back much further than that.”17 A former trader at the London office of Morgan Stanley has suggested that such misreporting of rates was fairly common practice even in 1991, a mere five years after the system was put in place.18

There have been, broadly speaking, two kinds of manipulations. The first category was designed to bolster traders’ profits. Traders nudged the money market desks of their banks to massage submissions in order to rake in the gains from deals they brokered. Requests were also passed on to these desks in collusion with counterparts at other banks. So a trader could ask the submitter of the fixings to keep the “fixings” high (or low) until certain deals went through. By keeping rates artificially raised or lowered, traders were guaranteed to make money on these deals. Where the income they paid out was fixed to the Libor, a lower rate reduced the payout; where their earnings were linked to the rate, a hike boosted these earnings. Far from being a manifestation of rogue trading, this pervasive rigging is a reflection of monopoly and cartel-like practices in the closed, clubby world of financiers.

A second category of manipulations, which emerged in the wake of the subprime market collapse, was the submission of artificially low rates. The motivation here was more complicated. Banks that were vulnerable sought to protect their reputations and their continued access to credit by obfuscating the actual difficulties they faced in borrowing. High borrowing costs signaled lack of credit worthiness. In fact, the persistently high Libor rates in 2008 were a sign of credit market distress. But, given the fragile state of investor confidence, persistently high Libor rates were seen, both by banks, regulators, and the central banks as an obstacle to restoring the credit engine.

Barclays’ high Libor submissions as the crisis was unfolding had thus prompted serious concern at the Bank of England. The recent travails of Royal Scotland bank had sent jitters though the financial markets, and Barclays was widely perceived to be the next to fail. The high rates were a signal of Barclays’ growing difficulties in borrowing from the market. There were numerous discussions between Bank of England officials and Barclays’ management (including the controversial phone conversations between bank managers and Paul Tucker, the deputy governor of the Bank of England) through this period. In May 2008, there were some reports of banks low-balling their borrowing rates to avoid looking desperate for cash. Timothy Geithner, who was then head of the New York Federal Reserve, sent a memo to Governor of the Bank of England Mervyn King outlining concerns (though no allegations of outright rigging) about the Libor and making recommendations to beef up its credibility. Given the close connections between private banks, central banks, and regulatory agencies, it is hardly credible that the scale of Libor manipulations caught the central bankers and regulators by surprise. The complete failure of the Central Bankers and regulators to respond reflects the structural stranglehold of private finance.

The relation between the state and the financial system erected on the complex interaction of private and public liquidity generation is fraught with contradiction. There has been a ratcheting up of state support of the banking system not just over the past three years or even the past few decades, but over the past century. However, the bulging safety net stokes even greater speculative and risk-taking behavior. Government interventions that rescue banks from their follies in order to restore stability, in effect, revive and reinvigorate the speculative juggernaut. The state again intervenes to rescue the financial institutions in the wake of the catastrophic bust that inevitably follows. The concentration and growing size of the institutions that need to be bailed out give rise to a dramatic scaling-up of central bank support to the financial system, even as regulatory control is being systematically weakened. As the bets keep increasing in size, the scope of the necessary intervention also grows, so that the cost of each successive meltdown becomes even larger. This destructive relationship has been christened “the doom loop.”19 In the process the state and central banks get more deeply implicated in the imperative to shore up the financial system and become hostage to the actions of private finance.

It is not surprising, given the immense control exercised by the Banking lobby, that any attempt at regulatory reform is resisted and stymied. The fundamental weakness of the Libor seems to have been ignored in the interests of protecting the financial system. It has been argued that the easing of the Libor rates late in 2008 was for the greater public good—a sort of collateral cost of preventing the complete collapse of the financial system. The truth is that it is simply testimony to how the power and influence of Wall Street continued to shape the response of the major central banks—the Bank of England and the Federal Reserve—even after its actions brought the global economy to the brink.

The deep ties and interpenetration between the government and financial sector also forged a common worldview that served the imperatives of finance and the neoliberal distaste for hindering, in any way, its forage for profits. The irony is that the neoliberal rhetoric of free markets that is deployed to justify obscene levels of profiteering and deter any forms of regulation is promoting a financial system where markets and market discipline have been banished! It is bad enough that in the world of exotic custom-built financial products and over the counter derivatives, the “models” spawned by the industry have completely usurped the role of the “market” that economic theory celebrates. As the conjurors of these models reaped fat profits from transactions that were conducted without any transparent process of price discovery through a market mechanism, they were immunized from the consequences of their actions. What we now know is that even these models are built around a notional price where no real market exists. Key features of a “properly functioning market”—wide and free participation and genuine price discovery—are conspicuously absent in the setting of the Libor. Pricing is based on private, self-reported quotes of a small clique of powerful banks without any reference to tangible financial transactions. These same banks also controlled the BBA, the organization that actually posts the daily Libor. While vociferously maintaining that self–regulation and unregulated market forces are the most effective form of discipline for this ballooning sector, the financial oligarchy colluded to preempt any genuine competitive process, or any form of accountability.

Equally blatant forms of collusion have recently come to light in the context of the municipal bond-rigging scam involving major banks, including J. P. Morgan Chase, Bank of America, UBS, Lehman Brothers, and Bear Stearns, who conspired and colluded to deliberately rig the public bids on municipal bonds, a business worth about $3.7 trillion. Towns and municipalities that borrow by issuing municipal bonds to finance various projects have also turned to brokers on Wall Street to handle investment of some of this money instead of keeping it idle over the course of the project. The bonds are supposed to be submitted to a competitive auction (of at least three bids), but what the brokers actually did was allow the bankers to collude to carve out chunks of business. The brokers charged with getting municipalities the best deal actually let the pre­arranged “winner” have a “last look” at the bids of the competitors, thus allowing the bank to make the lowest possible winning bid. “By shaving tiny fractions of a percent off their winning bids, the banks pocketed fantastic sums over the life of these multimillion-dollar bond deals,” while the broker collected not just fees and commissions but also a fat bribe. Four banks that took part in the scam (UBS, Bank of America, Chase, and Wells Fargo) have agreed to pay $673 million in damages. This is likely to be just a fraction of the actual sums skimmed from public projects all over the United States. Yet for the bankers concerned, this was a perfectly fair auction, since, despite the fact that the secret collusion resulted in lower returns to the municipalities, they still got the highest of the bids. The sharing of the extra margins between the colluding bankers was just extra topping on the cake!20

This same hubris of the financial oligarchs at the center of the complex financial infrastructure, who are in effect deciding market prices in a manner that leaves their clients with as bare a minimum as they can get away with, is evident in the Libor riggings. Bob Diamond, the Barclays CEO, complained in a memo to the staff after the fines scandal hit the headlines that, “We all know these events are not representative of our culture…on the majority of days, no requests were made at all.” Behind this arrogance is a perverse sense of entitlement to immunity from the disciplining ravages not simply of the law but of the market. Instead of the competitive markets espoused in the neoliberal dogma, the field was a hotbed of moral hazard, conflict of interest, and outright criminal fraud.

The Libor scandal is not about the risky bets or bad judgment of rogue traders, but the deliberate strangling of market forces in the pursuit of profits. The story of how such an obviously flawed rate came to enjoy such a central place in the global financial system is in the end a story about how corporate, financial capital was powerful enough to set in place institutional mechanisms to ensure the deliberate subversion of any efforts or any market forces that would stifle their pursuit of profits.

A Fantasy Built on Fiction, Breeding Illusion

Although the difference between the reported Libor rate and the actual borrowing costs might seem small, the total amount of money involved is huge, given that Libor rates affect contracts worth hundreds of trillions of dollars. The rate with which the traders and bankers were playing determines the prices that people and corporations around the world pay for loans or receive for their savings. And the mechanism set up allowed the bankers to dictate the rate, which was a pivotal determinant of their earnings, by conjuring these numbers literally out of thin air!

Adjustable-rate mortgages had been allowed in the U.S. mortgage sector after the St Germaine Depository Institutions Act of 1982. Today, about 90 percent of U.S. commercial and mortgage loans are linked to the Libor.21 In 1999, following the urgings of banking lobbies, the U.S. Student Loan Marketing Agency switched from pricing loans off the Treasury bill rates to using the Libor as a benchmark for loans. It is used as a benchmark to set payments on about $350 trillion worth of derivative contracts.22 The Libor, a fictional number based on good faith estimates of those whose earnings fluctuate dramatically with miniscule gyration of this same rate, is now an integral part of the hardwire of the financial system.

And while the banking system has raked in vast sums due to these manipulations, those on the wrong side of these deals have faced huge losses. Among those who have been defrauded through such deliberate rigging are municipalities like Baltimore. Bankers have embedded interest-rate swaps in many long-term municipal bonds, persuading municipalities and states to issue bonds and simultaneously enter into swaps. In these arrangements, the banks agreed to make variable-rate payments to the issuers, and the issuers, in turn, agreed to make fixed-rate payments to the banks involved. The City of Baltimore had entered into interest rate swaps worth $100 million, swapping fixed interest payment to banks for variable Libor-linked receipts. “Forty U.S. states currently allow municipalities to enter into swap agreements. The total estimated amount in 2010 was between $250–500 billion.”23 The artificial low-balling of the Libor after 2008 meant losses of millions of dollars annually to these government bodies. Such losses deprived these agencies of money at a time of prolonged recession and acute fiscal crisis, exacerbating job losses, and strangling public services. Pension funds that were entrusted with household savings were also ripped off though such manipulations.

And if that was not bad enough, after the crisis, when the State was forced to step in to shore up collapsing financial markets, the Treasury bailout programs used this artificially low Libor as the basis for lending to the banks under the Term Asset Backed Securities Loan Facility. And this despite the misgivings expressed by Timothy Geithner in his email to Mervyn King just a few months earlier! Not only did the structurally flawed rate receive further official sanction, but the rescued banks also ended up getting money at excessively cheap rates, skimming off the public exchequer. Meanwhile, families facing foreclosures of their homes or debts in significant excess of the value of their homes received no such relief.

The British government has announced a review of the Libor-setting process, to investigate ways of improving regulation and governance. Under consideration are recommendations like expanding the panel of banks submitting rates and exploring the possibility of a credible third party to monitor and collate submissions. Alternatives to Libor are being discussed. The bankers, however, do not see either the U.S. Treasury bill rate or the U.S. federal funds rate as a suitable benchmark for the parallel shadow financial system of derivatives and financial engineering, tethered as they are to state policy. An alternative that is finding favor with the bankers is an overnight index rate based on the weighted average of the interest rates paid each day on General Collateral Finance Repurchase Agreements (Repos), using the most traded collateral repos like U.S. government securities. This index will be given a further boost by U.S. Treasury Department moves to offer new floating-rate securities based on this index, as it attempts to maintain surging investor demand for government bonds. These proposals seek a patchwork fix of a system that has been usurped by the financial oligarchy for its own unfettered enrichment, when what is needed is an overhaul! The parties involved are, in the end, only trying to replace the fiction at the center without dispelling the neoliberal illusion that fostered the speculative juggernaut that enriched finance.

Even as the Libor scandal has turned the spotlight on the fundamentally flawed mechanisms of rate setting, Wall Street has been waging its battle against transparency in price setting on other fronts. This can be seen, for instance, in the strong pushback from the bank lobby against the Commodity Futures Trading Commission’s proposal that derivative trading facilities provide market participants with easily accessible prices on a centralized electronic screen and eliminate the one-to-one dealings between traders and investors. While espousing the neoliberal credo, and celebrating the virtues of “self-regulation,” the financial oligarchy continues to resist any attempt to curb its monopolistic stranglehold. Not only is regulatory control being preempted, the financial oligarchy also seeks immunity from market discipline.

The absence of the force of market discipline was, paradoxically enough, part of the argument against the socialist planning project, during a debate that took place before the Second World War between the advocates of capitalist markets and the defenders of planning—the “socialist calculation debate.” Ludwig Von Mises, an economist and philosopher of the Austrian school, argued that even if planners sought to mimic price signals, they could not create a disciplining mechanism analogous to the market, and could not therefore capture capitalism’s socially beneficial dynamism.24 It would seem that neoliberal orthodoxy and the hegemony of market fundamentalism has been instrumental in bringing into being a system plagued by this very failing!

Footnotes

  1. Syndicated loans are provided by a group or syndicate of banks to a borrowing sovereign or corporation. The rate on the loan is the benchmark rate plus some risk premium.
  2. Interest rate swaps allow two parties to negotiate a “swap” of payments from fixed rate and floating rate contracts. The floating rates are normally calculated on the basis of a benchmark like the Libor.
  3. A repo (repurchase agreement) is a method of short-term borrowing. The borrower “sells” a security to the lender with the understanding that the asset would be bought back at a higher price. The higher price represents the interest rate on the loan.

Ramaa Vasudevan is an assistant professor of economics at Colorado State University. She is a member of the Union for Radical Political Economics and an associate of the Dollars and Sense Collective.

Notes

  1. The LIBOR Affair: Banksters” (online video), Economist blogs, July 7, 2012, http://economist.com
  2. The LIBOR Scandal: The Rotten Heart of Finance,” Economist, July 7, 2012, http://economist.com.
  3. Gerard Dumenil and Dominique Levy, The Crisis of Neoliberalism (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2010) and Capital Resurgent (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2004).
  4. Ramaa Vasudevan, “Finance Imperialism and the Hegemony of the Dollar,” Monthly Review 59, no.11 (April 2008): 35–50.
  5. Ibid.
  6. Leo Panitch and Sam Gindin, “Finance and the American Empire,” in Leo Panitch and Colin Leys, eds., Socialist Register 2005: The Empire Reloaded (New York: Monthly Review Press, 2005), 54.
  7. Jacob Wintellberg and Phillip Woolridge, “Interbank Rate Fixings During the Recent Turmoil,” BIS Quarterly Review, March 2008, http://bis.org.
  8. Robert N. McCauley, “Benchmark Tipping in the Money and Bond Markets,” BIS Quarterly Review, March 2001, http://bis.org.
  9. Ibid.
  10. Ibid.
  11. Ibid.
  12. Ramaa Vasudevan, “The Credit Crisis: Is the International Position of the Dollar at Stake?Monthly Review 60, no.11 (April 2009): 24­–35.
  13. Fixing Libor,” Financial Times, June 27, 2012, http://ft.com.
  14. Melanie Newman, “British Bankers Association Claimed Key Lobbying Victories,” Guardian, July 9, 2012, http://guardian.co.uk.
  15. Michael Mckenzie and Brooke Masters, “After Libor—The Search for a New Benchmark,” Financial Times, July 10, 2012, http://ft.com.
  16. “The LIBOR Scandal: The Rotten Heart of Finance.”
  17. Ibid.
  18. Douglass Keenan, “My Thwarted Attempts to Tell of LIBOR Shenanigans,” Financial Times, June 26, 2012, http://ft.com.
  19. Andrew Haldane and Piergiorgio Allessandri, “Banking on the State, Presentation at Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago,” September 2009, http://bis.org.
  20. Matt Taibbi, “The Scam Wall Street Learned from the Mafia,” Rolling Stone, July 5, 2012, http://rollingstone.com.
  21. Mariane Ojo, “LIBOR, EURIBOR and the Regulation of Capital Markets: The Impact of Eurocurrency markets on Monetary Setting Policies,” Munich Personal REPEC Archive Paper No 42093, October 20, 2012, http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de.
  22. Gillian Tett, “Libor Affair Shows Banking’s Big Conceit,” Financial Times, June 28, 2012, http://ft.com.
  23. The Libor Probes: An Expensive Smoking Gun,” Economist, April 14, 2012, http://economist.com.
  24. Ludwig Von Mises, “Economic Calculation in the Socialist Commonwealth,” in Freidrich Von Hayek, ed., Collectivist Economic Planning (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1935).

Ridiculous: “Voter Fraud is a Felony” billboards removed amid outcry from critics

Mac Slavo, SHTFplan.com | In a country where showing your identification is required for everything from opening a gym membership and renting a movie to purchasing a...

Financial fraud — Crime without criminals?

Ken Eisold - mindfulmoney.co.uk | More and more people are noting that when banks and other financial firms settle charges of fraud and pay out large sums...

Are Universities Turning into Corporate Drone Factories?

Unless we take hold of the reigns we will be cursed with a more ruthless form of corporate power wielded through naked repression. In decaying...

Exposing Corporate-financed Holocaust in Africa

By Keith Harmon Snow War in Congo has again been splashed across world headlines and the same old clichés about violence and suffering are repackaged...

Record Corporate Bailout Reveals the Bankruptcy of American Capitalism

WSWS | The US government takeover of the mortgage finance giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac has dealt a shattering blow to the ideology of...

Corporate Whistleblowers Are Left Dangling

By JENNIFER LEVITZ | The Department of Labor, charged with enforcing the federal law protecting corporate whistleblowers at publicly traded companies, has been dismissing...

US Colony Iraq Subsidizes Military-Industrial Fraud

Corporate-government fraud has gotten a major boost ever since Iraq became the latest colony of the failing American Empire. "Iraq is fast becoming one of...

Corporate America

By Chris Hedges | The corporate state is our shadow government. Candidates who aspire to higher office get corporate money if they promote corporate interests....

CIA Corporate Spying

They're leaving "the Company" to snoop on your company. How C.I.A. agents are pushing corporate espionage to ominous new extremes. Douglas Frantz Photograph by: Matt Hoyle In...

Science is being distorted to promote political and corporate agendas

By Mike Adams In the United States today, science is no longer a pure study. The science primarily publicized today is science that supports the...

Koch Brothers Driving Keystone XL Pipeline from Canada to Cut Out Venezuelan Oil

Greg Palast: Koch brothers could save two billion dollars a year if they can replace Venezuelan heavy crude crude with Canadian tar sands - one of the dirtiest sources of carbon emissions on the planet.

Bio

Greg Palast is a BBC investigative reporter and author of Vultures' Picnic. Palast turned his skills to journalism after two decades as a top investigator of corporate fraud. Palast directed the U.S. governmentʼs largest racketeering case in history– winning a $4.3 billion jury award. He also conducted the investigation of fraud charges in the Exxon Valdez grounding.

Koch Brothers Driving Keystone XL Pipeline from Canada to Cut Out Venezuelan Oil

Context: As yet there are no context links for this item.

Bio

Greg Palast is a BBC investigative reporter and author of Vultures' Picnic. Palast turned his skills to journalism after two decades as a top investigator of corporate fraud. Palast directed the U.S. governmentʼs largest racketeering case in history– winning a $4.3 billion jury award. He also conducted the investigation of fraud charges in the Exxon Valdez grounding.

Transcript

PAUL JAY, SENIOR EDITOR, TRNN: Welcome to The Real News Network. I'm Paul Jay in Baltimore. And welcome to the first of what will be a regular series of interviews with Greg Palast called The Palast Report. He now joins us from New York City.

Greg is a BBC investigative reporter. He writes in The Nation and Vice magazine. He's the author of the New York Times bestseller The Best Democracy Money Can Buy, and latest book is Billionaires & Ballot Bandits.Thanks very much for joining us.GREG PALAST, JOURNALIST AND AUTHOR: Glad to be with you, Paul.JAY: So what are you working on this week?PALAST: Ooh. I've been kind of playing with this oozing black snake, this kind of viperous tube of sludge called the XL Keystone Pipeline. And so I've been investigating by kind of pushing myself through this sludge pipe and seeing what is stuck in the ooze. And what I have found here is a fascinating story of the pipeline, the Koch brothers. And the story took me all the way back to Venezuela and Hugo Chávez. So that's what I'm working on right now, this untold story of Chávez, the Koch brothers, and the XL.JAY: So connect these three big dots.PALAST: Three big dots. Okay. The XL pipeline, Keystone pipeline, is the proposed pipeline, extension of a pipeline that would take tar sands oil from Canada—what they do is they have, you know, big bulldozers that rip up the earth, they melt the dirt, they melt the sludge, and there's this heavy goo that's kind of like hot asphalt, which they want to move down to refineries, down to Houston, Texas. And my first question was: what? Why? You know, isn't Texas where oil comes from? In fact, that's our big oil-exporting state, is Texas. So why are we taking oil from Canada past the north, the northern interior of the U.S., where we can use heating oil? Why are we taking it down to Houston? [incompr.] to Newcastle to the Gulf coast. And the answer is: Koch. The Koch brothers are the owners of the big refineries, like the Flint Hills refinery, along the Gulf coast of Texas. And you have to understand, refineries, these kind of giant filth machines, are actually very sensitive instruments. They can't just suck up and refine any old oil and throw filth into the air; they're very specialized machines. And the Gulf coast refineries, especially those controlled by the Koch brothers in Flint Hills, can really only handle heavy crude oil. So the stuff that's in Texas itself, West Texas crude, which is light and sweet, it's good oil; it's not filled with a lot of crappy sulphur. That's no good for the Texas refineries. Rather, they need that heavy, gunky stuff which is ultrapolluting. So there is a controversy right now, and there will be a big demonstration against the XL Keystone pipeline on February 17 in Washington. And I wanted to know why we're taking oil from Canada across the entire United States to Texas. And, again, it's because the Kochs want it. Now, why do they want it? The answer is, right now they're getting their oil—the only place they can get lots of heavy crude oil—if you want heavy crude, you've got to get it from a heavy dude named Hugo Chávez, the president of Venezuela. And one thing about Chávez, who I've known for many years, is that he doesn't let go of his nation's oil on the cheap. He is a cornerstone of OPEC. And Venezuela's been selling heavy crude at a premium to the price paid in Texas, because it costs more to get heavy oil from Venezuela than it does to get light oil down the road from Texas. But they have no choice, the Koch brothers, but paying Hugo for his gunky oil.Now, on the other hand, the Canadians not only are selling for less than Texas oil—they're selling, as of today—if you check out this week's reports, about $33 a barrel less is the price of West Canada Sands (WCS) oil, as they call it, versus WTI, the West Texas Intermediate. So you're saving about $35 a barrel—$35 a barrel—if you can get the oil from Canada as opposed to Venezuela. So they've got to cut off Chávez and they've got to bring the oil in from Canada. And that's the reason why we are talking about endangering the most sensitive aquifers and important—that is, water sources in America—to have a pipe with the filthiest oil in the planet, the most polluting oil on the planet, to drag it all the way from Canada all the way down to Texas so that the Koch brothers at Flint Hills can make—their savings would be about $2 billion a year that the Koch brothers will make off our risking the aquifers across the United States.JAY: So is the Koch brothers' refinery—it was primarily built to deal with Venezuelan oil?PALAST: They bought it that way. So, see, in other words, the Koch brothers—I've been investigating the Koch brothers. If you read Billionaires & Ballot Bandits, my latest book, I have several chapters on the Koch brothers. I've been investigating these guys for 17 years. In fact, when I first wrote about them for The Guardian, I called them the richest guys you've never heard of. Now you've heard of them.But the way that they make their money is not by, you know, being entrepreneurs or good investors or job creators. Their entire operation, the two brothers Koch, Dave and Charles, each worth over $20 billion, they make their money on political plays. So they'll take Sunoco, which wasn't making any money from its refinery in Texas having to buy from Venezuela, they took over Flint Hills and figured, a-ha, we'll just do the political play. If we can use our political muscle to jam a pipeline through the guts of the United States down to Texas—you know, and most people would think that that's mad, taking tar oil from Canada and bringing it to the Texas, to the Gulf coast—we can make a killing. And by the way, they're making an extra killing. When the Republicans were talking about the XL Keystone pipeline making us energy-independent—first of all, that assumes, by the way, that Canada is a suburb of Seattle—.JAY: Well, there's some truth to that, but go on.PALAST: Yeah, I know. Some Canadians feel that it works that way. We're not energy-independent if it comes from Canada. But if it comes from Canada, let's assume that this is our buddies, because they'll give us the oil cheap, and that's what makes them our buddies.It also undermines Hugo Chávez. They have to undermine Chávez, which they want to do for geopolitical reasons.But then the oil will not be used in the United States. It will be refined mostly for gasoline that will be sold at a premium in the Caribbean. Remember, these refineries are in the Gulf coast. Selling it, then running that stuff back into New Jersey is not a moneymaker. The way you make the money is you sell gasoline in places that don't have the refining capacity and will pay a premium, like, you know, Jamaica, Santa Domingo. That's where your money's going to be made. So this is oil from Canada which will then go into the Koch refineries and sold into the Caribbean. And we are paying the price in two ways—one, the massive danger of a break in these pipelines, which happen all the time. And that would be disastrous, given the areas it's going across. And the second is that because it will now open up new fields in Canada, because it will now make more tar sands finds economic, 'cause they'll have a market for it, we're going to have a massive, massive, massive increase in global warming chemicals that will be thrown into the air by the process of both the drilling, the refining, and the ultimate use of this product, which is the absolutely filthiest, filthiest oil—.JAY: Yeah, I think that Canadian tar sands, I think, is number-one or close to number-one producer of carbon emissions in a single place on the planet.PALAST: Yeah. I mean, Alberta is basically one big—is becoming a big dirt smokestack.Now, Obama has not made a decision on this. That is, he was afraid to approve Keystone XL pipeline before the election because he knew he would be lynched by environmentalists and people of Kansas, Nebraska, where the pipeline comes down. But now that the election's over, look out. In fact, my money would be on Obama approving the Keystone XL. There is a tremendous amount of pressure from the Koch brothers and from other oil interests, plus it plays into the administration's game of a widescale attack on Hugo Cházez. And that, by the way, includes the choice of John Kerry, who started this week as our new secretary of state. Senator Ketchup is—remember, his fortune is based on marrying into Mrs. Ketchup, Mrs. Heinz, and Heinz has had a running battle with Venezuela because Heinz property was confiscated by Chávez's government in a land-reform move. So, you know, if your—those tomatoes going into those bottles have now—those plants, ketchup plants were taken over by the Chávez government for the workers there. And so John Kerry is a longtime Chávez hater.This administration has totally swallowed, repeated, and amplified the anti-Venezuelan propaganda and foreign policy of George Bush.JAY: Alright. Thanks very much, Greg. And Greg will be back in a couple of weeks to tell us what he's working on. Thanks for joining us. PALAST: You're very welcome, Paul.JAY: And thank you for joining us on The Real News Network.

End

DISCLAIMER: Please note that transcripts for The Real News Network are typed from a recording of the program. TRNN cannot guarantee their complete accuracy.


Comments

Our automatic spam filter blocks comments with multiple links and multiple users using the same IP address. Please make thoughtful comments with minimal links using only one user name. If you think your comment has been mistakenly removed please email us at [email protected]

Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.

Who’s Behind “Fix the Debt”?

Look out, the "fixers" are coming.

Top corporate chieftains and Wall Street gamblers want to tell Washington how to fix our national debt, so they've created a front group called "Fix the Debt" to push their agenda. Unfortunately, they're using "fix" in the same way your veterinarian uses it — their core demand is for Washington to spay Social Security, castrate Medicare and geld Medicaid.

Who's behind this piece of crude surgery on the retirement and health programs that most Americans count on? Pete Peterson, for one. For years, this Wall Street billionaire, who amassed his fortune as honcho of a private equity outfit named Blackstone, has runs a political sideshow demanding that the federal budget be balanced on the backs of the middle class and the poor. Fix the Debt is just his latest war whoop, organized by a corporate "think tank" he funds.

This time, Peterson rallied some 95 CEOs to his plutocratic crusade, including the likes of General Electric boss Jeffrey Immelt and Honeywell chief David Cote. (Note: Both Immelt and Cote, while cheering for cuts to programs that we working Americans pay into, are themselves taking money hand over fist from taxpayers in terms of military contracts and corporate subsidies for their corporations. But they aren't concerned about defense spending and ending subsidies that benefit their bottom line.)

All of them are not merely "One Percenters," but the top one-tenth of One Percenters. Of course, a group of pampered, narcissistic billionaires would not make a credible sales argument for this dirty work. Having elites piously preach austerity to the masses would be as ineffective as having Col. Sanders invite a flock of chickens to Sunday dinner.

Presented with this image problem, Fix the Debt needed to give their campaign a more benign image, and Peterson and Co. followed a tried-and-true formula of political deceit. As described by Mary Bottari of the Center for Media and Democracy, the trick is to "gather a bipartisan group of 'serious' men, hire a PR firm to place them on TV shows, blanket the media with talk of a looming crisis and pretend to have grassroots support."

In this case, a collection of former member of Congress, each of whom had a reputation for being moderate to the extreme, were recruited to give the campaign a sheen of high public purpose. Backed by a $40 million budget put up by the corporate interests, these "elder statesman" are now the face of Fix the Debt, doing dozens of TV interviews, hosting breakfast sessions with members of Congress, making speeches about "mutual sacrifice" and generally going all-out to sell the financial elite's snake oil.

But wait — being an elder does not automatically mean you're a statesman. Let's peek at the resumes of these so-called public-spirited fixers of the debt. Start with Jim McCrery, a former GOP lawmaker from Louisiana. While urging Congress to cut people's programs, he's also a top-paid lobbyist pushing Congress to give more tax subsidies to America's richest people and to such multinational corporations as General Electric.

Former Democratic Sen. Sam Nunn is a fixer, too — but he's also paid $300,000 a year to be on the board of directors for General Electric. Likewise, Democrat Erskine Bowles, a co-founder of the fixers' front group, is on the board of Morgan Stanley, drawing $345,000 a year. And former GOP Sen. Judd Gregg takes about a million bucks a year as advisor to and board member for such giants as Goldman Sachs and Honeywell.

Fix the Debt is nothing but another corporate fraud. I wouldn't let this gang of fixers touch pet my dog, much less my Social Security!

© 2012 Creators Syndicate

Jim Hightower

National radio commentator, writer, public speaker, and author of the book, Swim Against The Current: Even A Dead Fish Can Go With The Flow, Jim Hightower has spent three decades battling the Powers That Be on behalf of the Powers That Ought To Be - consumers, working families, environmentalists, small businesses, and just-plain-folks.

Trump to nominate ‘impeccable’ Christopher Wray as FBI director

Published time: 7 Jun, 2017 11:53 Edited time: 7 Jun, 2017 12:48 US President Donald Trump...

350.org on New Revelations in #ExxonKnew Case

NEW YORK - New documents from the New York State Attorney General show that while now Secretary of State Rex Tillerson was CEO of...

Secret studies proving Monsanto sells poison

Secret studies proving Monsanto sells poison by Jon Rappoport July 3, 2014 www.nomorefakenews.com Claire Robinson has written a stunning article exposing hidden proof Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide is poison: “The glyphosate toxicity studies you’re not allowed to see,” gmwatch.org, July 2, 2014. Glyphosate is the main ingredient in Roundup, Monsanto’s product, which is used in hurricane-like […]

One day in 1913, Woodrow Wilson had a shocking thought

One day in 1913, Woodrow Wilson had a shocking thought by Jon Rappoport June 26, 2014 www.nomorefakenews.com President Woodrow Wilson was one of those men who saw a horrible danger to his country, looked it in the eye, and decided that, instead of trying to decentralize and dismantle that overarching power, he would hope against […]

Is there a GMO-chemtrail connection?

Is there a GMO-chemtrail connection? by Jon Rappoport May 21, 2014 www.nomorefakenews.com In a groundbreaking article at farmwars.info, Barbara Peterson makes a stunning connection between GMO food crops and chemtrails. (“Monsanto Patents and Chemtrails”) Peterson has looked into a Monsanto patent that expands the genetic engineering of food crops. Engineering for what purpose? Overcoming the […]

FBI mulls easing marijuana policy to lure more hackers

The Federal Bureau of Investigation is considering moving beyond its position of refusing to consider hiring employees who used marijuana in the past, a...

Monsanto aliens

Monsanto aliens by Jon Rappoport April 1, 2014 www.nomorefakenews.com “I recognized my two selves: a crusading idealist and a cold, granitic believer in the law of the jungle” – Edgar Monsanto Queeny, Monsanto chairman, 1943-63, “The Spirit of Enterprise”, 1934. “Monsanto should not have to vouchsafe the safety of biotech food. Our interest is in […]

Apple, Microsoft, Google, NFL: suicide by greed

Apple, Google, Microsoft, NFL: suicide by greed by Jon Rappoport March 25, 2014 www.nomorefakenews.com The old movie line, “Stop me before I kill again,” comes to mind. In this case, however, it’s “Stop me before I kill myself.” PandoDaily has uncovered a wide-ranging scandal among tech giants. It’s basically an illegal scheme to limit wages […]

Money web: CIA, Cheney, Whole Foods, everybody

Investment-fund web: CIA, Cheney, Whole Foods, everybody by Jon Rappoport March 21, 2014 www.nomorefakenews.com First the bottom line: if you’re a publicly traded company, your shares are selling in the same web that predators control. If you put your money in a huge investment fund, you’re in that web, too. For example, take the Vanguard […]

Facebook and Monsanto: top shareholders are identical

Facebook and Monsanto: top shareholders are identical by Jon Rappoport March 22, 2014 www.nomorefakenews.com Seven of the top 12 shareholders of Facebook and Monsanto are identical. Even more to the point, three of the top five shareholders are the same. The top shareholder, at the moment, in Monsanto is The Vanguard Group, which is number […]

Will healthy food crops go extinct?

Will healthy food crops go extinct? By Jon Rappoport March 12, 2014 www.nomorefakenews.com A new US survey highlights the ominous “gene drift” problem, the contamination of organic food crops by GMOs from other farms. This is not a new situation. It has been present since the introduction of commercial GMO crops in 1996. The survey […]

Power grab at the top of the natural foods industry

Power grab at the top of the natural-food industry by Jon Rappoport March 6, 2014 www.nomorefakenews.com From a February 13 article, “Who owns organics now?”, at the Cornucopia Institute: “In 1995 there were 81 independent organic processing companies in the United States. A decade later, Big Food had gobbled up all but 15 of them.” […]

Covert chemical warfare/a time bomb in the Ukraine

Covert chemical warfare / and a time bomb in the Ukraine by Jon Rappoport February 28, 2014 www.nomorefakenews.com In the entirely justified blow-up over the poisonous effects of Monsanto’s Roundup, recent history has been pushed to the side. There are, of course, other companies and other poisons (herbicides, pesticides). For example, read this from “Transport […]

“Not one case of harm from GMOs”

“Not one case of harm from GMOs” by Jon Rappoport February 26, 2014 www.nomorefakenews.com Here are two GMO quotes. I’ll let them speak for themselves, and then make a few comments. QUOTE ONE: “This compilation is a sample of the scientific references including over 1200 studies, surveys, and analyses that suggest various adverse impacts and […]

What the Whole Foods-Monsanto connection really means

What the Whole Foods-Monsanto connection really means by Jon Rappoport February 26, 2014 www.nomorefakenews.com Yesterday, I wrote and posted an article, “Top shareholders in Whole Foods and Monsanto: identical.” I laid out the five investment funds that hold huge numbers of shares of both companies. http://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2014/02/25/top-shareholders-in-whole-foods-and-monsanto-identical/ This means very little to Monsanto. But to Whole […]

Top shareholders in Whole Foods and Monsanto: identical

Top shareholders in Whole Foods and Monsanto: identical By Jon Rappoport February 25, 2014 www.nomorefakenews.com Is there a Whole Foods-Monsanto connection? The answer is yes. But the important question is: what does this connection mean? What does it imply? Is it significant? If you consult open listings (for example, investors.morningstar.com), you can look at the […]

Study: Monsanto’s Roundup causes “gluten intolerance”

Study: Monsanto’s Roundup causes “gluten intolerance” by Jon Rappoport February 21, 2014 www.nomorefakenews.com A recent study proposes that gluten intolerance and celiac disease are on the rise as a result of glyphosate, the main ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide. The National Library of Medicine states that celiac disease “damages the lining of the small intestine […]

Under the radar: prestigious mainstream editor torpedoed the FDA

Under the radar: prestigious mainstream editor torpedoed the FDA by Jon Rappoport February 3, 2014 www.nomorefakenews.com Seven years ago, Marcia Angell, who, for two decades, edited one of the most famous medical journals in the world, the New England Journal of Medicine, wrote a piece for the Boston Globe. It was titled, Talking Back to […]

Our Special today is corn chowder with Agent Orange

Our Special today is corn chowder with Agent Orange by Jon Rappoport February 3, 2014 www.nomorefakenews.com Remember Agent Orange? The US Army sprayed it all over Vietnam. It defoliated (destroyed) plant growth and brought on cancers and birth defects. One of its significant ingredients was a chemical called 2.4-D. Well, the US Dept. of Agriculture […]

Monsanto’s Roundup: new deadly scam exposed

Monsanto’s Roundup: new deadly scam exposed by Jon Rappoport February 2, 2014 www.nomorefakenews.com Roundup is the Monsanto herbicide that is touted as the cornerstone of GMO food crops. Monsanto claims these crops are genetically engineered to withstand heavy spraying of Roundup. Therefore, the crops live and the weeds die. Breakthrough. There are several key lies […]

“Big government isn’t a problem, it’s those damn corporations”

“Big government isn’t a problem, it’s those damn corporations” by Jon Rappoport January 31, 2014 www.nomorefakenews.com I know. All our problems come from mega-corporations. That’s it. End of story. The Surveillance State, for example, knows what brand of paper towel you’re using and whether you put on your left or right shoe first, because “we’re […]

Truth about the Seralini rat-tumor-GMO study explodes

Truth about the Seralini rat-tumor-GMO study explodes by Jon Rappoport January 19, 2014 www.nomorefakenews.com Remember a researcher named Gilles-Eric Seralini, his 2012 GMO study, and the controversy that swirled around it? He fed rats GMOs, in the form of Monsanto’s Roundup Ready corn, and they developed tumors. Some died. The study was published in the […]

Google and the World Brain

Google and the World Brain by Jon Rappoport January 8, 2014 www.nomorefakenews.com In a BBC documentary, “Google and the World Brain,” the issue of author copyright is explored. Google has scanned and published out-of-print books that are still covered by copyright. Interviewed, Kevin Kelly (twitter) (also here and here), the co-founder of Wired, makes a […]

Washington Post, its new owner, and the CIA: joined at the hip

Washington Post, its new owner, and the CIA: joined at the hip by Jon Rappoport December 22, 2013 www.nomorefakenews.com Norman Solomon (twitter), writing at Counterpunch, nails it down: building a version of the online Cloud that will run inside the CIA, for the CIA, has been awarded, as a $600 million contract, to Amazon Web […]

Facebook stock price follows my prediction: insiders rule

Facebook stock price follows my prediction: insiders rule by Jon Rappoport December 16, 2013 www.nomorefakenews.com On August 20, 2012, three months after Facebook went public and launched its IPO, I posted a piece headlined: “Facebook, the CIA, DARPA, and the Tanking IPO.” In it I presented a little background and made a prediction: “But now […]

Insanity in the poisoned society

This article refers to GMO labeling, but also to toxic pharmaceuticals, harmful vaccines, and other chemical assaults on human health and life. There is a...

RINFORMATION

USA Topics 9/11 Agenda 21 Assassinations Banks Bush, George Jr Boston Bombings Bohemian Grove CIA Cointelpro Corruption DARPA Democrats Disinformation Congress Drones Eugenics FBI Federal Reserve Guantanamo HAARP ...

Truthdigger of the Week: Greg Palast

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/truthdigger_of_the_week_greg_palast_20130921/ Posted on Sep 22, 2013 ...

BBC’s HR boss to quit amid pay-off row

The BBCâ„¢s HR director is to quit amid pay-off row.The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) human resources director Lucy Adams is to resign following criticisms...

Locking Out the Voices of Dissent

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/locking_out_the_voices_of_dissent_20130714/ Posted on Jul 14, 2013 ...

Apple CEO defends multi-billion-dollar tax dodge

  By ...

Early Prison Release for Enron’s Skilling, Trump Hits New Low, and More

Early Prison Release for Enron’s Skilling, Trump Hits New Low, and More Email   Print   Share Posted on May 8, 2013 Hearing Things: The House...

A Short History of US Government Handouts

By Stephen Lendman Global economies are withering while Washington conceives "Financial Recovery Plan(s) from Hell," according to economist Michael Hudson in his latest February 11...

Wal-Mart Spying: Good, Bad, Or Just The Future?

Mel Duvall Wal-Mart is used to finding its name on the front page of The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal, but in...

Reviewing Ferdinand Lundberg’s “Cracks in the Constitution”

By Stephen Lendman RINF Alternative News Ferdinand Lundberg (1905 - 1995) was a 20th century economist, journalist, historian and author of such books as The Rich...

The Stomach-churning Violence of Monsanto, Bayer and the Agrochemical Oligopoly

As humans, we have evolved with the natural environment over millennia. We have learned what to eat and what not to eat, what to...

Whose Side Are They On: Main Street Consumers or Wall Street Banks?

WASHINGTON - One of the major battles in Congress this fall will be a fight over a regulatory repeal measure that will have lasting...

It's (Loan) Shark Week: Families Are Biting Back

(Photo: Ismagilov / Getty Images) It's Shark Week, but the most dangerous predators this year aren't on TV or at the beaches -- they are...

The Russia Investigation is Distracting Us from These Two Key Issues

by Sandra O'Hare The current administration is…newsworthy. New information about collusion with Russia during the campaign seems to come forward daily, and everyone is (understandably...

Defending Public Schools, Demonstrators Greet Betsy DeVos at ALEC Annual Meeting

Education Secretary Betsy DeVos was met by hundreds of protesters in Denver on Thursday, where she spoke at the annual meeting of the American...

‘How Can the Arsonists Be the Firefighters Today?’

Janine Jackson interviewed Maurice Carney about the crisis in the Democratic Republic of Congo for the July 14, 2017, episode of CounterSpin. This is...

Wall Street wants rollback of Enron-era accounting rules

Financial executives have called on lawmakers to scale back securities regulations that they argue stifle the...

In India, National Academy of Agricultural Sciences Ditches Science for Spin in Push for...

The case surrounding the approval of genetically modified (GM) mustard in India is coming to a head on the back of the Genetic Engineering...

When Will Co-opted Figures and Board Members of Companies like Monsanto and Bayer Be...

The public is being poisoned, disease rates are spiralling, waterways are contaminated, soil is being degraded, insects, birds, invertebrates and plant diversity are in...

Warren Buffett wants more taxes on rich Americans, single-payer healthcare

The Republican healthcare proposal amounts to a tax cut for the rich, and the US economy...

Google ends Gmail snooping, has all the personalized data needed for ads

Published time: 24 Jun, 2017 01:54 Google has unexpectedly announced that it will no longer read...

DOJ bans Holder-era settlement payouts to 'slush fund' third parties

The US Justice Department will no longer pay settlements to third parties that were “neither the...

Progressive vs political outsider: Democrats face off in CA special election for House seat

A state assemblyman campaigning as a true progressive is up against a city official who distinguishes...

Resist the Duopoly: Because Judas’s Party Can’t Defeat Trump’s

Author’s Note: This is the second and final part of my call-to-arms series “The REAL Trump Resistance: An Anti-Duopoly Occupy.” Given the importance I...

How Kuwait Lobbied Hillary Clinton to Nix Criminal Probe of Defense Contractor

In 2009, Kuwait called on then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to intervene with the Justice Department and help nix a criminal fraud case...

End the Greedy Silence

It is time Americans rise up against the corruption, inefficiency, and cruelty of our healthcare system and tell its corporate captors and Congress –...

Buying the election? Tory billionaires outspend Labour’s trade unions in donor war

Donations from the billionaire business lobby to the Conservative Party are already almost double the...

The Public or the Agrochemical Industry: Who Does the European Chemicals Agency Serve?  

By Rosemary Mason and Colin Todhunter Environmentalist Dr Rosemary Mason has just written an open letter to the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) Director of Risk...

‘Chevron Was Just Fabricating a Lie to Get Out of Paying for a Cleanup’

Janine Jackson interviewed Paul Paz y Miño about Chevron’s oil spill in Ecuador for the May 5, 2017 episode of CounterSpin. This is a lightly edited...

Trump Mocks His Voters

Eric Zuesse, originally posted at strategic-culture.org It usually comes from his actions, instead of from his words, but sometimes Trump mocks his voters verbally too,...

Lockheed Martin-Funded Experts Agree: South Korea Needs More Lockheed Martin Missiles

The THAAD anti-missile system sure is great, say analysts whose salaries are partly paid for by THAAD’s manufacturer. (photo: DoD/Lockheed Martin) As tensions between the...

France’s Answer To Trumpism: Non, Merci

Before you go to sleep Sunday you will have learned a new name, the name at least six or seven of your fellow-Americans already...

Bigoted Americans Far More Supportive of War Against Syria

Eric Zuesse, originally posted at strategic-culture.org —— On April 23rd, the U.S. mega-corporate and government-funded National Public Radio network, NPR, interviewed voters about their views on...

Wells Fargo Directors Face Wrath for Complicity In Bank Corruption

Met by fierce protests both inside and out the annual shareholder meeting in Ponte Vedra Beach, Florida on Tuesday, members of the Wells Fargo...

Saqib Bhatti on Wells Fargo, Jeremie Greer on Taxes and Inequality

PlayStop pop out ...

Britain the go-to place for Russian criminals, says Moscow’s embassy in London

Over 50 criminals wanted in Russia on various charges are currently being sheltered by the...

Trump is Obama’s Legacy: Will this Break up the Democratic Party?

Photo by www.GlynLowe.com | CC BY 2.0 Nobody yet can tell whether Donald Trump is an agent of change with a specific policy in mind,...

Monsanto’s Violence in India: The Sacred and the Profane

From Hinduism and Paganism to Thor, Woden and Monsanto, humans have lost their ancient beliefs, practices and connection with nature. The old practices, so...

Funny, There Are No Workers on the White House Jobs Panel

By golly, The Donald delivers. Trump and his new blue-ribbon panel of working-class champions have announced a bold new initiative to create millions of American...

The Political Economy of ‘Moral Authority’

In her acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention last year (7/28/16), Hillary Clinton forcefully rebutted President Donald J. Trump’s call to “make America...

Stop Protecting the Criminality of the Global Pesticides Industry

The agrichemicals industry wallows like an overblown hog in a cesspool of corruption. With its snout firmly embedded in the trough of corporate profit...

Enemy of Reason: Behind the Mask of Pro-GMO Neoliberal Ideology

Professor Shanthu Shantharam recently wrote a response to Viva Kermani’s well thought out article about injecting some honesty into the debate about genetically modified (GM) food and...

Sweat Shops, GMOs and Neoliberal Fundamentalism: The Agroecological Alternative to Global Capitalism

Much of the argument in favour of GM agriculture involves little more than misrepresentations and unscrupulous attacks on those who express concerns about the technology and its impacts....

Pro-GMO Scientists Blinded by Technology and Wedded to Ideology

The Oxford Martin School is based at Oxford University in the UK and has set up the ‘Oxford Martin Commission for Future Generations’ (OMC). Bringing together...

Monsanto and GMO Propagandists Softening-up UK Public for GM After Brexit

On the back of Brexit, the UK government is planning what could be a disastrous trade deal with the Trump administration. It would likely...

Monsanto’s Communications Guru to Visit the UK: Instead of Promoting GM, Take Responsibility for...

Monsanto is preparing a fresh effort to promote genetically modified (GM) crops to the UK public, according to a piece in The Scottish Farmer. The...

NPR’s No-‘Lie’ Policy and the Limits of Impartiality in the Trump Era

After much back and forth over the past few weeks, National Public Radio finally clarified their editorial stance on when it is and isn’t...

NYT Amazed That Republicans Are Embracing Republican Ideas

Readers who are familiar with the Republican Party wil be surprised to learn the it previously “opposed” such policies as increasing the size of...

NPR’s No-‘Lie’ Policy and the Limits of Impartiality in the Trump Era

NPR promises that as soon as Donald Trump acknowledges that he intends to deceive, it’ll label it a “lie.” After much back and forth over...

Down the Rabbit-Hole to Trump’s Victory

Eric Zuesse, originally posted at strategic-culture.org There are several key reasons why Donald Trump won, such as that he achieved a 1,405,004 nationwide popular-vote victory in...

Development and India: Why GM Mustard Really Matters

The push to commercialise the growing of genetically modified (GM) mustard in India is currently held up in court due to a lawsuit by...

Translating Trump’s Inaugural Speech From the Original German

Donald Trump’s inaugural speech, like the candidate himself, was a chain of falsehoods, saber-rattling and scary Neofascist uber-nationalism. But it could be difficult to...

Why This Price Is Wrong

For most people, prescription drugs are a lifeline. For Representative Tom Price, Donald Trump’s health secretary nominee, they’re a source of profits. Indeed, hundreds of...

Britain’s ‘failure to tackle tax havens’ draws ire of anti-corruption campaigners

Anti-corruption campaigners have accused the British government of falling short on its longstanding commitment to...

NYT: If Only We Knew What We Already Know About Jeff Sessions

The New York Times (1/8/17) raises questions about Jeff Sessions–questions it admits have already been answered. Jefferson Beauregard Sessions seems to be on his way...

Welcome to the Vortex

I spent most of 2016 doing my duty as citizen, writer and educator aghast at the favors done for the unprincipled, incoherent, vicious, dangerous...

From Agriculture to Demonetisation: Not ‘Make in India’ but Made in Washington

Colin Todhunter A version of the following piece was originally published in June 2016. However, since then, India’s PM Narendra Modi has embarked on a...

How Do Republicans Get Away With Voter Suppression?

Greg Palast (right) interviews Rosario Dawson (left) about the Republican purging of Hispanic females from voter rolls in his documentary The Best Democracy Money...

Entrenching Capitalist Agriculture in India Under the Guise of Development

Colin Todhunter Washington's long-term plan has been to restructure indigenous agriculture across the world and tie it to an international system of trade based on...

‘Mad as hell’: State of Georgia accuses DHS of hacking into their system

The state of Georgia’s secretary of state has said he is “mad as hell” following an...

If We Care About the Constitution, Trump Has to Sell His Empire

Andrew Ross Sorkin (New York Times, 11/28/16): “Some of your critics will deride the corporate monitor as mere window dressing.” And those critics would...

Fake News

“During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.” – George Orwell, Visionary Author Now that the rigged election circus is finally behind...

Only Wealthy White Leftists

A great uproar goes forth from the enemies of the Trump Beast, with much gnashing of hair and pulling of teeth. He will be...

Obama’s Nonexistent Legacy

Eric Zuesse, originally posted at strategic-culture.org “Trump did more than any democrat to deflate the neocon/neoliberal agenda that liberals themselves screamed was fascist when Bush...

Rejecting Dangerous Saviors: Can "The People" Save the US?

The palatable desire for saviors is understandable but also profoundly threatening. It symbolizes an authoritarian mentality of relying on a great leader for political...

Why Are Public Officials Protecting the Pesticides Industry? Digging Down into the Cesspool of...

Colin Todhunter It is based on a cesspool of corruption that is most probably responsible for more death and disease than the combined efforts of...

Have We Just Witnessed The Birth Of A Revolution?

(RINF) - Dear Readers: The article below has come to me. I am unable to ascertain if it is a published statement or one of...

The Big Split

If Trump is the price we have to pay to defeat Clintonian neoliberalism – so be it.               ...

How Republicans Game the Concept of Democracy Through Disenfranchisement

Polling booths at an early voting location on the Arizona State University campus in Tempe, October 12, 2016. Voter disenfranchisement is just...

Wells Fargo is Rotting from the Top Down

Just when you thought that, surely, big banker greed had bottomed out with 2008’s Wall Street crash and bailout, along comes Wells Fargo, burrowing...

‘Will Every Eligible Voter Be Able to Cast a Ballot?’

Janine Jackson interviewed Ari Berman about “rigging” elections for the October 21, 2016, episode of CounterSpin. This is a lightly edited transcript. Ari Berman: “Conservatives…realized...

How the 2004 Presidential Election Was Stolen by George W. Bush

Eric Zuesse (RINF) - In 2006, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. headlined at Rolling Stone “Was the 2004 Election Stolen?” and he presented an argument that...

Agrochemicals and the Cesspool of Corruption: Dr. Mason Writes to the US EPA 

Colin Todhunter (RINF) - In her recent open letter to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), campaigner Dr Rosemary Mason documents what amounts to...

‘America’s Lawyer’: Mike Papantonio to host legal show on RT America

Trial lawyer hall-of-famer Mike Papantonio is joining RT America, and will host a new primetime weekly...

Stop the Presses

Journalists marched from Galatasaray Square to Taksim Square, demanding the release of arrested colleagues and better protection for press freedom, March 13,2011 in Istanbul,Turkey....

Ode to Joy (denied)

Banks with trillions Bring death in millions Soldiers of Elysium1 Flying, marching Driving, bombing Innocents to kingdom come Seizing children Maiming mothers Razing villages to the ground Everywhere where wealth’s extracted Leveling homes, entire...

Seeds of Occupation: India’s Stockholm Syndrome

Colin Todhunter Stockholm syndrome, or capture-bonding, is a psychological phenomenon described in 1973 in which hostages express empathy and sympathy and have positive feelings toward their...

US drug agency spent $237mn paying sources for free-to-obtain data – DOJ

The US Drug Enforcement Agency paid its sources, from couriers to TSA agents, nearly $250 million over five years, a recent review revealed. However,...

A Sad and Shabby Thing: Here Comes Debate #1

Donald Trump at the Republican debate at the Venetian in Las Vegas, December 15, 2015. (Photo: Ruth Fremson / The New York...

Election or Revolution? An Open Letter to the People of the United States

Robert J. Burrowes As citizens of the USA with a presidential election approaching you have a wonderful opportunity to ponder whether to participate in this...

How to Take on the Banksters

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) listens to John Stumpf, the chief executive of Wells Fargo, testify before the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban...

‘The Bodies of Prisoners Are Commodities’ – CounterSpin interview with Noelle Hanrahan on prison...

Janine Jackson interviewed Noel Hanrahan on the national prison strike for the September 16, 2016, episode of CounterSpin. This is a lightly edited transcript. Noelle...

“The Dead Cannot Make A Comeback” – Is India About To Make A Catastrophic...

Colin Todhunter Global oilseed, agribusiness and biotech corporations are engaged in a long-term attack on India's local cooking oil producers. In just 20 years, they...

What’s Behind the Latest Government Scam

“The fact is that the government, like a highwayman, says to a man: Your money, or your life. And many, if not most, taxes...

Demonize and Distract: Sanitizing Syria for the Masses  

Orlok | Shutterstock.com Summoning the Humanitarian Pretext The arch pragmatist Machiavelli once wrote that, “If you watch the ways of men, you will see that those who...

Monsanto whistleblower receives $22mn award under US federal govt program

An unnamed whistleblower responsible for exposing Monsanto’s shady deals involving Roundup products to the federal government...

America’s Aristocracy Facing Resistance from American Public Regarding Russia

Eric Zuesse, updated from strategic-culture.org The subterranean reality of U.S. foreign policy is that it serves the U.S. aristocracy, the owners of controlling blocs of...

Media Silence and the Agrochemicals Industry: The Slow Poisoning of Health and the Environment  

Colin Todhunter It’s an all too common tale of dirty deeds, shady deals and propaganda. Rosemary Mason’s recent open letter to journalists at The Guardian...

The Party’s Over

Well, the party is over and the machine has prevailed. Our attempt to revive democracy in the electoral arena failed. Still, we owe Bernie...

Former pro wrestlers sue WWE over claims of neurological damage

World Wrestling Entertainment Inc. is being sued by dozens of former professional wrestlers who claim that...

The Trump Revolution

Beating the Hillary Hate Brigades (HHB) to the punch with what appears to be the first book published about the political rise of Donald...

It’s Not the Brexit, Stupid

Just over a week ago the world was coming unglued, as enough British citizens grew a pair and spit in the face of the...

Whom do we blame for our troubles?

A natural progression has arisen 40 years after billionaires laid plans for a cultural revolution, in large part by using fake organizations of philanthropy...

Pro-GMO Spin Masquerading as Science Courtesy of “Shameful White Men of Privilege”

Colin Todhunter Unlike their predecessors, early 21st century missionaries do not come armed with bibles. They come as members of a scientific priesthood, spouting slick...

America’s One-Party Government

Eric Zuesse, originally posted at strategic-culture.org INTRODUCTION Today’s United States is a more realistic version of the type of society that George Orwell fictionally described in...

German Intelligence Service to Become Branch of U.S. CIA

Eric Zuesse (NOTE: The following news report was offered on the morning of June 7th as an exclusive, to the following newsmedia, all of whom...

False Promises, Smears and Golden Rice: Is This the Solution for Disease, Poverty and...

Colin Todhunter  The pro-GMO lobby relies on fraud, regulatory delinquency, opaque practices, smear campaigns, dirty tricks, slick PR and the debasement of science. While choosing to sideline the root causes of...

Google involved with Clinton campaign, controls information flow – Assange

American tech giant Google is closely cooperating with Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign to promote the candidate,...

America’s Corpocracy: Conspiracy Theory or Conspiracy Reality?

I was prompted to write this article when a twitter contact of mine wondered whether some of my writings about the corpocracy amounted to...

Matt Ridley’s Pro-GMO Blunders and Ignorance in the British Press

In his recent piece for The Times newspaper in the UK, Viscount Matt Ridley argues that a new report from the American National Academies of Sciences (NAS) leaves...

From the Green Revolution to GMOs: Living in the Shadow of Global Agribusiness

What can we do about the powerful transnational agribusiness companies that have captured or at the very least heavily influence regulatory bodies, research institutes, trade...

UK cybercrime prosecutions rise 34% in 1 year

The number of cyber criminals prosecuted in Britain rose by almost 34 percent in 2015 while prosecutions for white collar criminals also increased marginally,...

The Privatization of the Public Sphere

a katz | Shutterstock.com   The Republican Party is consolidating behind Donald Trump and, on May 12th, House Speaker Paul Ryan kissed the ring of the party’s presumptive...

U.S., UK, and EU, Are Now Dictatorships

Eric Zuesse, originally posted at strategic-culture.org How can it be that in virtually all of the U.S. Presidential-candidate head-to-head Democratic versus Republican polling that was done...

Monsanto and the Poisoning of Europe

This week, a Standing Committee of plant scientists from 28 member states in Europe is likely to endorse the European Food Safety Authority’s (EFSA)...

Monsanto and the Poisoning of Europe: An Open letter to the EFSA Chief Attorney...

This week, a Standing Committee of plant scientists from 28 member states in Europe is likely to endorse the European Food Safety Authority’s (EFSA)...

Glyphosate in the EU: Product Promoters Masquerading as Regulators in a “cesspool of corruption”?

On 13 April, the EU Parliament called on the European Commission to restrict certain permitted uses of the toxic herbicide glyphosate, best known in...

(Anti-) Corruption experts? Who’s who at Cameron’s post-Panama Papers transparency summit

Prime Minister David Cameron’s anti-corruption summit will bring together a bevy of political leaders, officials from the financial world and sports representatives of FIFA...

Obama: TTIP Necessary So As to Protect Megabanks From Prosecution

Eric Zuesse On May 7th, Deutsche Wirtschafts Nachrichten, or German Economic News, headlined, "USA planen mit TTIP Frontal-Angriff auf Gerichte in Europa” or “U.S. Plans Frontal Attack...
Village of Talish

A few words about the recent “four day war” in Nagorno-Karabakh

Alla Pierce A recent trip to the independent Republic of Nagorno-Karabakh with the task to amass material for Veterans Today, left me with a dual...

Crime Can Pay if It’s Big Enough

Wow, $5 billion. That’s the stunning amount Goldman Sachs has agreed to pay to settle federal criminal charges over its shameful financial scams, which helped...

Cameron Is Cornered

It’s said that there’s nothing more vicious than a wild animal that’s cornered. I’d add that there’s nothing more devious than a top corporate...

‘Great rhetoric, now act!’ Fight money laundering, anti-corruption group tells govt

Government proposals to crack down on vast sums of dirty money pulsing through the heart...

Journalism, Pro-GMO Triumphalism And Neoliberal Dogma In India

Swaminathan S Anklesaria Aiyar is a senior Indian journalist. He is also a Research Fellow at the Cato Institute in Washington. The Cato Institute has a...

Fleecing the American Taxpayer: The Profit Incentives Driving the Police State

If there is an absolute maxim by which the federal government seems to operate, it is that the American taxpayer always gets ripped off. This...

Capitalism And Global Agribusiness: From Ford To Monsanto, It’s For Your Own Good

“We must… build our own local food systems that create new rural-urban links, based on truly agroecological food production... We cannot allow Agroecology to...

Imperialism, political corruption and the real face of capitalism

The “Panama Papers” claimed its first casualty Tuesday, when Icelandic Prime Minister Sigmundur David Gunnlaugsson was forced to resign following protests by thousands of...

“Panama papers” tax evasion leak stokes political crises worldwide

Andre Damon On Sunday evening, a group of over 100 global newspapers, in collaboration with the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ), began releasing reports...

The political agenda behind the racial politics of the New York Times’ Nicholas Kristof

Via WSWS. This piece was reprinted by RINF Alternative News with permission or license. Niles Williamson On Sunday, the New York Times published an addendum by...

War: The great unmentionable in the 2016 US elections

Via WSWS. This piece was reprinted by RINF Alternative News with permission or license. The most striking feature of the 2016 US election campaign is...

Robert De Niro pulls controversial anti-vaxxer film from Tribeca Film Festival

Robert De Niro has withdrawn the film “Vaxxed: From Cover-Up to Catastrophe” from his Tribeca Film...

The Crusade in Favour of GMO: Falsehoods and Vilification will not Fool the Public

Pro-GMO campaigners often attack critics of the technology by claiming their negative views of it emanate from well-funded environmentalist groups or commercial interests in...

Honduran Government covers up involvement in murders of indigenous rights leaders

Via WSWS. This piece was reprinted by RINF Alternative News with permission or license. Andrea Lobo Human rights and indigenous activists took to the streets of...

$5trn-a-day Forex rigging probe dropped despite evidence of criminality

British prosecutors have dropped a criminal probe into the rigging of the $5trn-(£3.5trn)-a-day foreign exchange...

‘Everyone Is Not Watched Equally’

Janine Jackson interviewed Alvaro Bedoya on privacy, technology and the targets of surveillance for the March 11, 2016, CounterSpin. This is a lightly edited...

Hillary Clinton’s Destruction of Emails Was a Federal Crime

Eric Zuesse However, our laws have been written so as to protect government officials, and corporate executives, if and when they are prosecuted for it....

New Zealand: Anti-TPP protests promote Maori nationalism

Via WSWS. This piece was reprinted by RINF Alternative News with permission or license. Tom Peters The signing of the Trans-Pacific Partnership in New Zealand last...

The Financial System Is A Larger Threat Than Terrorism

Paul Craig Roberts (RINF) - In the 21st century Americans have been distracted by the hyper-expensive “war on terror.” Trillions of dollars have been added...

Attempt to form PSOE-Citizens government coalition in Spain collapses

Via WSWS. This piece was reprinted by RINF Alternative News with permission or license. Paul Mitchell The attempt by Socialist Party (PSOE) leader Pedro Sánchez to...

For an active boycott of the Brexit referendum!

Via WSWS. This piece was reprinted by RINF Alternative News with permission or license. For an active boycott of the Brexit referendum! Statement of the Socialist...

Breaking the Backbone of Indian Society: The Small Farmer

This is an updated and amended version of an article originally published in August 2015 which includes new information and new links to journal...

Billionaire-Owned Observer Whines About Democratization of Media in 2016’s Worst Op-ed

New York Observer‘s depiction of the “atypical candidate” Bernie Sanders. (image: DonkeyHotey) Second only to glib equivalencies between Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders, 2016’s most...

Pro-GMO Activism in India: Journalism gives way to Spin, Smears and Falsehoods 

In a recent piece for the magazine Swarajya (an online and print publication based in India​), its national affairs editor, Surajit Dasgupta, makes it clear that he has...

Trojan Horse Arguments and the GMO Issue: Indian Food and Agriculture Under Attack

In 2013, India’s former Agriculture Minister Sharad Pawar accused US companies of derailing the nation’s oilseeds production programme. Similar claims had been made before....

Or your money back: Monsanto execs return $4mn in bonuses after SEC settlement

Two Monsanto executives returned their lavish bonuses, amounting to nearly $4 million, after the agribusiness giant agreed to pay federal regulators $80 million as...

‘Artful Smear’ Attack Backfires as Clinton Accused of Denying Impact of Big Money

'Clinton, like our Supreme Court, ignores thousands of years of human experience in how money corrupts politics.' Lauren McCauley Hillary Clinton is under fire for defending...

Organic Agriculture, Capitalism and the Parallel World of the Pro-GMO Evangelist

Consider that India had for generations sustained one of the highest densities of population on earth, without any chemical fertilisers, pesticides, exotic dwarf strains...

Hillary Is the Candidate of the War Machine

Jeffrey D. Sachs There's no doubt that Hillary is the candidate of Wall Street. Even more dangerous, though, is that she is the candidate of...

“Lies, Lies and More Lies” – GMOs, Poisoned Agriculture and Toxic Rants

Have you ever read all of those pro-GMO scientists-cum-lobbyists professing their love of science? They are always talking about how science must prevail over...

A Balanced View of the Obama Presidency

Eric Zuesse, originally posted at strategic-culture.org Barack Obama’s Presidency turns out to have been what neither his supporters nor his opponents expected. A balanced historical...

Buddy, Can You Spare a Dime for a CEO?

Wall Street buccaneer Carl Icahn has pocketed billions for his himself over the years. But now he says he’s passionate about helping others. In particular,...

Taiwan bans GMOs from school lunches… mandates GMO labeling nationwide… throws down gauntlet on...

Even as the fascist, corrupt U.S. government and its regulators (FDA and USDA) actively conspire with the biotech industry to poison Americans with genetically...

How America’s Corrupt Press Are Destroying the Country

Eric Zuesse Even the best of America’s major mainstream and alternative-news media understate enormously the degree to which America’s government is corrupt; and, as a...

America Is Being Destroyed By Problems That Are Unaddressed – Paul Craig Roberts

Paul Craig Roberts (RINF) - One hundred years ago European civilization, as it had been...

For-Profit Colleges Are Scandal Machines

The nation’s for-profit, private college industry is a study in horror. Start with the fact that it actually calls itself an “industry.” Excuse me, but...

The GMO Issue: False Claims, Pseudo-Analysis And A Politically Motivated Agenda

Critics of GM promote pseudo-science, make false claims based on ignorance and are driven by politically motivated ideology. The actions of these affluent elitists...

Seven Wrinkles in the Paris Climate Deal

(Photo: Takver / Flickr) The headlines from the Paris climate talks tell an inspiring story. Agence France-Presse reported an outbreak of “euphoria” as the international...

Credulous Reporting of Deceptive Propaganda Made Planned Parenthood Attack Inevitable

James O’Keefe in the pimp get-up he did not wear when he went in to smear ACORN. (image: Fox News) The attack on Planned Parenthood...

The Toxic Agriculture of Monsanto and Big Agribusiness vs Agroecology Rooted in Communities and...

  "We are being far too kind to industrialised agriculture. The private sector has endorsed it, but it has failed to feed the world, it...

Chicago police brutality and the Democratic Party

Jerry White There are some events that starkly expose the reality of class relations and class rule in the United States. Such is the case...

Top Democrat in New York legislature convicted of corruption on all counts

By Philip Guelpa Democrat Sheldon Silver, the former Speaker of the New York State Assembly, was convicted Monday on all seven charges of corruption brought before...

Ford execs, Wall Street investors gloat over new UAW contract

By Jerry White In a conference call with Wall Street investors Monday morning, Ford CEO Mark Fields and other company executives boasted that the new four-year...

America’s Awesome Corruption – Especially in the Military

Eric Zuesse, originally posted at strategic-culture.org On November 16th, the great journalist on international strategic and military issues, F. William Engdahl, headlined at journal-neo, “Do We...

‘You No Longer Have Your Constitutional Right to Civil Jury Trial’ – CounterSpin interview...

CounterSpin interview with Joanne Doroshow on forced arbitrationJanine Jackson interviewed Joanne Doroshow about the forced arbitration for the November 6 CounterSpin. This is a...

Who Needs Gates And Monsanto? Confronting Hunger, Poverty and Climate Change: “Tremendous Success” of...

It is essential that we get off the chemical treadmill that the modern industrial urban-centric food and agriculture system is based on. It is...

Africa is the Western world’s testing ground for microchip implants, weaponized viruses and experimental...

The African continent continues to be used by Western powers as a testing ground for some pretty heinous things, the latest of which appears...

Poisoned Agriculture: Depopulation and Human Extinction’

There is a global depopulation agenda. The plan is to remove the ‘undesirables’, ‘the poor’ and others deemed to be ‘unworthy’ and a drain...

Strong Links between Glyphosate and a Multitude of Cancers that are “reaching epidemic proportions”:...

Glyphosate is the active ingredient in the herbicide Roundup. The use of glyphosate is widespread throughout Europe. However, on 20 March the World Health Organisation’s...

Rice, wheat, mustard … India drives forward first GMO crops under veil of secrecy

A secret application has been made to India's GEAC (Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee) for a new variety of GMO mustard to be released for...

Seeds of Corruption: “Unneeded, Unwanted and Unsafe,” the Case of Genetically Modified Mustard in...

In India, genetically modified (GM) mustard is edging closer to becoming the first officially approved GM food crop to be placed on the commercial...

Obama’s “60 Minutes” interview and the crisis of US policy in Syria

By Barry Grey In an extraordinary interview Sunday evening on CBS News’ “60 Minutes” program, President Barack Obama sought to defend his policy in Syria against...

“Marketplace” Program, from ‘Nonprofit’ NPR, Pumps Fascism

Eric Zuesse Here’s a pretty blatant example: On October 7th, U.S. National Public Radio’s (NPR’s) “Marketplace’ show headlined glowingly "How the TPP will drive domestic reform in Asia,” and...

The Western Alliance Is Crumbling

EU Is Abandoning U.S. on Overthrowing Assad Obama Cannot Defeat Assad without EU’s Help EU Also Rejects Obama’s TTIP & TISA Demands Obama’s Presidential ‘Legacy’ Heads to...

Obama v. Putin: Their Debate on Crimea

The Source of the ‘New Cold War’: The Basic Disagreement Between Obama and Putin Eric Zuesse, originally posted at strategic-culture.org INTRODUCTION The basic disagreement between U.S. President...

Modi and Monsanto: A Wake Up Call For India

Immediately prior to Narendra Modi being elected India’s PM last year, there were calls from some quarters for him to usher in a Thatcherite-style...

America’s News Is Heavily Censored

Eric Zuesse, originally posted at strategic-culture.org On 7 September 2002, U.S. President George W. Bush blatantly lied to concoct a “new report” by the IAEA...

Monsanto’s ‘Hand of God’: Planned Obsolescence of the Indian Farmer 

The mantra of global agribusiness companies is that they care about farmers. They also really care about humanity and want to help to feed...

Rupert Murdoch’s Fox News Says Refugee Crisis Is Putin’s Scheme. The Backstory

Eric Zuesse The show aired on September 5th, and interviewed their contracted expert: http://video.foxnews.com/v/4466018186001/european-union-leaders-struggle-to-deal-with-migrant-crisis/?#sp=show-clips https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=2&v=8-RyOaFwcEw TRANSCRIPT, starting at 4:45: 4:45, Interviewer: The other place that nobody seems to want to...

Altered Genes, Twisted Truth: Monsanto’s Silence is Deafening 

In his book ‘Altered Genes,Twisted Truths’, US public interest attorney Steven Druker exposed the fraudulent practices and deceptions that led to the commercialisation of GM food...

Insider trading ring netted $100 mil by hacking press releases – feds

Federal prosecutors have charged nine people in an insider trading ring that lifted information from corporate press releases before they were made public. The...

Hypnotic Trance in Delhi: Monsanto, GMOs and the Looting of India’s Agriculture

We are about to enter August. And that's a special month in India. Each year, on the 15th, the country commemorates the anniversary of independence...

UK PM Cameron explains .01% doctrine: ‘Destroy nation-states to invent our own barbaric realm’

Reposted with permission of Washingtonsblog by Carl Herman hat tips: Nafeez Ahmed and Tony Gosling On July 20, 2015, UK Prime Minister David Cameron delivered a major speech...

‘You Can Legally Bribe a Government Official’ – CounterSpin interview with Lee Fang on...

Janine Jackson interviewed investigative reporter Lee Fang about Washington’s revolving door for the July 24 CounterSpin. This is a lightly edited transcript. Lee Fang (image: David...

GM officials unlikely to face criminal charges for coverup of deadly defects

By Shannon Jones Despite overwhelming evidence of a cover-up, General Motors officials are unlikely to face criminal charges in relation to an ignition defect tied to...

Agency to Enslave Greeks Is Established

Eric Zuesse Late on Thursday, July 16th, German Economic News headlined “Greece: Debt Restructuring Through the Back Door,” and reported that, “The majority of Greece’s...

7/7 led to wars abroad and loss of freedoms at home… but do we...

For the London media 7/7 is 'done and dusted', but for Tony Gosling, who helped cover the IRA London bombing campaign for the BBC,...

After 6-Year Tenure Not Prosecuting Banks, Eric Holder Returns ‘Home’ to Defend Them

Critics say new position of former attorney general, known for protecting big banks, is a dramatic example of the revolving door Sarah Lazare (Common Dreams) - Former...

Capture, Smear, Contaminate: The Politics Of GMOs

When rich companies with politically-connected lobbyists and seats on public bodies bend policies for their own ends, we are in serious trouble. It is...

Food Security: a Hostage to Wall Street

In October of last year, World Food Day celebrated ‘Family Farming: Feeding the world, caring for the earth’. According to the UN Food and...

Percentage of Health-Uninsureds in U.S. Rises by 1.7%

Since Obama First Promised to Lower It by 100% Eric Zuesse On 23 June 2015, Bloomberg news bannered "Uninsured Rate Falls to Lowest Since Obamacare Implementation” and reported...

How Obama’s ‘Trade’ Deals Are Designed to End Democracy

Eric Zuesse U.S. President Barack Obama has for years been negotiating with European and Asian nations – but excluding Russia and China, since he is...

The Two Contending Visions of World Government

The Origin & Broader Context of Obama’s ‘Trade’ Deals Eric Zuesse U.S. President Barack Obama’s proposed ‘Trade’ deals are actually about whether the world is heading...

BBC Panorama Programme: Promoting GMO and Cultivating Ignorance

  "There is no global or regional shortage of food. There never has been and nor is there ever likely to be. India has a...

What’s Wrong with the Obama Administration’s Trade-Deal Arguments

Eric Zuesse Here is from the June 3rd article at the pro-trade-deals Americas Society & Council of the Americas, "Summary: The Trans-Pacific Partnership - What's at...

Parasitism and the economic crisis

(WSWS) - The US Commerce Department released figures Friday showing that the US economy contracted sharply, shrinking at an annualized rate of 0.7 percent in...

GMOs – Altered Genes, Twisted Truth: The Silence From The Royal Society Is Deafening

In his recent book ‘Altered Genes,Twisted Truths’, US public interest attorney Steven Druker exposes the fraudulent practices and deceptions that led to the commercialisation...

Token fines for banks caught rigging foreign exchange markets

By Andre Damon and Barry Grey (WSWS) - In yet another wrist-slap settlement for bankers involved in criminality on a massive scale, the US government on Wednesday...

Los Angeles City Council moves to raise minimum wage

By Adam McLean and Jerry White (WSWS) - In a 14-1 vote Tuesday, the Los Angeles City Council voted to draft an ordinance to raise the city’s...

Steve Forbes Put Me on His Spam List After I Submitted This Article to...

How Congressional Republicans Lie to Approve Obama’s Trade Deals Eric Zuesse Obama’s trade-deals – especially TPP with Asia, and TTIP with Europe – are so vicious...

Wall Street Titans Who Crashed Global Economy in 2008 Go Big for TPP

As billionaire class and financial elites push corporate-friendly pact, new data shows empty promises and 'job-killing' reality of previous agreements (Common Dreams) - Even as...

How the Media Misrepresent ‘Fast Track,’ TPP, and TTIP

Eric Zuesse Both conservative and liberal ‘news’ media misrepresent U.S. President Barack Obama’s proposed international trade-deals as if they were about only such things as...

Unmasking The GMO Humanitarian Narrative

Genetically modified (GM) crops are going to feed the world. Not only that, supporters of GM technology say it will produce better yields than...

‘Expose the Slaveholders’: Activists Disrupt For-Profit Prison Corp. Meeting

Nadia Prupis RINF Alternative News As the for-profit prison corporation GEO Group held its annual shareholder meeting in Boca Raton, Florida on Wednesday, human rights organizations...

The Era of Wealthy Entitlement

  Paul Buchheit RINF Alternative News Because of irresponsible reporting by conservative sources, many Americans have been led to believe that social programs are bankrupting our nation....

Who Needs Neil Young When We’ve Got Monsanto?

Neil Young is reportedly about to release a new album called, ‘The Monsanto Years’. Don’t expect the lyrics to be music to the ears...

Are Leading Economists Corrupt, or Just Mind-Blowingly Ignorant?

Eric Zuesse Conservative economists favor Republican candidates because it’s the way for them to rise in power themselves, but what about ‘progressive’ economists: are they...

How America’s Aristocracy Extends Its Global Control

Eric Zuesse As has been well documented even by the BBC, in their 1992 classic documentary about the CIA’s (still-ongoing) Gladio Operation, America’s CIA basically took...

Globalization: Global Agribusiness Hammering Away At The Foundations Of Indian Society


RINF, Countercurrents, Global Research

https://twitter.com/colin_todhunter

According to the World Bank in the nineties, it was expected (and hoped) that some 400 million people in Indian agriculture would be moving out of the sector by 2015. To help them on their way, farming had to be made financially non-viable and policies formulated to facilitate the process.

Food and trade policy analyst Devinder Sharma describes the situation: 

“India is on fast track to bring agriculture under corporate control... Amending the existing laws on land acquisition, water resources, seed, fertilizer, pesticides and food processing, the government is in overdrive to usher in contract farming and encourage organized retail. This is exactly as per the advice of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund as well as the international financial institutes.” 

He notes that in its 2008 World Development Report, the World Bank wanted India to hasten the process by accelerating land acquisitions and launching a network of training institutes to train younger people in rural areas so as to make them eligible for industrial work. This is now happening, especially the highly contentious push to facilitate private corporations' access to land, which has been sparking mass protests across the country. 

Sharma describes how US subsidies and global trade policies work to benefit hugely wealthy agribusiness corporations, while serving to cripple the agricultural sectors of poorer countries. The massive subsidies doled out by the US to its giant agribusiness companies lower global produce prices and buck markets in favour of Washington. The US has also included non-trade barriers (such as various health standards and regulations) to keep agricultural imports out. At the same time, India has opened its markets and support for its own farmers is being cut. Farmers are thus being left to the vagaries of a global market slanted in favour of US interests.

As India's farmers face increasing financial distress and foreign private players try to move in to secure land and the seed, food processing and food retail sectors, what is happening courtesy of compliant politicians is tantamount to cannibalizing the country at the behest of foreign interests. 

Western agribusiness has already gained an influential foothold in India and many of the country’s national public bodies. Along with US food processing giants Cargill and Archer Daniels Midland, agribusiness aims to recast the rural economy (and thus Indian society, given that hundreds of millions depend on it for a living) according to its own needs. This would mean eventually moving over 600 million (never mind the previously mentioned figure of 400 million) who depend on agriculture and local food processing activities into urban areas.

Monsanto already dominates the cotton industry in the country and is increasingly shaping agri-policy and the knowledge paradigm by funding agricultural research in public universities and institutes (see here). Moreover, public regulatory bodies are now severely compromised and riddled with conflicts ofinterest where decision-making over GMOs are concerned. 

But this is the nature of the 'globalization' agenda: the goal is to ‘capture’ and ‘exploit’ foreign markets and their policy/regulatory bodies. The culture of neoliberalism is exemplified by APCO Worldwide, a major ‘global communications, stakeholder engagement and business strategy’ company that Narendra Modi has been associated with in the past. In APCO’s India Brochure, there is the claim that India’s resilience in weathering the global downturn and financial crisis has made governments, policy-makers, economists, corporate houses and fund managers believe that India can play a significant role in the recovery of the global economy in the months and years ahead. APCO describes India as a trillion dollar market.

No mention of ordinary people or poor farmers. The focus is on profit, funds and money because for the readers of such documents all of this constitutes ‘growth’ – a positive sounding notion sold to the masses that in reality means corporate profit. It forms part of an ideology that attempts to disguise the nature of a system that has produced austerity, disempowerment and increasing hardship for the bulk of the population and the concentration of ever more wealth and power in the hands of the few who now dictate policies to nation states.

Take a brief look at what happened in Britain when the neoliberal globalization strategy took hold there. As with Modi, Margaret Thatcher was a handmaiden to rich interests.

During the eighties, the Thatcher government set the wheels in motion to shut down the coal mining industry. The outcome destroyed communities across the country, and they have never recovered. Crime-ridden, drug-ridden and shells of their former selves, these towns and villages and the people in them were thrown onto the scrapheap. The industry was killed because it was deemed ‘uneconomical'. And yet it now costs more to keep a person on the dole than it would to employ them at the minimum wage, the country imports coal at a higher cost than it would to have kept the pits open and Britain has to engage in costly illegal wars to secure its oil and gas energy needs, which coal could largely provide (Britain has over 1,000 years of coal supply in the ground). In fact, before 1970, Britain got all its gas from its own coal.

The economics just do not add up. Former miners’ leader Arthur Scargill fought to save the mining industry and now asks where is the sense in all of this (see thisthis and this).   

The same happened across the manufacturing sector, from steel to engineering to shipbuilding. And a similar process occurred in the fishery and agriculture sectors. In 2010, there were over eight million unemployed (over 21 percent of the workforce), despite what the official figures said.

Britain decided to financialize its economy and move people out of manufacturing to integrate with a neoliberal globalized world order. Ordinary people’s livelihoods were sacrificed and sold to the lowest bidder abroad and the real economy was hollowed out for the benefit of giant corporations who now have near-monopolies in their respective sectors and record massive profits. People were promised a new service-based economy. Not enough jobs materialized or when they did many soon moved to cheap labour economies or they were automated. 

Although it’s a vastly different country, if we look at agriculture in India, a similar trend is seen. Almost 300,000 farmers have taken their lives in India since 1997 and many more are experiencing economic distress or have left farming as a result of debt, a shift to cash crops and economic ‘liberalization’.

In a recent TV interview, Devinder Sharma highlighted the plight of agriculture:

“Agriculture has been systematically killed over the last few decades… the World Bank and big business have given the message that this is the only way to grow economically… Sixty percent of the population lives in the villages or in the rural areas and is involved in agriculture, and less than two percent of the annual budget goes to agriculture… When you are not investing in agriculture, you think it is... not performing. You are not wanting it to perform... Leave it to the vagaries or the tyranny of the markets… agriculture has disappeared from the economic radar screen of the country… 70 percent of the population is being completely ignored…”

As policy makers glorify ‘business entrepreneurship’ and ‘wealth creation’ and acquiesce to hugely wealthy individuals and their corporations, it largely goes unrecognized that farmers have always been imbued with the spirit of entrepreneurship and have been creating food wealth for centuries. They have been innovators, natural resource stewards, seed savers and hybridization experts. But they are now fodder to be sacrificed on the altar of US petro-chemical agribusiness interests.

In his interview, Devinder Sharma went on to state that despite the tax breaks and the raft of policies that favour industry over agriculture, industry has failed to deliver; but despite the gross under-investment in agriculture, it still manages to deliver bumper harvests year after year:

“In the last 10 years, we had 36 lakh crore going to the corporates by way of tax exemptions... They just created 1.5 crore jobs in the last ten years. Where are the exports? … The only sector that has performed very well in this country is agriculture... Why do you want to move the population... Why can’t India have its own thinking? Why do we have to go with Harvard or Oxford economists who tell us this?” (36 lakh crore is 36 trillion; 1.5 crore is 15 million)

It all begs the question: where are the jobs going to come from to cater for hundreds of millions of former agricultural workers or those whose livelihoods will be destroyed as transnational corporations move in and seek to capitalize industries that currently employ tens of millions (if not hundreds of millions)?

The genuine wealth creators, the farmers, are being sold out to corporate interests whose only concern is to how best loot the economy. As they do so, they churn out in unison with their politician puppets the mantra of it all being in the ‘national interest’ and constituting some kind of ‘economic miracle’. And those who protest are attacked and marginalised. In Britain during the eighties, it was a similar situation. Workers' representatives portrayed as the 'enemy within'. 

Through various policies, underinvestment and general neglect, farmers are being set up to financially fail. However, it is corporate-industrial India which has failed to deliver in terms of boosting exports or creating jobs, despite the massive hand outs and tax exemptions given to it (see this and this). The number of jobs created in India between 2005 and 2010 was 2.7 million (the years of high GDP growth). According to International Business Times, 15 million enter the workforce every year (see here).

Again, this too is a global phenomenon.

Corporate-industrial India is the beneficiary of a huge global con-trick: subsidies to the public sector or to the poor are portrayed as a drain on the economy, while the genuinely massive drain of taxpayer-funded corporate dole, tax breaks, bail outs and tax avoidance/evasion are afforded scant attention. Through slick doublespeak, all of this becomes redefined necessary for creating jobs or fueling ‘growth’. The only growth is in massive profits and inequalities, coupled with unemployment, low pay, the erosion of welfare and a further race to the bottom as a result of secretive trade agreements like the TTIP.

India is still a nation of farmers. Around two thirds of the population in some way rely on agriculture for a living. Despite the sector’s woeful neglect in favour of a heavily subsidized and government-supported but poorly performing industrial sector, agriculture remains the backbone of Indian society.

Notwithstanding the threat to food security, livelihoods and well-being, the type of unsustainable corporate-controlled globalized industrial agriculture being pushed through in India leads to bad food, bad soil, bad or no waterbad health, stagnant or falling yields and ultimately an agrarian crisis. It involves the liberal use of cancer-causing pesticides and the possible introduction of health-damaging but highly profitable GMOs.

There was a famous phrase used in the eighties in Britain by the former Prime Minister Harold McMillan. He accused the Thatcher administration of 'selling the family silver' with its privatization policies and the auction of public assets that ordinary people had strived to build over many decades of dedicated labour. 

As Modi presses through with his strident neoliberal agenda and seeks to further privatize India's agricultural heritage, it begs the question: is it not tantamount to turning in on yourself and destroying the home in which you live? 

Globalization – Global Agribusiness Hammering Away At The Foundations Of Indian Society 

According to the World Bank in the nineties, it was expected (and hoped) that some 400 million people in Indian agriculture would be moving...

Chevron Whistleblower Leaks ‘Smoking Gun’ in Case of Ecuadorian Oil Spill

Videos sent to Amazon Watch described as 'a true treasure trove of Chevron misdeeds and corporate malfeasance' Lauren McCauley In what is being described as "smoking...

4 Ways That Corporations Owe Us Big Time

Paul Buchheit The distorted belief that wealthy individuals and corporations are job creators has led to sizeable business subsidies and tax breaks. The biggest giveaway is...

The Great GMO Legitimation Crisis

Author of ‘Altered Genes, Twisted Truth’ Steven Druker recently talked of how back in the seventies a group of molecular biologists formed part of...

The Great GMO Legitimation Crisis

RINF, The 4th Media, Global Research, Countercurrents, The Nation (Sri Lankan newspaper), The Ecologist, CounterPunch

Author of ‘Altered Genes, Twisted Truth’ Steven Druker recently talked of how back in the seventies a group of molecular biologists formed part of a scientific elite that sought to allay fears about genetic engineering by putting a positive spin on it. At the same time, critics of this emerging technology were increasingly depicted as being little more than non-scientists who expressed ignorant but well-meaning concerns about science and genetic engineering.

This continues today, but the attacks on critics are becoming more vicious. Former British Environment Minister Owen Paterson recently attacked critics of GMOs with a scathing speech that described them as a self-serving, elitist “green blob” that was condemning “billions” to misery. Professor Anthony Trewavas has continued this theme by stating:

Greenpeace notably decides its opinions must prevail regardless of others, so it arrogates to itself the right to tear up and destroy things it doesn’t like. That is absolutely typical of people who are unable to convince others by debate and discussion and in the last century such attitudes, amplified obviously, ended up killing people that others did not like. But the same personality type the authoritarian, ‘do as I tell you’, was at the root of it all. Such groups therefore sit uneasily with countries that are democracies.”

According to this, critics of GMOs possess authoritarian personality types, are ignorant of science and unable to convince people of their arguments and thus resort to violence. 

Part of the pro-GMO narrative also involves a good deal of glib talk about democracy. In an open letter to me, Anthony Trewavas says:

“It would be nice if you could say you are a democrat and believe that argument is better than destruction but argument that deals with all the facts and does not select out of those to construct a misleading programme. Misleading selection of limited information is causing considerable problems in various parts of the world that leads some into very violent behaviour, particularly in religious belief. I am sure you agree that this is not a good way forward… Whatever their [farmers’] choice is… they must be allowed to make that decision… That is the nature of every democracy that I hope all will finally live under?”

Pro-GMO scientists have every right to speak on psychology, politics and democracy. However, let a non-scientist criticise GMOs and they are accused of self-serving elitism or ignorance. Indeed, let even a scientist produce scientific evidence that runs counter to the industry-led science and he or she is smeared and attacked.

Let a respected academically qualified political scientist, trade policy analyst or social scientist whose views are in some way critical of GMOs and the corporations promoting them express a coherent viewpoint supported by evidence from their specific discipline and they are attacked for being little more than ideologues with an agenda, or their evidence or sources are described as ‘biased’. Any analysis of the role of the IMF, World Bank and WTO and their part in restructuring agriculture in poor nations or devising policies to favour Western agribusiness is suddenly to be side lined in favour of a narrow focus on ‘science’, which the masses and ideologues could not possibly comprehend; by implication, they should therefore defer to (pro-GMO) scientists for the necessary information.

The pro-GMO lobby talks about choice, democracy and the alleged violence of certain environmental groups but says nothing about the structural violence waged on rural communities resulting from IMF/World Bank strings-attached loans, the undermining of global food security as a result of Wall Street commodity and land speculators, the crushing effects of trade rules on poorer regions or the devastating impacts of GMOs in regions likeSouthAmerica. To discuss such things is political and thus 'ideological' and is therefore not up for discussion it seems.

Much easier to try to focus on ‘the science’ and simply mouth platitudes about democracy and freedom of choice while saying nothing about how both been captured or debased by powerful interests, including agribusiness. By attempting not to appear to be ideological or political, such people are attempting to depoliticise and thus disguise the highly political status quo whereby powerful corporations (and some bogus notion of a 'free market') are left unchallenged to shape agriculture as they see fit:

“Anyone who’s seen the recent virally circulated Venn diagrams of the personnel overlap between Monsanto and USDA personnel, or Pfizer and FDA, will immediately know what I’m talking about… A model of capitalism in which the commanding heights of the economy are an interlocking directorate of large corporations and government agencies, a major share of the total operating costs of the dominant firms are socialized (and profits privatized, of course), and “intellectual property” protectionism and other regulatory cartels allow bureaucratic corporate dinosaurs… to operate profitably without fear of competition." Kevin Carson, Center for a Stateless Society. 

If certain politicians or scientists and the companies they support really do want to ‘feed the world’ and are concerned with poverty and hunger, they should forget about GMOs and focus their attention elsewhere: not least on how the ‘free market’ system that they cherish so much causes hunger and poverty, whether for example through food commodity speculation (see earlier link) by powerful banking interests or a US foreign policy that has for decades used agriculture to trap nations into subservience.

Rather than have the public focus on such things, such people try to mislead and divert attention away from these things with puerile notions of authoritarian personality types who reject some illusory notion of open debate, free choice and democracy.  

Failure is us

Even with this power and political influence at its disposal, the GMO agritech industry is far from being a success.  Much of its profits actually derive from failure: for example, Andrew Kimbrell notes that after having chosen to ignore science, the industry’s failing inputs are now to be replaced with more destined-to-fail and ever-stronger poisonous inputs. The legacy of poisoned environments and ecological devastation is for someone else to deal with. In his book, Steven Druker has shown that from very early on the US government has colluded with the GMO agritech sector to set a 'technical fix-failure-technical fix' merry-go-round in motion.

This system is designed to stumble from one crisis to the next, all the while hiding behind the banners of ‘innovation’ or ‘research and development’. But it’s all good business. And that’s all that really matters to the industry. 

There’s always good PR ground to be made from blaming critics for being ‘anti-science’ and money to be made from a continuous state of crisis management (‘innovation’ and bombarding farmers with a never-ending stream of new technologies and inputs).  Part of the great con-trick is that it attempts to pass off its endless crises and failures as brilliant successes.

For many promoters of the GMO cause, it is a case of not even wanting to understand alternative approaches or the devastating impacts of GMOs when their lavish salary or consultancy fees depend on them not wanting to understand any of it.

When it comes to labelling unsafe and untested GM food in the US, the pro-GMO lobby grasps at straws by saying too much information confuses the public or sends out the wrong message

When it says sound science should underpin the GMO issue, it does everything it can to circumvent any science that threatens its interests.

When it says its critics have a political agenda, it side lines debates on how it hijacks international and national policy making bodies and regulatory agencies.

When it talks about elite, affluent environmentalists robbing food from the bellies of the poor, its private companies are owned by people who form part of a privileged class that seek to turn their vested interests into policy proscriptions for the rest of us.

The pro-GMO lobby engages in the fraudulent notion that it knows what is best for humanity. Co-opting public institutions and using science as an ideology, it indulges in an arrogant form of exceptionalism.

The world does not need GMO food or crops, especially those which have not been proven safe or whose benefits are questionable to say the least. There are alternative ways to boost food production if or when there is a need to. There are other (existing) ways to tackle the impacts of volatile climates. 

However, the alternatives are being squeezed out as big agritech and its captured policy/regulatory bodies place emphasis on proprietary products, not least GMOs and chemical inputs. 

The pro-GMO lobby has a crisis of legitimation. No amount of twisted truths or altered genes, expensive PR or attacks on its critics can disguise this.

Science, Democracy and Choice: Responding To A Pro-GMO Scientist

Writer and researcher Colin Todhunter takes apart the arguments of pro-GMO lobbyist Anthony Trewavas below. There’s more about Trewavas here. The following is in response...

Science, Democracy And Choice: A Response To Professor Tony Trewavas’s Open Letter

The following is in response to an open letter published on the AgBioWorld Facebook page by Professor Tony Trewavas of Edinburgh University. This response is also posted on the GM Watch, Global Research, Countercurrents and RINF websites. 

Tony Trewavais wrote his letter after reading my article ‘So You Want to Help Africa Mr Paterson? Then Stop Promoting Ideology and Falsehoods to Push GMOs’. The article originally appeared on a number of prominent websites. On Global Research, the piece appeared under a different title ‘The Propaganda Campaign in support of GMOs’ (read here).

Professor Trewavas is a prominent supporter of GMOs in Britain. His original letter is provided in full below my response.

Dear Professor Trewavas

I find your response to my piece disappointing. You failed to address many of the issues I discussed (not least that the world can feed itself without GMOs and that hunger and poverty are due to structural factors and not a lack of food, which GMOs have merely exacerbated) and have decided to indulge in the same type of smear-scare tactics that Owen Paterson employed in his Pretoria speech.

You forward the baseless assertions that GMOs are safe, even though there has not been one long-term epidemiological study conducted to show this.

While condemning Greenpeace and other groups for somehow being authoritarian and anti-choice, you say nothing about agribusiness corporations whose financial clout has brought them political influence that allows them to exert huge control over the WTO and capture regulatory bodies and public research institutions. These corporations have had a key role in driving trade policies from India to Europe, not least in terms of the secretive Knowledge Initiative on Agriculture and the world’s largest secretive, pro-corporate trade deal, the proposed TTIP. 

Where is the choice and democracy here? 

You have nothing to say on that but proceed to lecture me on the virtues of choice and democracy.

In your opening paragraph alone, you make four fallacious assertions.

First of all, I did not say GMOs would be a disaster for "any" farmer. In India’s Punjab state, for example, some farmers have done quite well from the introduction of petrochemical farming (‘green revolution’). But water tables are falling drastically, pesticides have contaminated the water supply, there is a big cancer problem and many farmers are experiencing economic distress. In Punjab, this form of agriculture is unsustainable. There is now an agrarian crisis and it is a health, environmental and social disaster. My point is that GMOs would similarly be bad for agriculture in general and would have a systemic, detrimental impact on the environment and human health.

Second, you claim that I fear GMOs will not be a disaster for African farmers but a success. Not true. You have ignored the fact that a number of GMO projects in Africa to date have indeed been failures and in my article I provided a link to a report to highlight this (which you go on to conveniently dismiss as a ‘biased’ source).  

Third, you say that the word ‘choice’ is conspicuously absent from my article. Any objective reader would appreciate that the concept is central to it, not least where I discuss the ‘choices’ imposed on Ethiopia via the West’s ‘structural adjustment’ of agriculture (which I refer to at the end of the article). That was not a case of farmers ‘choosing’ to restructure their agriculture, but a case of policies being forced on them at a macro policy level. And this is one of the issues that I have with GMOs.

Although you conveniently do not mention that part of my piece, Michel Chossudovsky’s analysis takes account of the way by which agribusiness conglomerates can and do set rules at the WTO, manipulate market forces and restructure agriculture in foreign countries for their own ends. That is very much related to ‘choice’ and its denial. You talk a great deal about ‘democracy’ but fail to address how this situation fits with your ideas of giving choice to farmers and not imposing authoritarian agendas on people.

You say I should buy a farm and exert my choice to farm as I wish. Talk about exercising such a choice to the people in South America who Helena Paul wrote about (described in my piece). They are being driven out as agribusiness and the planting of GMOs (mainly for export) takes hold. She describes this as ecocide and genocide. Tell it to the peasant farmers who are being forced from their lands by speculators and corporations as described by reports by GRAIN and the Oakland Institute last year. These are the people who feed 80 percent of the ‘developing world’, without GM technology, yet are being squeezed out. Where is choice and democracy?

Certain words are used cheaply by some.

The issue of choice not only concerns the options made available to people, but those which have been closed off. Owen Paterson’s claims that “primitive, inefficient” farming techniques would condemn “billions” to hunger, poverty and underdevelopment is ridiculous. He engages in hyperbole in order to denigrate credible alternatives that are forwarded by the groups he is attacking and thus trying to deny those alternatives.

Fourth, nowhere do I say that only agroecological farming should be implemented to feed the world, as you claim I do. However, there are many studies and official reports that demonstrate the efficacy of organic and agroecological approaches that are well publicised. In my article, I referred to some of these studies and reports. But rather than regurgitating references, I would say that no matter what data is presented, certain people seek to marginalise agroecological approaches and prefer to focus on external input intensive ‘solutions' and proprietary technologies, such as GMOs.
I find it strange that supporters of GMOs talk so much about choice when the GMO biotech industry has spent $100 million in the US to deny choice by preventing labelling of GM food.

Where is the choice for the farmer who uses non-GM crops but has his field contaminated by GMOs? Where was the choice when parts of the US wheat crop were contaminated as a result of open-field trials or when contamination took place because of Liberty Link 601? Where is the choice in West Bengal where GMOs from Bangladesh have been found?

Where is the choice for farmers when the only ones that end up on the market are company seeds, or where thousands of varieties have been reduced to a relative handful?

In my piece, Daniel Maingi and Mariam Mayet mentioned the squeezing out of alternatives as a result of the impact of Western agribusiness in Africa. Are they to be dismissed as ‘biased’ sources too?

You say the following: 

“Most objectors in this area have a political programme not a scientific one but they like to bend science to their own political point of view. Science is by its nature not politics or political propaganda or anything like it. It deals with evidence not superstition, or political or social philosophies. If you have a political programme then please stop trying to justify it by claiming it has scientific support; it does not.”

First of all, I provided valid references which referred to peer-reviewed science in the article (and have again below), but all you can say is that my ‘political programme’ has “no scientific support”. I say to you: please stop justifying your own pro-GMO stance by smearing critics and rejecting any evidence because it does not fit your own agenda. Please do not talk about ‘choice’ and ‘democracy’ when your own agenda is to support powerful corporations who via the distortion of science and the capture of strategic national and international bodies deny choice.

Your view of science is either deliberately misleading or simply naïve. And for someone in your position, I find it difficult to believe it could be the latter. From acquiring funding and formulating the questions to be addressed, to conducting research, interpreting findings and peer review, politics are present in science throughout. The manufacture of scientific knowledge involves a process driven by various sociological, methodological and epistemological conflicts and compromises, both inside the laboratory and beyond. Writers in the field of the sociology of science have written much on this. I refer you to the following link, which contests your lofty view of science and scientists: ‘Monsanto wants to know why people doubt science’.

The very fact you have responded to me in a certain manner discredits your view of scientists, not least because it becomes difficult to appreciate where the line between science and lobbying is in your case.

There is an authoritarian, political agenda behind the GMO project – not set by some environmental group (as you say) that you like to use as a whipping boy – but by the agribusiness concerns behind GMOs and petro-chemical industrial agriculture. Focusing on Greenpeace with its supposed agenda serves as a convenient diversion.

It is not NGOs, groups, activists and campaigners that have failed to provide convincing arguments. And, by the way, to conflate such groups with intolerance, authoritarianism and killings by brutal regimes or groups is ludicrous and smacks of desperation on your part. You are a scientist but are using all the cheap smears and tactics of a lobbyist!

When peer-reviewed science is provided by critics to support their claims, the onslaught by the GMO agritech industry and its mouthpieces against those who legitimately and scientifically contest the claims about the efficacy of GMOs is relentless. Just ask Arpad Pusztai, P. M. Bhargava, Judy Carman, Terje Traavik, Andrés Carrasco, Ignacio Chapela, Allison Snow, Marc Lappé, Britt Bailey, Bela Darvas and G. E. Seralini.

These scientists have all either been threatened, smeared or hindered in their work because their research called into question the safety and/or efficacy of GMOs or associated products.

The hypocrisy of those from the pro-GMO lobby who call for sound science to inform the debate on GMOs is glaringly obvious. Those who argue against GMOs are accused of not having science or facts on their side and of engaging in propaganda, while it is clear the pro-GMO lobby that hurls such allegations is itself guilty of all such things. This tactic goes hand in glove with a strident populist agenda whereby the pro-GMO lobby portrays itself as on the side of the people, while its opponents are ‘elitists’ and are ‘stealing food from the bellies of the poor’.

If you really do value democracy as much as you say and wish to call to account those who show contempt for it, you would do better by reading Steven Druker’s new book ‘Altered Genes, Twisted Truth’. Instead of attacking Greenpeace and other groups, you should be more even handed (and employ just a little ‘scientific objectivity’ in your approach) by looking at the fraudulent practices and processes in US government departments that led to the commercialisation of GMOs in that country.

As far as your point on there being a scientific consensus is concerned, it has been well established in recent months by over 300 scientists in a peer reviewed journal that there is no consensus. Furthermore, you bring the issue of climate change into the debate. If I am to accept your claim that there is overwhelming consensus on climate change then I certainly reject your assertion that the same applies to the GMO issue.

What you claim to be ‘biased’ sources have demonstrated that the claims made on the back of many studies on GMOs are not supported by the evidence and that in many instances certain findings are marginalised as not being significant when they actually are (I supply these two links which provide reference to support my claims, the first of which you have already dismissed as being from a biased source, without addressing the issues raised therein:  'An evidence-based examination of the claims made for the safety and efficacy of GM crops and food' and 'Adverse impacts of transgenic crops/food: a compilation of scientific references with abstracts').  

Moreover, climate change is fundamentally different to the GMO issue. Climate change may or may not be anthropogenic, but scientists are deliberately genetically engineering food and adopting a wait and see attitude towards the impact. Wouldn’t it be better to prove safety beforehand?

But let’s get one thing clear, as Druker shows, GMOs were placed on the commercial market due to political arm twisting and official bodies in the US ignoring science that pointed out the dangers of this technology. The decision to commercialise GMOs was not based on scientific evidence; in fact, it ignored such evidence. Yet you are still placing the onus on scientists to prove that GMOs are unsafe – and when they show that they are, these scientists are attacked. It seems science is only called on when it suits.

Releasing GMOs onto the commercial market is not like boarding a plane, as you suggest. The genetic engineering of food affects every member of the population. It presents a widespread, systemic risk to the human population. Most planes are safe and have been tested. Moreover, we have a choice to board a plane. We have no other choice than to eat (unlabelled) food. GMO food has not been proven safe.

The GMO biotech industry carries out inadequate, short-term studies and conceals the data produced by its research under the guise of ‘commercial confidentiality’, while independent research highlights the very serious dangers of its products. It has in the past also engaged in fakery in India, bribery in Indonesia, smears and intimidates those who challenge its interests and distorts and censors science by restricting independent research. If science is held in such high regard by the GMO agritech sector, why engage in such practices and why in the US did policy makers release GM food onto the commercial market without proper long-term tests?

Despite its claims to the contrary, the sector cannot win the scientific debate, so it resorts to co-opting key public bodies or individuals to propagate various falsehoods and deceptions. Part of the deception is based on emotional blackmail: the world needs GMOs to feed the hungry, both now and in the future. This myth has been blown apart. In fact, the organisation GRAIN highlights that GMOs have thus far have actually contributed to food insecurity!

You say:

“If agroecological approaches can currently match yield that can be attained by using modern farming methods then by all means use it.”

Why doesn’t Paterson adopt this attitude? He denigrates such alternatives, and you deem it necessary to jump to his defence by responding this way.

“But if not and my understanding is that currently it cannot, then they should not be the farming method of recommended choice at present.”

Perhaps you need to do some more reading and consult a few more UN and scientific reports.   

You say that:

“No-one with any concern for humanity or the welfare of its population should currently consider any other alternative. The groups that campaign for this kind or that kind of farming method and destroy crops to try and bounce others into their point of view have lost that fundamental concern for their own species.”

What a ridiculous assertion. Why do you persist in attacking those who clearly do have compassion? Environmental groups have not engaged in decades of massive criminality, in decades of cover ups and serious environmental pollution. You would do better by focussing on one particular leading company whose record clearly shows that it has no regard whatsoever for humanity, yet which claims it wants to ‘feed the word’ with altruistic intent.

If you really do believe in dispassionate, objective discourse, then adopt an even-handed approach. You talk so much about democracy and choice yet there is no mention whatsoever of the crimes, cover ups and decades of environmental pollution that a certain company that forms part of the pro-GMO lobby has been involved in.

You talk about choice and democracy but say nothing about how big agribusiness has at international and national levels captured policy making bodies to effectively impose ‘choice’ on US consumers and poorer nations and devastate local economies. Where is your condemnation? Where is your condemnation of ‘big list’ studies and fallacious claims made by the likes of Jon Entine about safety and efficacy on the back of them? Or are your condemnations, attacks, misrepresentations and ridiculous assertions reserved for those who flag up such things?

While powerful corporations have instant access to policy makers who work closely together, ordinary people and groups have to resort to Freedom of Information legislation to ascertain what happens behind closed doors. They have to rely on whisteblowers or leaked documents or must go through the courts to gain access to studies that formed the basis of regulatory bodies’ approvals for commercial agribusiness products. And you talk to me about democracy and of how I or some campaign group have scant regard for it?

Your response is full of warm sounding notions about democracy and choice and some high-minded words about science and scientists (of course, only the science that fits your paradigm). Rhetoric, platitudes and clichés do not constitute a considered response. Projecting the pro-GMO lobby’s deficiencies onto its critics is not valid. It’s disappointing from a scientist.

You indulge in cheap, fallacious attacks on critics, which is symptomatic of a very transparent and predictable propaganda campaign aimed at critics.  

In finishing, I would like to make clear that I do not belong to any environmental or campaign group. I received no payment for the article you responded to. This is why I refer to myself as in ‘independent’ (not freelance) writer.

I wonder how many scientists can claim such a level of independence from for-profit corporate entities.

With kind regards,

Colin Todhunter


Open letter from Professor Trewavas

Dear Mr Todhunter

I read your article against GM crops (So You Want to Help Africa Mr Paterson? Then Stop Promoting Ideology and Falsehoods to Push GMOs; http://rinf.com/alt-news/editorials/want-help-africa-mr-paterson-stop-promoting-ideology-falsehoods-push-gmos/) but I searched in vain for one small word, ‘choice’.  It seems never to enter the commentaries of Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth or WWF or the other odd environmentalist/activist groupings that appear now and again. Your claim is that Africa can do very well just on agroecology. Well, put your money where your mouth is. Buy a farm in Africa and farm it in the way that you want. But allow others to farm as they wish and if they wish to use GM crops that is their right to do so just as it yours, not to. According to you any African farmer using GM crops will be a disaster so in that case they will stop using them. If it’s not a disaster, which I suspect is what you fear most, then they will reap the benefit and perhaps persuade you in due course to farm like them. Do you want to impose your opinions on others without allowing them to make their own minds up and choose how they wish to farm?

It is an unfortunate situation that in our present world many environmentalist groups have become typically authoritarian in attitude. Greenpeace notably decides its opinions must prevail regardless of others, so it arrogates to itself the right to tear up and destroy things it doesn’t like. That is absolutely typical of people who are unable to convince others by debate and discussion and in the last century such attitudes, amplified obviously, ended up killing people that others did not like. But the same personality type the authoritarian, ‘do as I tell you’, was at the root of it all. Such groups therefore sit uneasily with countries that are democracies. It would be nice if you could say you are a democrat and believe that argument is better than destruction but argument that deals with all the facts and does not select out of those to construct a misleading programme. Misleading selection of limited information is causing considerable problems in various parts of the world that leads some into very violent behaviour, particularly in religious belief. I am sure you agree that this is not a good way forward.

There is a consensus amongst scientists, at least those that have made themselves aware of all reasonable scientific facts, that GM is both safe for consumption and with appropriate regulations for the environment too. Do you agree with that consensus or not? There is another scientific consensus over climate change that is impelling governments to take action. The consensus over GM food safety is stronger amongst scientists than that over climate change, according to a current survey. I assume you accept the one over climate change, most do. But science and scientific fact is not a pick and mix situation, if you accept a scientific consensus on one than you have to accept it for the other. I am sure you will be aware that there are minorities of scientists, different in both cases, that object to both. But I have found that those that do object to the consensus on GM crops always fail to provide an acceptable balance of information in their objections. They select out only the very limited data they consider supports their view and neglect everything else that does not. That is not science that can be used to construct policy. It’s like claiming flying is unsafe because several planes a year crash whilst ignoring the hundreds of thousands every day that haven’t. If you want unbiased information on GM crops go to the many university personnel who can provide it for you. But please do not quote the so obviously-biased publication which you have, as though it were scientific fact.

Most objectors in this area have a political programme not a scientific one but they like to bend science to their own political point of view. Science is by its nature not politics or political propaganda or anything like it. It deals with evidence not superstition, or political or social philosophies. If you have a political programme then please stop trying to justify it by claiming it has scientific support; it does not.

All human activities have costs and benefits, that will include agroecological approaches that you apparently favour, but at the start both costs and benefits have to be drawn up to see what is appropriate to the particular circumstance. Given the rapidly increasing African population I would say that currently yield is crucial but that can change just as farming methods are changing in Europe towards increasing environmental concerns. Farming methods that do both such as no-till or integrated farm management currently offer the best compromise. Malawi, I understand, subsidizes minerals for crop growth and has turned the country from a food importer into a food exporter. That seems an excellent approach at present to solve a pressing problem.

If agroecological approaches can currently match yield that can be attained by using modern farming methods then by all means use it. But if not and my understanding is that currently it cannot, then they should not be the farming method of recommended choice at present.

When Africa has got its population increases under control and producing sufficient to feed everybody then alternatives like agroecology may come to the fore. No-one with any concern for humanity or the welfare of its population should currently consider any other alternative. The groups that campaign for this kind or that kind of farming method and destroy crops to try and bounce others into their point of view have lost that fundamental concern for their own species.

I am not dogmatic about the methods that farmers use since I consider that decision is the province of individual farmers themselves. Whatever their choice is their right in the framework of their country but they must be allowed to make that decision in full knowledge of all the scientific information and advice, not the tiny amount available to support alternative points of view. That is the nature of every democracy that I hope all will finally live under.

Good science is not set in stone or concrete, the current view on GM crops is simply based on the wealth of the factual and reproducible evidence that all good scientists recognise. But if the evidence indicates change then scientists change with it. Why not join those whose job it is to provide farmers and the populace with unbiased evidence constructed by independent university personnel? You have nothing to lose but the constraints of closed thinking and everything to gain that comes from reasoned and open scientific debate.

With my best wishes
Professor Tony Trewavas FRS
University of Edinburgh
Professor Anthony Trewavas FRS. FRSE
Institute of Molecular Plant Science
Mayfield Road
Edinburgh EH9 3JH



THE CIA AND AMERICA’S PRESIDENTS – JOHN CHUCKMAN

          THE CIA AND AMERICA’S PRESIDENTS Some rarely discussed truths shaping contemporary American democracy   John Chuckman Many people still think of the CIA as an agency designed...

Feeding The Vultures, While Starving Agriculture: Capitalism’s Great Indian Con-Trick

The 4th Media, Global Research, Countercurrents, RINF

The story goes like this: India is an economic miracle, a powerhouse of growth. It is a nation that increasingly embodies the spirit of entrepreneurship. And the proof? Until recently, India had year on year 9% GDP growth (or thereabouts).

Such logic, statements and figures are the stuff of headlines that pay homage to the supposed wonders of neoliberalism which the corporate media trots out time and again in the belief that if something is repeated often enough then it must be true.

Visit Delhi or Mumbai and you can witness the trappings of this ‘success’. Newly built towns on the outskirts with gleaming apartment blocks and sterile shopping malls. What more could a person want? All well and good for those who have benefited from neoliberal economic reforms that began in 1991 - because indeed it seems that is all they do want.

But these beneficiaries of neoliberalism comprise a minority. They constitute but a section of the urban population, which in turn constitutes a minority within the country. They are the ones the ideologue-economists and corporate-controlled media in the West focus on when celebrating capitalism and its global ‘success’. But what about the bulk of the population, the two thirds that live in villages and rural India?

According to Sudhansu R Das, the Indian village was once enshrined in a performing eco-system and a healthy social life (see this). In fact, the village was the centre of a rural economy, an economic powerhouse of agricultural innovation, artisanship and entrepreneurialism. However, the British Raj almost dismantled this system by introducing mono crop activities and mill-made products. Post-independent India failed to repair the economic fabric and is now actually accelerating the dismantling. As a result, rural India is too often depicted as a ‘basket case’, a drain on the nation's subsidies and resources.

It is not, however, agriculture that is the subsidy-sucking failure it is so often portrayed as in the mainstream media. The spotlight should instead focus on corporate-industrial India, the supposed saviour of the nation, which has failed to deliver in terms of boosting exports or creating jobs, despite the massive hand outs and tax exemptions given to it (see this and this).  As subsidy-sucking failures go, it has much to answer for.

Of course, corporate-industrial India is engaged in a huge con-trick, which forms part of the neoliberal agenda worldwide: subsidies to the public sector or to the poor are portrayed as a drain on the economy, while the genuinely massive drain of taxpayer-funded corporate dole, tax breaks, bail outs, sops, tax avoidance and evasion are afforded scant attention. If anything, through slick doublespeak, all of this becomes redefined as being necessary to create jobs or fuel 'growth'.

But what does the taxpaying public get in return for subsidising the private sector in this way and for paying for its fraudulent practices? What do ordinary people get for being forced to ‘stand on their own two feet’ while subsidising a system of ‘free’ enterprise that is anything but free? Jobs...  'growth'?

No, they see record profits and levels of inequality and experience austerity, the outsourcing of jobs, low pay, the destruction of rights, deregulation, mass unemployment and the erosion pensions and social security (see this  and this).

The machinery of state is pressed into the service of private capital for the benefit of private capital under the guise of 'growth' or the 'national interest' and that is the price the rest of us pay.

This is exemplified by the following quote:
“We don’t think how our farmers on whose toil we feed manage to sustain themselves; we fail to see how the millions of the poor survive. We look at the state-of-the-art airports, IITs, highways and bridges, the inevitable necessities for the corporate world to spread its tentacles everywhere and thrive, depriving the ordinary people of even the basic necessities of life and believe it is development.” – Sukumaran CV
What Sukumaran CV describes above is in India underpinned by unconstitutional land takeovers, the trampling of democratic rights, cronyism, cartels and the manipulation of markets, which to all purposes is what economic ‘neo-liberalism’ has entailed in India over the last two decades. Corporations have run roughshod over ordinary people in their quest for profit.

In the process, there have been untold opportunities for well-placed officials and individuals to make a fast buck from various infrastructure projects and sell offs of public assets, such as airports, seeds, ports and other infrastructure built up with public money or toil.

This neoliberal agenda is based on state-corporate extremism, which has across the world resulted in national states submitting to the tenets of the Wall Street-backed pro-privatisation policies, deregulation, free capital flows, rigged markets and unaccountable cartels. It is the type of extremism that is depicted as being anything but by the corporate-controlled media.

Powerful corporations are shaping the ‘development’ agenda in India and the full military backing of the state is on hand to forcibly evict peoples from their land in order to hand it to mineral extracting and processing industries, real estate interests and industry.

Moreover, the deal that allows the Monsanto/Syngenta/Walmart-driven Knowledge Initiative on Agriculture in return for the US sanctioning and backing the opening up of India’s nuclear sector to foreign interests has shown who is setting the agenda for agriculture, food and energy.

Almost 300,000 farmers have taken their lives since 1997 and many more are experiencing economic distress or have left farming as a result of debt, a shift to (GM) cash crops and economic ‘liberalisation’ (see this). And yet the corporate-controlled type of agriculture being imposed and/or envisaged only leads to bad food, bad soil, bad or no waterbad health, poor or falling yields and an impending agrarian crisis.

It’s not difficult to see where policy makers’ priorities lie. In a recent TV interview (watch here), food policy analyst Devinder Sharma highlighted such priorities:
“Agriculture has been systematically killed over the last few decades. And they are doing deliberately because the World Bank and big business have given the message that this is the only way to grow economically… Sixty percent of the population lives in the villages or in the rural areas and is involved in agriculture, and less than two percent of the annual budget goes to agriculture… When you are not investing in agriculture, you think it is economically backwards, not performing. You are not wanting it to perform. You are ensuring that the price they get today under the MSP (Minimum Support Price) has also being withdrawn. Leave it to the vagaries or the tyranny of the markets… Twenty-five crore people in this country are agricultural landless workers. If we give these people land, these people are also start-ups, these people are also entrepreneurs... But you are only giving these conditions to industry... agriculture has disappeared from the economic radar screen of the country… 70 percent of the population is being completely ignored…”
Farmers have been imbued with the spirit of entrepreneurship for hundreds of years. They have been "scientists, innovators, natural resource stewards, seed savers and hybridisation experts" who have increasingly been reduced to becoming "recipients of technical fixes and consumers of poisonous products of a growing agricultural inputs industry" (see here).

In his interview, Devinder Sharma went on to state that despite the tax breaks and the raft of policies that favour industry over agriculture, industry has failed to deliver; and yet despite the gross under-investment in agriculture, it still manages to deliver bumper harvests year after year. Furthermore, when farmers are prioritised, politicians are accused of populism and playing to a vote bank. Yet when industry receives subsidies, hand outs and tax breaks, it is called 'reform'and portrayed as contributing to 'growth':
“When we talk about budgets, it’s going to be populism or reforms. What is reforms? … if you don’t give anything to industry, they call it ‘policy paralysis’. But if you give them all kinds of dole then they think it is growth, they think it is a dream budget. In the last 10 years, we had 36 lakh crore going to the corporates by way of tax exemptions. Where are the jobs? They just created 1.5 crore jobs in the last ten years. Where are the exports? ... The only sector that has performed very well in this country is agriculture. Year after year we are having a bumper harvest. Why can’t we strengthen that sector and stop the population shift from the villages… Why do you want to move the population just because Western economists told us we should follow them. Why? Why can’t India have its own thinking? Why do we have to go with Harvard or Oxford economists who tell us this?”
With GDP growth slowing and automation replacing human labour the world over in order to decrease labour costs and boost profit, where are the jobs going to come from to cater for hundreds of millions of former agricultural workers or those whose livelihoods will be destroyed as transnational corporations move in and seek to capitalise industries that currently employ tens of millions (if not hundreds of millions)?

Are they to become what Arundhati Roy calls the "ghosts of capitalism," the invisible, shoved-aside victims of neoliberalism who are deemed surplus to requirements?

India’s development is being hijacked by the country’s wealthy ruling class and the multinational vultures who long ago stopped circling and are now swooping. Meanwhile, the genuine wealth creators, the entrepreneurs who work the fields and have been custodians of the land and seeds for centuries, are being sold out to corporate interests whose only concern is to how best loot the economy.

As they do so, they churn out in unison with their politician puppets the mantra of it all being in the ‘national interest’ and constituting some kind of 'economic miracle'.

Feeding The Vultures While Agriculture Starves: Capitalism’s Great Indian Con-Trick

The story goes like this: India is an economic miracle, a powerhouse of growth. It is a nation that increasingly embodies the spirit of...

GMOs And Green Blob Hallucinations: The Twisted World Of Mr Paterson


RINF, Global Research, Countercurrents, The Nation (Sri Lanka, on 8/3/2015)

Speaking last week in Pretoria, former UK Environment Minister Owen Paterson described critics of GMOs as comprising part of a privileged class that increasingly fetishizes food and seeks to turn their personal preferences into policy proscriptions for the rest of us. He called them backward-looking and regressive. He claimed their policies would condemn billions to hunger, poverty and underdevelopment because of their insistence on mandating primitive, inefficient farming techniques.

He called them:

“… the ‘Green Blob’ – a reference to a 1950s Sci-Fi movie starring Steve McQueen in which a blob-like alien attacks Earth and swallows everything in its path: the environmental pressure groups, renewable energy companies and some public officials who keep each other well supplied with lavish funds, scare stories and green tape. This tangled triangle of unelected busybodies claims to have the interest of the planet and the countryside at heart, but it is increasingly clear that it is focusing on the wrong issues and doing real harm while profiting handsomely.”

He went on to state:

“There are many impediments standing between the vision of agricultural progress and Africa, of course, but none is more pernicious than the Blob. It is supported by massive funding provided by the EU itself, as well as numerous church and humanitarian groups, and the well-meaning but misguided generosity of the privileged classes in Europe and elsewhere. It has undue influence in the media, government and international institutions. Unfortunately, few question either its credentials or motives.” (see the full text of the speech here)

Paterson then proceeded to proclaim the virtues of GMOs and laid out a series of slurs, falsehoods and cherry-picked proclamations that anyone would be forgiven for thinking had come straight from the pen of a GMO agribusiness employee. But it wouldn’t have been the first time would it? In the case of this bit of poetry that Paterson likes so much, it came courtesy of Syngenta.

No, such practices are commonplace. Indeed, across the globe uncaged corporate parrots seem to be perched on the highest of ledges:

“We have had the National Academies of Science give a clean chit of biosafety to GM crops — doing that by using paragraphs lifted wholesale from the industry’s own literature! Likewise, Ministers in the PMO who know nothing about the risks of GMOs have similarly sung the virtues of Bt Brinjal and its safety to an erstwhile Minister of Health. They have used, literally, 'cut & paste' evidence from the biotech lobby’s 'puff' material. Are these officials then, 'uncaged corporate parrots'?” Aruna Rodrigues, writing about the situation in India here in The Hindu.

Some points to consider for any rational thinking person

What would you do when presented with the option of sanctioning the commercialisation of genetically engineered food that is fundamentally different to conventional food? And have no doubt, it is: see this analysis by Steven Druker. Forget about those will try to confuse you that humans have always been tampering with food and genetic engineering represents more of the same. It doesn’t.

Would you engage in doublespeak about ‘substantial equivalence’ to try to convince people that it is just the same as conventional food in order to prevent public/scientific scrutiny (see this), and (as Druker shows to be the case) would you then ignore any fears, concerns and evidence in order to commercialise it?

You would if you are the US government, which has done exactly that, as described in Drukers new book 'Altered Genes, Twisted Truth: How the Venture to Genetically Engineer Our Food Has Subverted Science, Corrupted Government and Systematically Deceived the Public' (Clear River Press, March 2015).  

In fact, if you are among the pro-GMO lobby, you would dream up some ideology about giving consumers and people greater choice by offering them the option of GMOs. You would also forward the myth that the corporations behind GMOs have humanity’s best interests at heart and that critics are anti-science ideologues whose policies and attitudes would leave billions dead or at least impoverished and starving. As part of this deception, you would forward the lie that GMOs are safe, even though there has not been one long-term epidemiological study conducted to show this, and are needed to feed the world. (See these claims debunked here).

And if you are part of this lobby or so gullible to unwittingly become its foot soldier by propagating the ideology in the media or on website comment threads, you would be part of a $100-million-dollar PR campaign (that figure is for the US alone).

And back to Owen Paterson

These powerful and extremely wealthy corporations or their foot soldiers in a display of glaring hypocrisy accuse critics of being part of a lavishly funded conspiracy against them and indeed humanity.

Yes, the same corporations whose financial clout has bought them political influence in so far that they exert huge control over WTO (see this), have captured regulatory bodies and public research institutions (see this and this), have had a key role in driving trade policies (see this) and are the biggest lobbiers (see this) for the world’s largest (secretive, pro-corporate) trade deal, the TTIP, which will constitutionally hand over regulatory and economic policies to a cartel of lawyers, officials and high-level corporate executives (see this).  

So maybe it’s time to slightly rearrange parts of Paterson’s attack on his critics to provide him with a reality check. Paterson would have more truthfully presented the case by stating:

“It is these powerful corporations (not a ‘green blob’), whose owners are part of the privileged class that seek to turn their vested interests into policy proscriptions for the rest of us. It is this backward-looking and regressive class whose policies have already condemned tens of millions to hunger, poverty and underdevelopment. It is this privileged class (not a ‘green blob’) that has swallowed up everything in its path facilitated by public officials who are well supplied with lavish funds, scare stories and ‘green revolution’ rhetoric. This tangled triangle of unelected, unaccountable corporations claims to have the interest of the planet and the countryside at heart, but it is increasingly clear that it is focusing on the wrong issues and doing real harm while profiting handsomely. There are many impediments standing between the vision of agricultural progress and Africa, of course, but none is more pernicious than this group that is supported by massive profits often secured from fraudulent practices and by often well-meaning but gullible people who buy into its rhetoric. It has undue influence in the media, government and international institutions. Fortunately, there are many who question its credentials and motives.”

Readers are urged to read this to appreciate why Paterson has got is so wrong.

GMOs And Green Blob Hallucinations: The Twisted World Of Mr Paterson  

Speaking last week in Pretoria, former UK Environment Minister Owen Paterson described critics of GMOs as comprising part of a privileged class that increasingly...

Europeans Want TTIP Trade-Deal, though Obama Blocks Making Its Terms Public

Eric Zuesse TTIP is a secretly negotiated trade deal between the U.S. and the EU, and all indications are that it will replace each nation’s...

Teaching critical thinking skills to high school students: Case study of failure to end...

The following are my teaching assignments on critical thinking for California 12th grade students in the semester-long courses, “US Government” and “Economics.” I offer...

HSBC documents reveal criminal conspiracy of banks and governments

Andre Damon On Sunday, international news outlets the Guardian and Le Monde, working with the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ), published articles based on...

HOW AMERICA SCREWS UP THE WORLD WITHOUT EVER LETTING ITS PEOPLE KNOW WHAT IS...

John Chuckman RINF Alternative News Brian Williams, American television network anchor caught telling his audience a fantasy version of his experience on a foreign assignment, has...

Why Public Banks Outperform Private Banks: Unfair Competition or a Better Mousetrap?

Ellen Brown RINF Alternative News Public banks in North Dakota, Germany and Switzerland have been shown to outperform their private counterparts. Under the TPP and TTIP, however,...

How Public Tax Dollars Are Subsidizing the Recklessness of US Corporations

New York Times highlights long-documented phenomenon, in which damages for company malfeasance are paid for, in part, by the very public that is harmed Sarah...

Monsanto’s Shares Surge as its Drive to Force GM Crops into India Gathers Pace

It was a case of Modi mania when Narendra Modi and his BJP ‘swept’ to power in last year’s Indian general election. It was...

Monsanto’s Shares Surge As Its Drive To Force GM Crops Into India Gathers Pace

RINF and Countercurrents 4/2/2015, The 4th Media and Global Research 5/2/2015, Morning Star 10/2/2015, Counterpunch 27/3/2015

It was a case of Modi mania when Narendra Modi and his BJP ‘swept’ to power in last year’s Indian general election. It was however hardly the sweeping endorsement from the voters that much of the corporate media liked to portray it as. The BJP might have took 282 of the 543 seats in the Lok Sabha, but it ‘swept’ to power on only 31 percent of the vote.

Parts of corporate India and the well-off middle classes nevertheless celebrated Modi’s rise to Prime Minister in the belief that they would materially benefit from a ‘Thatcherite-style’ revolution (see here). And many ordinary folk also swallowed the PR about Modi's ‘vibrant Gujarat’ PR campaign, which has been shown to be anything but ‘vibrant’.

Writing on the Countercurrents website, Rohini Hensman shows that GDP growth in Gujarat under Chief Minister Modi was nothing special compared with many other states in India and was supported by wholesale privatisation of public assets, which has in effect meant the state government abdicating responsibility for decision-making processes that impact millions of people's lives by handing them to elite interests (see here). In terms of poverty, rural population displacement, hunger, farmer suicides, corruption, disease and debt, Hensman demonstrates that under Modi the extreme economic neoliberalism practised was anything but a resounding success.

Now at the political helm nationally, Modi and his administration are helping to accelerate a process that could eventually result in the selling of the economic and social bedrock of the country - agriculture - to foreign GMO agribusiness, not least by pushing for open field trials of various GM food crops. (The BJP does not stand alone here, though, as the process was gathering pace under the previous Congress-led administration and Veerappa Moily near the end.)

Some might find it perplexing that a nationalist outfit like BJP would appear willing to hand over food sovereignty and security to foreign agribusiness, such as US giant Monsanto, which seeks to secure control over the supply and growing of seeds and thus the global food chain (for example, see this). (The GMO issue is ultimately about geopolitics, seed freedom and food democracy, see here.)

Investigative journalist and geopolitical analyst Shelley Kasli has outlined the makeover that Modi received from the US-Israeli led APCO Worldwide, a major 'global communications, stakeholder engagement and business strategy' company. Kalsi shows that APCO is well connected to the US/Israeli establishment, helping to promote militaristic policies, economic neoliberalism and the overall strategies of and engagements between governments and powerful corporate interests across the globe (see Kasli’s piece on APCO here).

This is who Modi has previously partnered with to promote Gujarat as ‘vibrant’ and thus himself as potential PM material. There was the suspicion that once in power, Modi would become the go-to man for foreign corporate interests, especially those which are part of the extensive APCO network (and that includes Monsanto).

Facilitating powerful Western corporations' entry into India is not unique to the current administration. The Knowledge Initiative on Agriculture helped the likes of Monsanto, Archer Daniel Midland, Cargill and Wal-Mart’s push into India’s seed, trade and retail sectors in return for concessions in the nuclear field (see here).

Under the Modi-led administration, however, there is a stated commitment to clear away ‘blockages’ that the previous administration was unwilling or unable to do and would no doubt hinder the type of economic neoliberalism Modi presided over in Gujarat. And it is increasingly apparent those ‘blockages’ include smoothing the way for the entry of GM crops.

Ignoring all the evidence and warnings

Writing in The Hindu last year, Aruna Rodrigues noted that the Technical Expert Committee (TEC) Final Report (FR) is the fourth official report exposing the lack of integrity, independence and scientific expertise in assessing GMO risk (see here). The four reports are: The ‘Jairam Ramesh Report’ of February 2010, imposing an indefinite moratorium on Bt Brinjal, overturning the apex Regulator’s approval to commercialise it; the Sopory Committee Report (August 2012); the Parliamentary Standing Committee (PSC) Report on GM crops (August 2012) and the TEC Final Report (June-July 2013). There is a remarkable consensus here.

The TEC recommended an indefinite moratorium on the field trials of GM crops until the government devised a proper regulatory and safety mechanism. No such mechanism exists, but open field trials are being given the go ahead, regardless of a history of blatant violations of biosafety norms, hasty approvals, a lack of monitoring abilities, general apathy towards the hazards of contamination and a lack of institutional oversight mechanisms (see this).

The BJP-ruled Maharashtra government has just granted ‘no-objectiion certificates’ for GM open-field trials of rice, chickpeas maize, brinjal and cotton. Some regard this as a game changer in the push to get GM crops into India. (Punjab, Haryana, Delhi and Andhra Pradesh have given NOCs for field trials of some biotech crops, while states like Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan have banned such research activities.)

On the 2nd February, the Coalition for GM Free India posted the following on its website:

In the wake of media reports about the Maharashtra Govt granting No Objection Certificates (NOCs) for the open air field trials of GM crops in the state, the Coalition for a GM Free India along with the Coalition for a GM Free Maharashtra has sent a letter… to the Chief Minister of Maharashtra urging him not to overlook the growing scientific evidence on the adverse impacts of GM crops as well as the public opposition to it. The fact that the announcement regarding approvals of field trials was made on the sidelines of an event arranged by the International biotechnology industry lobby group, ISAAA, shows in a way the influence International biotech giants like Monsanto as well as their Indian promoters have in every government. Besides this there seems to be no basis on which these open trials could be permitted at a time every other credible agency be it the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Agriculture or the Supreme Court appointed Technical Expert Committee or the TSR Subraminiam committee appointed by the Union Minister of Environment, Forests and Climate Change to look into environmental laws in the country have cautioned against any open release of GMOs at this juncture…” (see here)  

The negative health, environmental and potential dangers of GM crops (not least the surrendering of food sovereignty and security to Western agribusiness and the US) have been well documented (see herehere  and here), while those who legitimately oppose and campaign against GMOs are smeared and portrayed by India's internal intelligence agency as working against the ‘national interest’ (see here).

Monsanto and the GM biotech sector forward the myth that GM food is necessary to feed the world’s burgeoning population. It is not (in India's case, see this and this). Aside from a report from GRAIN (here) that concluded small farms family/peasant farms are more productively efficient than large industrial-scale farms and that the former can (and virtually does) feed the world, the World Bank-funded International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge and Science for Development Report also stated that smallholder, traditional farming can deliver food security in low-income countries through sustainable agri-ecological systems

By attempting to sideline opposition and ignoring expert advice and credible evidence pointing to potential catastrophic consequences if India were to adopt GM crops that it doesn't even need, no one can be in any doubt that there is an agenda at the highest level to push GMOs into India at any cost. It is clear the 'national interest' and (foreign) 'corporate interest' are being conflated (see here).

Agribusiness setting the agenda

If politicians fail to sanction GMO trials, there is a habit that they will be replaced until one of them does (see here). Backed by the US State Department (see here) and parts of the Indian political(-intelligence) elite (as alluded to above), the GMO agribusiness sector has gained a strategic and influential foothold in India and many of its national public bodies. Along with US food processing giants Cargill and Archer Daniels Midland, it threatens to destroy the rural economy by recasting it (and thus Indian society, given that hundreds of millions depend on it for a living) according to its own needs. This would mean moving over 600 million who depend on agriculture and local food processing activities into urban areas (as foreign interests move in). These sectors currently employ tens of millions. Livelihoods will be decimated. What will these people do?

Consider that the number of jobs created in India between 2005 and 2010 was 2.7 million (the years of high GDP growth). According to International Business Times, 15 million enter the workforce every year (see here).  

In APCO’s India Brochure, there is the claim that India’s resilience in weathering the global downturn and financial crisis has made governments, policy-makers, economists, corporate houses and fund managers believe that India can play a significant role in the recovery of the global economy in the months and years ahead. APCO describes India as a trillion dollar market. The emphasis is not on redistributing the country’s wealth among its citizens or the empowerment of farmers, but on positioning international funds and facilitating corporations’ ability to exploit markets and extract profit the best way they can.

In the mainstream media and among many politicians and economists, this constitutes growth and development, but it is neither. It is financial-corporate plunder under the guise of ‘globalisation’. The evidence doesn’t lie. In the West, decades of such policies have culminated in austerity, disempowerment and increasing hardship for the masses and the concentration of ever more wealth and power in the hands of the few.

The evidence doesn’t lie where global agriculture is concerned either. Last year, the Oakland Institute stated that the first years of the 21st century will be remembered for a global land rush headed by institutional investors (the kind of entities that 'global communications and business strategy companies' deal with to 'facilitate 'stakeholder engagement' and 'position funds' to 'exploit markets') of nearly unprecedented scale, often at the expense of local food security and land rights (see here). 

Small farmers are currently squeezed onto less than a quarter of the world’s farmland and the world is fast losing farms and farmers through the concentration of land into the hands big agribusiness and the rich and powerful. According to the report GRAIN (referred to earlier), the concentration of fertile agricultural land in fewer and fewer hands is directly related to the increasing number of people going hungry every day. 

US agribusiness via the World Bank/IMF/WTO has for some time been eyeing Indian agriculture as a cash cow for themselves (see here), and the Modi-led administration is promoting GMO biotechnology as business investment opportunity for foreign companies under the trendy-sounding 'Make in India' campaign. The political subjugation of India by the US partly rests on Monsanto’s overriding control of the nation’s agriculture (see here). Monsanto already dominates the cotton industry in the country and is increasingly shaping agri-policy and the knowledge paradigm by funding agricultural research in public universities and institutes (see here). Moreover, public regulatory bodies are now severely compromised and riddled with conflicts of interest where decision-making over GMOs are concerned, as outlined by Aruna Rodrigues in her article in The Hindu (referred to earlier).

Responding to the decision to sanction the field trials in Maharashtra, Monsanto India shares jumped 18 percent on Monday 2 February and the company was headed towards its biggest daily gain since September 2014. 

Mark Halton, head of Global Marketing and Communications for Monsanto has praised APCO for helping the GMO giant to:

“… understand how Monsanto could better engage with societal stakeholders surrounding our business and how best to communicate the social value our company brings to the table.” (see here

As far as powerful corporations are concerned, not least big agribusiness, it is increasingly clear that Modi is the go-to man. But that's what some in India feared all along. 

Activist Marching Band Delivers Petition to Citigroup Calling on the Banks to ‘Revoke Their...

Most of the Nation’s Biggest Banks Are Using Forced Arbitration to Block Ripped-Off Consumers From Their Day in Court; CFPB Can Act WASHINGTON - Today,...

How Obama Lied About Obamacare

Eric Zuesse When U.S. Senator Barack Obama was campaigning for the Presidency in 2007 and 2008, he promised that on healthcare, his plan would be "making...

A Tale of Two Cuomos: The Tragic End of the Inspired Voice and the...

By Greg Palast for Reader Supported News  I knew Mario Cuomo well. Too well. I helped write talking points for speeches that got him elected Governor and grieved that he did not become President. But there was another Cuomo, the one that tried to stop the US publication of my book, The Best Democracy Money Can [...]

GMO Seeds of Profit, Power and Geopolitics

Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are not essential for feeding the world , but if they were to lead to increased productivity, did not harm...

Palast wins Sidney Prize for Exposing New Threat to Voters of Color

From the Sidney Hillman Foundation NEW YORK – Greg Palast wins the December Sidney Award for “Jim Crow Returns,” and “Challenging Crosscheck,” a two-part Al Jazeera America exposé that shows how millions of innocent people were flagged as suspected vote fraudsters just because they have the same first and last name as someone in another [...]

The Pro-GMO Lobby: Anti-science and a Politically Motivated Agenda

Colin Todhunter The pro-GMO lobby claims that there is a scientific consensus on the safety of GM food and therefore the GMO debate is over....

US House Declares Cold War on Russia

Stephen Lendman RINF Alternative News Lunatics infest Washington. Crazies. Hardline extremists. Criminals. Lawless fascists by any standard. Dominating both parties. Mocking legitimate governance. Making policy irresponsibly. Including homeland...

Obama Is 100% Opposed to Accountability. But the Problem Goes Even Deeper

Eric Zuesse U.S. President Barack Obama has blocked accountability, everywhere he can. (1) Obama did it for the top officials who had caused illegal tortures to...

Menace on the Menu: The Globalization of Servitude

Colin Todhunter In his book ‘The World Economy: A Millennial Perspective’, economist Angus Maddison noted that India was the richest country in the world and...

Food Security a Hostage to Wall Street and US Global Hegemony

Colin Todhunter Last month, World Food Day celebrated ‘Family Farming: Feeding the world, caring for the earth’. According to the UN Food and Agriculture Organization’s...

The Straw Man Anti-GMO Activist: Irrationalism Masquerading As Informed Debate

Colin Todhunter A few months back, a much publicised article in the New Yorker magazine set out to attack Indian environmentalist and anti-GMO campaigner Vandana...

Corrupt Politicians, IMF Loans And Foreign Aid

Lenin Nightingale RINF Alternative News External forces do not enslave the masses of the world - they are enslaved by those from their own country who...

The Democrats Got What They Deserved

Guess I got what I deserve Kept you waiting there, too long my love All that time, without a word Didn't know you'd think, that I'd forget,...

Big money has corrupted politics

Stephen Lendman RINF Alternative News Ignore scoundrel media who won, who lost horserace rubbish. US electoral politics is too debauched to fix. Big money corrupts it. Democracy...