Ron Paul Schooling Ben Bernanke

Part 2 – Big Pharma: The Success of The Germ Theory

I get a daily email from Reuters Health News that tells me all the up-to-date progress that Big Pharma is making with its drug research. But isn’t it peculiar that after nearly a century of modern medicine, after the discoveries of anti-biotics, vaccination, genome therapy, biotech, nanotechnology etc. we are still no closer to a cure for cancer or aids or heart disease or Alzheimer’s or HIV etc – the list goes on and on?

All the drugs that are spewed out of Big Pharma’s labs are essentially anti-inflammatory painkillers for particular conditions. These drugs only make the patient feel more comfortable but very few of these drugs are outright curatives are they ? Perhaps I’m being too cynical here, but maybe this is the way Big Pharma likes it, maybe this is firm policy with the drugs companies. After all, if there was a cure for cancer, these patients would have no further need for their very expensive cancer drugs, radiotherapy or surgery would they? So Big Pharma seems to prefer inventing drugs/procedures that the patient will have to take for a long time. Look at the “Cancer Industry” for example. It’s HUGE. Hundreds of expensive drugs, Radiography machines, expensive surgery. My goodness — if a successful cure was found for cancer, what would happen to all this huge industry? Well perish the thought !! Dependency seems to be key to Big Pharm’s illusive strategy. Simply because this continuing dependency will naturally mean more profit for Big Pharma. This dependency is a bit like a drug pusher making the user so dependent on his drugs that he buys more and more and more. Hence the huge profits.

Or perhaps I’m being unkind here. Perhaps the whole basis of Medicine and Big Pharma – The Germ Theory - is incorrect ? So what does the Germ Theory say ? Basically put, this theory says this: One germ –>One disease –> One cure. But this theory evolved way back in the early 1900, and was “invented” by Louis Pasteur. However this wasn’t the only theory that was prevalent at the time – there was another theory, postulated by Antoine Bechamp (and backed up by Gunther Enderlein, Claude Bernarde, Royal Rife, Gaston Naessens etc.) called The Cellular Theory.

Here is a comparison of the two theories:

GERM THEORY (PASTEUR)	CELLULAR THEORY (BECHAMP).
1. Disease arises from micro-organisms outside the body.	Disease arises from micro-organisms within the cells of the body.
2. Micro-organisms are generally to be guarded against.	These intracellular micro-organisms normally function to build and assist in the metabolic processes of the body.
3. The function of micro-organisms is constant.	The function of these organisms changes to assist in the catabolic (disintegration) processes of the host organism when that organism dies or is injured, which may be chemical as well as mechanical.
4. The shapes and colours of micro-organisms are constant	Micro-organisms change their shapes and colours to reflect the medium(pleomorphism)
5. Every disease is associated with a particular micro-organism	Every disease is associated with a particular condition.
6. Micro-organisms are primary causal agents.	Micro-organisms become “pathogenic” as the health of the host organism deteriorates. Hence, the condition of the host organism is the primary causal agent.
7. Disease can “strike” anybody.	Disease is built by unhealthy conditions.
8. To prevent disease we have to “build defences”.	To prevent disease we have to create health.

If you are interested, here is some further evidence concerning both The Germ Theory and The Cellular Theories:

Louis Pasteur Plagiarized Antoine Bechamp’s Work and Lied about Certain Aspects of His Germ Theory

Antoine Bechamp

The Current State and Behaviour of Big Pharm Today

On the Curious Working Practices of the FDA

Pasteur’s Mistakes

Claude Bernard

Gunther Enderlein

Antoine Bechamp

Gaston Naessens

Royal Raymond Rife

Virginia Livingston

Hodgkin’s Disease – Research Evidence of Pleomorphic Bacteria

In Praise of Four Women Against Cancer

Alan Cantwell M.D.

Notable also, is that the Germ Theory is the only theory that Big Pharma dares to allow — perhaps because this theory fits their money-making “business model” so well. This model — from the One Germ –> One disease aspect — conveniently allows Big Pharma to continuously invent thousands of expensive, singular drugs that are only useful for one particular disease or condition. They invent a drug or procedure, patent it and then make huge profits off their sales despite the drug’s or procedure’s usually vicious side-affects. The Cellular Theory would kill this business practice dead.

And you might well ask, why hasn’t anyone set out to prove, by way of any research, the efficacy of The Cellular Theory then? In America, it takes $200 million to prove safe proof of purpose for just one drug to the satisfaction of the FDA. And the only sector that has that kind of beefy funding is Big Pharma. There are no small start-up biotech companies or Alternative Therapy clinics that have this kind of money. So they are completely shut out of this drug loop by both Big Pharma and the FDA.

On his deathbed, and with his scientific adversary Claude Bernard present, Louis Pasteur finally admitted :”…You are right, microbes are nothing, the terrain is everything…”

But too late, the wheels of Big Pharma had already started to spin, twist and dance to The Germ Theory….

Also see the article Part 1 – Big Pharma : An Ethics and Morals Vacuum

Part 1: Big Pharma – An Ethics and Morals Vacuum

In 2007, the UK government’s Chief Scientific Advisor, Sir David King, laid out a ‘universal code of ethics’, which was a sort of ‘Hippocratic Oath for Scientists‘ for all researchers and scientists across the globe. The reasons for the introduction of this code was because of the increase in amoral breaches that were becoming apparent within the very fibre of the scientific research communities worldwide. The UK government has already adopted this code of ethics.

The seven principles of the code are intended to guide scientist’s actions, and are defined here:

• Act with skill and care in all scientific work. Maintain up to date skills and assist their development in others.

• Take steps to prevent corrupt practices and professional misconduct. Declare conflicts of interest.

• Be alert to the ways in which research derives from and affects the work of other people, and respect the rights and reputations of others.

• Ensure that your work is lawful and justified.

• Minimise and justify any adverse effect your work may have on people, animals and the natural environment.

• Seek to discuss the issues that science raises for society. Listen to the aspirations and concerns of others.

• Do not knowingly mislead, or allow others to be misled, about scientific matters. Present and review scientific evidence, theory or interpretation honestly and accurately.

Please notice the clauses that protect against corruption, that respects the rights of ordinary people, prevents disinfomation or propaganda, and promotes mutual sharing of information for the common good and adherence to The Law.

There is no such scientific code of ethics like this in the US. But here is one of the current definitions of the US modern version of the Hippocratic Oath (which applies only to the medical and not the scientific research personnel) as defined by Dr Louis Lasagna. There is much about humanity in this oath, but very little to do with morals, corruption or indeed the Law. This is certainly not emphasised.

Unfortunately, the US Medical Profession and its researchers(read Big Pharma) have not yet taken up this modern version of the Hippocratic Oath for Scientists. Perhaps this is understandable since even recent and modern US medical research has had such a poor and desperate history. See :

A History of Modern Medical and Psychiatric Experimentation in the USA(1965 – 2005)

This modern history is truly disgusting and horrific, involving not only Big Pharma and Medicine, but also the CIA and even President Bush himself — and in its reading, brings to mind all too well the abhorrent Nazi medical experiments and practices on the Jews during the Second World War.

But, if truth be told, my biggest gripe against modern Big Pharma is the power they have over both the Food and Drugs Administration as well as the US government. And my biggest reasons and suspicions of Big Pharma and the whole medical lobby are based mainly on statistics.

According to the NIA’s report(2001), over 784,000 people die annually due to medical mistakes. Comparatively, the 2001 annual death rate for heart disease was 699,697 and the annual death rate for cancer was 553,251. Iatrogenic death(death due to medical mistakes and drugs) are , undoubtedly, the major cause of death in the US.

Click here to see a breakdown of all the Iatrogenic Causes of Death in the US

The FDA Exposed: An Interview With David Graham, Vioxx WhistleBlower

The Increasing Corruption in the US Medical and Pharmaceutical Sectors

See the related post, Part 2 – Big Pharma: The Success of The Germ Theory

The Ravages of Ignored US Debt

The majority of American citizens probably have no actual idea of their country’s real fiscal debt. From the film I.O.U.S.A., David Walker describes it this way:

‘When many Americans think of debt and deficits, their knee-jerk reaction is to blame the war in Iraq, or defense spending. Some people think that we can solve the country’s financial problems by stopping fraud, waste and abuse, or by canceling the Bush tax cuts. The truth is, the United States could do all three of these things and still wouldn’t come close to solving the nation’s fiscal challenges.

‘The U.S. already has $11 trillion in fiscal liabilities, including public debt. To this amount, add the current unfunded obligations for Social Security benefits of about $7 trillion. Then add Medicare’s unfunded promise: $34 trillion, of which about $26 trillion relates to Medicare (parts A&B) and about $8 trillion relates to Medicare D, the new prescription drug benefit which some claimed would save money in overall Medicare costs. Add another trillion in miscellaneous items and you get $53 trillion. The United States would need $53 trillion invested today, which is about $175,000 per person, to deliver on the government’s obligations and promises. How much of this $53 trillion do we have? Nada.’

U.S. Debt History

But this ongoing and sad story of unmanageable U.S. Debt hasn’t always been the case. In Wikipedia and within early American History, the first recorded National Debt was $75,463,476.52, on Jan 1, 1791. The lowest point of the public debt was recorded in 1835 and was $33,733.05 !! And right throughout the 19th century – with a strong, rising economy – America’s greenback was fully backed by gold and always very stable. In those heady days noone had heard about Keynesian Economics or Monetarism. In terms of debt, part of this theory maintains the Debt represents Economic Strength. So the more debt a country has, according to the Monetarist Theory, the stronger the country is economically. But right now America is in deep debt. Do you think America is a strong, rising economy now without any economic weaknesses ? Seems to me there is also a principle called “Too Much and Too Little” which is similar to the Chinese Yin and Yang principle.

The Dollar’s Downward Slide

The stability of the Dollar was evident right up until 1913. Between 1913 and now, the American Dollar has declined in value by 96% . The Fed was also formed in 1913. In 1944 with the Bretton woods Agreement the dollar had a stellar rise in its importance, and became the World Reserve Currency. One of the principles that the US signed up to in Bretton Woods was that that US Dollar must always be backed by gold. So all other major currencies in the world confidently backed their currencies against the dollar(which was backed by gold). But in 1971 the greenback suddenly became a fiat currency, no longer backed by gold according to Executive Order decree by Richard Nixon. As well as this huge monetary turnaround, this also disconnected all the other major currencies of the world from the gold standard(without any option), because by making the Dollar a floating currency, all the other currencies that depended on the Dollar were consequently disconnected from gold. And by this action, Nixon greatly weakened the World Reserve Dollar, whose value and stability is patently no longer the hegemon it once was.

The Fed, The Dollar and the Great Importance of the Printing Press

The main way that the Fed deals with its mounting Debt is by selling its debt in the form of Sovereign Bonds, T-Notes, T-Bills etc. Foreign countries mainly buy these debt instruments for a fixed time period with a fixed interest which is guaranteed by the US government. These instruments are printed by The Fed and purchased in vast quantities by foreign countries (especially by Japan and China) with dollars from their reserves and dollars come back to America to help pay its vast debt. This mechanism undoubtedly inflates the dollar, driving its value South – continuously.

Interestingly enough there is another result from the The Fed’s creation of these debt instruments. This is called Fractional Reserve Lending or Banking which is defined as:

Fractional-reserve banking is a banking practice in which banks are required to keep only a fraction of their deposits in reserve with the choice of lending out the remainder while maintaining the obligation to redeem all deposits upon demand. This practice is prevalent worldwide and is considered to be the customary form of banking.

So, as an illustration of this banking principle, if the Fed creates – say – $1 million worth of T-Bills or dollars for purchase by China, then – according to US Banking Law – The Fed is allowed to create $9 million more dollars (out of thin air) for its own use in the ratio of 1:9. So, that’s 1 million T-Bills for China and $9 million for The Fed, who then lends this money out at low rates to the US banks and financial institutons (who again lend out these funds at the 1:9 ratio) who in turn lend this money out at very high and exorbitant credit rates to businesses and the public. This type of over-practice constantly inflates the Dollar and should need no explaining.

As well as this, the US government is also allowed to purchase it’s own debt instruments, thereby resulting in what seems to be an immediate profit of 9 times the worth of its investment out of thin air !! Multiples of this government practice can seem astounding. The mind boggles at all the possibilities here.

Another way that The Fed makes money is through something called seigniorage which can be defined as:

Seigniorage derived from coins arises from the difference between the face value of a of a coin (or note) and the cost of producing, distributing and eventually retiring it from circulation.

Here is a good illustration of this banking principle from Wikipedia:

No seigniorage occurs in the following situation: A person has one ounce of gold, trades it in for a gold certificate (which allows him to redeem the certificate for one ounce of gold), keeps that certificate for a year, and then trades it in for gold — he or she ends up with exactly one ounce of gold again.

Seignorage does occur in the following situation: A government does not issue gold certificates and instead converts gold into currency at the market rate. A person trades in an ounce of gold for its worth in currency, keeps that currency for a year, and then trades the currency back in for an amount of gold — he or she may receive a different amount of gold from that which he or she started with, if the price of gold has increased or decreased during that year. Even if he or she were then to use the currency to buy something, someone is holding the bill for the entire time and the government still has the gold.

But in the current economic climate, and particularly in the US, there is a very apparent rise in the cost of living which can be explained further:

Seigniorage can be seen as a form of tax levied on the holders of a currency and as such a redistribution of real resources to the issuer. The expansion of the money supply causes inflation. This means that the real wealth of people who hold cash or deposits decreases and the wealth of the issuer of the money increases. This is a redistribution of wealth from the people to the issuers of newly-created money (the central bank) very similar to a tax.

The above definition applies to all paper currencies as well. As an example, lets say The Fed prints a million 1 dollar bills. Let’s say the actual cost – since we’re talking about a commodity that consists of just paper and ink – to the government (as profit for The Fed which is a part-private financial institution) is about 2.2 cents per note. So when the Fed puts the bills out there, it is making a profit from the government, because these are $1 dollar bills that have already devalued by 2.2% (through cost to the govt.).And as these costs rise through this inflation, the value of the dollar thus becomes less and less.

Perhaps this “inflation tax”(represented by the year by year inflation rate of the dollar currency that occurs with expansion of the money supply) levied by the US government on its own people is actually a very discreet and constant form of income tax. What else can you call it except, perhaps, a super-stealth citizens tax ? I wonder whether US citizens fully realize what is happening here.

In the descriptive words of Congressman Ron Paul upon the rampant money printing habits of The Fed:

“Strictly speaking, it probably is not necessary for the federal government to tax anyone directly; it could simply print the money it needs. However, that would be too bold a stroke, for it would then be obvious to all what kind of counterfeiting operation the government is running. The present system combining taxation and inflation is akin to watering the milk: too much water and the people catch on.”

The US Dollar – Current Status and Health Prospects

Well, everybody in the US is heaving a sigh of relief now, since the dollar has recently recovered its strength. Isn’t The Fed just wonderful !!? Their policies have worked just a treat haven’t they ? Great job guys !!

I hate to burst your bubble(Ouch, sorry about that..!!) but The Fed’s singular policies certainly had nothing whatsoever to do with the dollar’s recent quick recovery in August 2008 - because China will soon be purchasing vast quantities of US debt instruments for her own ends. This news is the real reason for the dollar’s sudden recovery. China has done this purely to maintain downward pressure on her Renminbi and Yuan, keeping her currrency well undervalued against the dollar – therefore her goods and services stay cheap. Cheaper than US exports.

The other far more disturbing thought is that for the first time ever, China has managed to successfully grossly manipulate the US Dollar for its own gain. Easily. And if it is capable of strengthening the Dollar for its own ends, China is equally capable of selling off that same currency for her own gain. Very disturbing indeed to see clear evidence that the US government has fully lost control of its own trade currency to China….

Deep Oil, Deep Power and Deep Pockets

Within the broil of geopolitical opinion, political correctness, shadow agendas and trite, posturing exchanges between world leaders, it is certainly difficult to sort out the truth form the drivel. When we are told something of earth shattering importance by a mega-country politician we then always have to analyze and decode it. In its first tellings there is no such thing as basic truth. These political deliveries can usually be split into two areas of explanation: The Convenient Excuse and The Inconvenient Reason. Politicians always tell you only the Convenient Excuse which, if you like, is merely barely believeable propaganda. Try this formula with Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, the US Polish Missile Base and Georgia and, if you look carefully behind the door, you’ll find a damn good alternative rationale for their political actions and purpose — The Inconvenient Reason — such as aggression, dominance, greed, oil monopolies and a myriad of other power-play reasons to suit any type of Communist, Democratic or Banana Republic government agenda. Let’s face it, there isn’t that much difference between Communist and Democratic puckering or babble is there? And this certainly applies to Big Business too, and particularly to the Oil Majors which is what this blog is all about.

Is Peak Oil Just a Convenient Excuse for High Oil Prices ?

In my last article – The Evidence for Limitless Oil and Gas — I presented as much evidence as I could for both the Western Biogenic Oil Formation Theory and the modern Russian Abiotic Oil Formation Theory. Before I researched this, I too was a firm Peak Oil believer. And Peak Oil can only be perpetuated and true if you believe in the Western Biogenic Oil Theory which, from its very explanation, determines that oil is finite. But then I became convinced of the validity of the Russian Abiotic Theory and wondered whether Big Oil was perpetuating The Peak Oil Theory for another reason. Perhaps Peak Oil is the Convenient Excuse and Excess Profit is the Inconvenient Reason ?

These two theories also must govern how you find oil. Using the Western Biogenic Method, you are only looking for an ancient static pool or reservoir of oil within the upper sedimentary layers of the Earth’s crust. This is an extremely difficult process, finding oil this way is very hit-and-miss as history has proved. Using the Russian Abiogenic Method, you simply look for cracks or fissures within the deeper igneous or metamorphic rock (called cap rock) which, according to the theory, leaks oil upwards through the hard cap rock into the sedimentary layers above. So oil can indeed be found in the sedimentary layers of rock but actually originates at much deeper levels below the hard capstone rock(as per Kudrayvtsev’s Rule). Searching for oil this way is much easier – just look for faults and fissures in the tectonic plates as evidenced by volcanoes, mud volcanoes, earthquake regions etc. and you will find oil albeit at much deeper levels. Or you simply drill through the cap rock to the oil below using special ultra-deep well extended-reach-drilling techniques. This kind of extended-reach-drilling technology in regard to its difficulty, compares easily with space technology. Also according to the Russian Abiotic Theory, if you have struck oil in shallow sedimentary rock and the oil becomes exhausted, then simply carry on drilling downwards and you will discover more oil either in the sedimentary layer below or in the region below the fissured cap rock.

The Discreet Affinity of the Bush Administration to the Peak Oil Theory

I am pretty stumped as to why the US government still beats its Republican drum concerning its dislike of Middle East Oil dependency. Bush is huffing and puffing about this, currently threatening to open up the offshore oilfields off Alaska and the American West Coast and hang the environmental cost. Bush and Cheney are both die-hard through-and-through American oilmen and are therefore closely aligned to the wishes of The Oil Majors(who funded and installed them into there current positions of power). So, simply put, I just can’t trust their judgements or their Convenient Excuses — since they are both probably well into the Peak Oil ruse. What a bluff!!….Yet another convenient perpetuation of Peak oil theory.

Consequences of Adherence to the Peak Oil Theory

You want reasons ? Click here to see the current running total of the profits earned by the five oil majors(Exxon, Chevron, Total, Shell and BP) since 2003.

The current rate of profit for the 5 Oil Majors is $3203.86 per second.

Well I can tell you, I’m plum exhausted now. To those Republicans(..and there will be a few) who violently disagree with my written blasphemy — for some enlightenment, can I suggest a driving holiday with a Budget Car in Russia ? If nothing else, the petrol will be significantly cheaper there (Russia is not part of OPEC nor does it adhere to the American Peak Oil Theory). For anyone else that disagrees and still sticks to the Peak Oil Theory – may I wish you all well and fair luck. And of course, happy walking. . .

I really need a break here, so I’m off to Burger Bust for the biggest, oilest, abiotic bull-bap I can find . . .And I will be driving. Optimistically, as it happens. . .

The Evidence for Limitless Oil and Gas

“The suggestion that petroleum might have arisen from some transformation of squashed fish or biological detritus is surely the silliest notion to have been entertained by substantial numbers of persons over an extended period of time.”

Fred Hoyle 1982

My own layman’s view — as we all surely believe — has always been that oil and gas were derived through the natural and long decomposition of organic detritus. Therefore I’ve always believed that oil is a finite resource and that it will eventually run out. But recently – and after much hard searching out of the facts, my view has changed. If the Russian view that oil and gas are continuously formed or replaced from a physical/chemical thermodynamic process that continously regenerates oil from ultra-deep locations(>9,000 metres), then the inference here is that oil may, perhaps, not be a finite resource — and that there is plenty of it.

Oil and Gas Origins – Biogenic or Abiotic ?

Do oil and gas originate from the biological decomposition of organic material (biogenic) or do they originate simply through a natural physical and chemical thermodynamic process involving just heat and pressure (abiotic) ?

It is notable that the whole of Hubbert’s Theory of Peak Oil rests completely on the assumption that oil is biogenic in origin. Therefore oil is a finite resource. Simply everyone believes this, because everyone believes that this is a proven fact. I have also read that this Biogenic Theory directly contradicts and offends the Second Law of Thermodynamics. I became suspicious, so I searched all over the internet for substantiative proof — and particularly the research articles in Google Scholar.

Evidence for The Biogenic Theory

• In 1757 Russian Scientist, Mikhailo Lomonosov put forward a hypothesis and suggested that oil came from biological detritus.

• In his paper “The Abiotic Oil Controversy” by Richard Heinberg which sides with biogenic oil (With relatively little actual quoted research evidence) has even admitted :“There is no way to conclusively
  prove that no petroleum is of abiotic origin…Perhaps one day there will be general agreement that at least some oil is indeed abiotic. Maybe there are indeed deep methane belts twenty miles below the Earth’s surface. But the important question to keep in mind is: What are the practical consequences of this discussion now for the problem of global oil depletion? “
  

  Lomonosov

The normal geologists view is that all oil and gas formation is biogenic. So I began with Wikipedia which indeed puts forth and recognised the theories of both Biogenic and Abiotic oil and gas origin. And although there has been clear, modern Russian research evidence cited for the theory of Abiotic Oil formation – oddly – there were no proper citations or references for the Biogenic theory on Wikipedia. I searched the internet including Google Scholar and there seems to be no ‘absolute proof’ from direct modern research for the Biogenic Theory of oil and gas formation. This theory — for want of a better word — seems to be greatly ‘assumed’ by geologists throughout geological research.

Evidence for the Abiotic Theory

I am certainly surprised to admit that there is such a large body of research on this theory — and all mainly Russian in origin. But this modern research — which is very detailed, seems to have been generally and surprisingly ignored by the West.

• In the 19th century various abiogenic hypotheses were first proposed after advances in science in the nineteenth century by Alexander von Humboldt, Dmitri Mendeleev and Marcellin Berthalot.
  

  Nikolai Kudraysvtsev

• Definition and Evidence

• An Article called Dismissal of the Claims of a Biological Connection to Biogenic Oil by J F Kenney. This is a detailed and scientifically rigourous paper which sets sets out to disprove all the various “fuzzy” assumptions for the Theory of Biogenic Oil. This was the article that completely convinced me of the truth of Abiotic Oil Formation.

• Nikolai Kudrayvtsev’s Theory(1951)

• Abiogenic(Abiotic) Petroleum Origin – Wikipedia

• “An Introduction to the Modern Petroleum Science, and to the Russian-Ukrainian Theory of Deep, Abiotic Petroleum Origins” by J.F. Kenney, Russian Academy of Sciences.

• In the ‘Introduction’ and ‘Scientific Publications’ section of GasResources.net there are many bona fide Russian research articles.

• A Dissertation by J.F. Kenney(Joint Institute of the Physics of the Earth Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow). Here is an extract:

“ABSTRACT: For almost a century, various predictions have been made that the human race is imminently going to run out of available petroleum. The passing of time has proven all those predictions to have been utterly wrong. It is pointed out here how all predictions have

depended fundamentally upon anarchaic hypothesis from the 18th century that petroleum somehow (miraculously) evolve from biological detritus, and is accordingly limited in abundance. That hypothesis has been replaced during the past forty years by the modern Russian-Ukrainian theory of deep, abiotic petroleum origins which has established that petroleum is a primordial material erupted from great depth. Therefore, petroleum abundances are limited by little more than the quantities of its constituents as were incorporated into the Earth at the time of its formation; and its availability depends upon technological development and exploration competence.”

• Considerations about Recent Predictions of Impending Shortages of Petroleum…by J.F. Kenney

• A Russian Book – ‘ Advanced Drilling Solutions’ detailing deep and ultra-deep oil drilling technology beyond the Earth’s crust and sedimentary layers to depths of over 40,000 ft’.

• Confirmation that oil fields in the Dnieper-Donetsk Basin in the Ukraine are Aboitic

• Peak Oil Theory vs Russian-Ukraine Modern Theory

Apparent Disinformation and Prejudicial Judgement of the Abiotic Theory

It is peculiar that there is so little Western acknowledgement or research verification concerning the utra-deep Russian Abiotic Oil formation theory. Surely this is suspicious and bears investigating — even if you don’t believe the theory — because this would certainly remove the geopolitical effects and problems of the current thinking on oil — that it is running out. Concerning this theory, I have also found some evidence of plagiarism, disinformation and misrepresentation of research data regarding the Russian Abiotic Theory by fairly eminent western scientists and western news resources :

• Accusations of Plagiarism and Misrepresentation of Abiotic Russian Research on Thomas Gold a well known US scientist.
• Rebuttal of article “Fossil fuel without Fossils” (Nature magazine, T. Clark, 12 August 2002) by J. F. Kenney, V. G. Kutcherov, N. A. Bendeliani, V. A. Alekseev, (2002).

Conclusions

In the end, I tend to agree with Richard Heinberg in that Oil and Gas formation is probably both biogenic as well as abiotic as I have no reason to believe otherwise. And if this is the case, why are people saying that we are running out of oil ? — Since the abiotic theory of oil maintains that there is a huge, untapped amount of oil already deep within the Earth’s mantle.

See my follow-up article Deep Oil, Deep Power and Deep Pockets in answer to the above question.

US Protectionism and the Domino Effect

As Obama steps up to the plate to become US President, and with the world still twisting in agony from the turbulent and never-ending Financial Crisis, what will he do to assure US business and industry ? Will he maintain the Free Economic Markets ? Or will he be forced to throw in the towel and raise the barriers of US Protectionism ?

Recently, President-elect Obama said, “China must change its currency practices. Because it pegs its currency at an artificially low rate, China is running massive current account surpluses. This is not good for American firms and workers, not good for the world.” Which is all perfectly true. Now ask yourself why China is doing this – obviously to maintain price supremacy in her markets. What does China say in reply ? She has already complained and warned that America should manage her own volatile trade dollar properly and has already stated that if America installs protectionist policies, then China would be forced to both dump her trillions of dollar reserves as well as implement protectionist policies of her own.

From an article in the UK Telegraph by Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, business editor:

There has been much talk lately of America’s Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, which set off the protectionist dominoes in 1930. It is usually invoked by free traders to make the wrong point. The relevant message of Smoot-Hawley is that America was then the big exporter, playing the China role. By resorting to tariffs, it set off retaliation, and was the biggest victim of its own folly.

Britain and the Dominions retreated into Imperial Preference. Other countries joined. This became the “growth bloc” of the 1930s, free from the deflation constraints of the Gold Standard. High tariffs stopped the stimulus leaking out.

It was a successful strategy – given the awful alternatives – and was the key reason why Britain’s economy contracted by just 5pc during the Depression, against 15pc for France, and 30pc for the US.

Could we see such a closed “growth bloc” emerging now, this time led by the US, entailing a massive rupture of world’s trading system? Perhaps.

This crisis has already brought us a monetary revolution as interest rates approach zero across the G10. It may overturn the “New World Order” as well, unless we move with great care in grim months ahead. This is where events turn dangerous.

The last great era of globalisation peaked just before 1914. You know the rest of the story.

I also find it peculiar that, apart from India’s and China’s successful economic emergence, all the rest of the Asian countries who have joined the WTO continue to flounder under the grossly unfair rules, regs and penalties of both the IMF and the World Bank. And then when you look at the performance of countries like Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia, The Philippines and Thailand who have all the so called ‘advantages’ of this Western run financial club, it is very odd indeed that the two Asian countries doing by far the best in terms of economic potential – and who are not members of these economic clubs – are India and China.

It has also been supposed that Obama’s inner cabinet is full of “free traders”. This can hardly be said to be the case in regard to Timothy Geithner, who, though certainly competent and necessary for continuity, is certainly a Protectionist according to his recent reported actions with Bernanke:

Both the Post and Times told readers that President Obama picked an economic team committed to “free trade.” This is not true.

The top members of President Obama’s team, and certainly his Treasury Secretary designate Timothy Geithner, supported the use of federal funds to bail out the banks. Giving $350 billion in loans at below market rates (coupled with government guarantees for deposits) was a massive subsidy to U.S. banks that give them an enormous advantage in international competition. Such subsidies are a clear form of protectionism.

While these officials may want to call themselves “free traders,” it is not an accurate description of their approach to economic policy and the media should not use it except in a quotation.

For clarity, Protectionism may be defined as :

“… The economic policy of restraining trade between nations, through methods such as tariffs on imported goods, restrictive quotas, and a variety of other restrictive government regulations designed to discourage imports, and prevent foreign take-over of local markets and companies. This policy is closely aligned with anti-globalization, and contrasts with free trade, where government barriers to trade are kept to a minimum. The term is mostly used in the context of economics, where protectionism refers to policies or doctrines which “protect” businesses and “living wages” within a country by restricting or regulating trade between foreign nations.”

President-elect Obama has complained about China’s unfair currency advantage. Perhaps he should avoid stepping on The Dragon’s Tail and read the  following  book – Super Imperialism: The Economic Strategy of American Empire by Michael Hudson, an American – before he complains about the unfair economic advantages of China. And perhaps he should also study Murray Rothbard’s The Case Against the Fed for some more truth and enlightenment concerning the blatantly unfair economics of the World Reserve Dollar.

I’m all for a level economic playing field myself and, after all, this is what Free Market Capitalism is all about, isn’t it ?

Mr Obama, US Fiscal Debt and the Lazy, Lazy Dollar

On January 20th there will be a new President in office and with this event – so we are told – a new era of economic hope will unfold and come into being. It seems that President Obama intends to introduce another massive stimulus into the American economy, with hugely funded infrastructure projects to encourage employment, tax cuts and redistribution of wealth for the middle classes, more Medical benefits for the poor and more tax breaks for America based businesses, just to name a few. But I do have some questions about these policies. Such as: Where will President Obama find the money to feed all these voraciously money-hungry projects ? What effect will all this spending have on the US Fiscal Debt and the dollar ? And where are the government policies that should function to reduce or payback US Debt ?

Since 1971, when the dollar was so ignominiously yanked off the gold standard by President Nixon (because he couldn’t pay the US IMF Debt caused by the Vietnam War), all world currencies have since become fiat and are therefore no longer backed by any valuable hard asset such as gold or silver. Within a short time, the dollar found its way onto a new and darker standard – the Treasury Bill/Debt exchange standard – wherein all reserve dollars accumulated by foreign countries could only be used to either purchase American goods or buy commodities like oil or purchase American Treasury Bonds. So most countries – and in particular China, Japan, Russia and UK – have all purchased large amounts of Treasury Debt Instruments which give ridiculously low and unfair interest rates in the longterm, because they simply can’t use their reserve dollars for anything else. Hence, since 1971, the rest of the world has been continually fueling and paying for America’s cheap debt/credit based lifestyle and policies. As a consequence, it is well subscribed that the American government has always had what can only be described as “benign neglect” regarding its own non-existent Fiscal Debt or Deficit policies which are manifest in its prolonged and continuous lack of proper dollar management. This “benign neglect” benefits no-one but America and only in the short term since it must beg the question: “Why should foreign world governments continuously pay America’s Fiscal Deficit, and thereby fuel her voracious credit based lifestyle forever ?”. The answer – what most people say these days – is that the world needs the American economy, therefore the world must support the dollar and continuously fund America’s debt in order to avoid economic Armageddon. But the cracks are already appearing in this convenient excuse – since it is clear that certain countries are fed up both with Amerca’s selfish “benign neglect” of her dollar as well as her ever-increasing debts….

In the newspapers and journals that I’ve been reading, the geopolitical position of America is now being questioned as well as significantly threatened. As an example, most people have heard of the Axis of Evil – a country cartel which includes the likes of Venezuela, Russia, China, Iran, India etc., Obamawho do not want to purchase oil or other commodities (as per Breton Woods) using the US Greenback. A new oil bourse has recently opened up on Kish Island in Iran (May 2008) where they trade oil mainly in Euros and never in dollars. How dare they, I hear you cry – what about Breton Woods ? Well, what about Breton Woods. If Nixon can remove gold from the dollar at the flick of a switch without consent (a prime contractual postulate of the Breton Woods agreement was that America’s Dollar must always be backed by gold) then why can’t other countries say to hell with Breton Woods and the dollar ? China has about $2 trillion in her dollar reserves and Russia has about $500 billion. And these two countries cannot be said to be great friends with America – but they certainly have the capability of easily destroying America’s economy with all their excess reserve dollars. Since it is fairly clear that the US Government has lost control of its own currency through its own lazy policy of “benign neglect”, all these two countries have to do is sell off their dollars and diversify into Euros and Yen for its horrific effects to be truly felt. If this does happen, America’s dollar economy will catch fire and consume itself in a rage of hyperinflation. But, of course, this won’t happen – or so the stale, old argument goes – because China and Russia both need the American market. This feeble argument is no more than an ever-hopeful and somewhat desperate Western view I think. China alone has a population that is 5 times larger than the US population of 300 million. All China has to do is turn her manufacturing inwards, to supply the citizens of her own domestic markets. As well, we also have Europe, India, Russia and the Mid-East, altogether a much larger market than America. And if all that wealth moves from West to East as has been predicted, where will this leave America ?

So now lets quickly return and look at Obama’s policies. In a general assessment these stimulus policies are all spend, spend, spend aren’t they ? How will President Obama balance his government’s forever increasing debt ? At some point, this debt must be paid back. If this is not the case then America is likely to be left naked, broke and stranded economically. In August 2007 we had the Sub-prime debacle. Come March 2008 and this developed into a fractured Financial Credit Bubble and many banks and financial institutions fell. The third and final stage – if America does not start tending her own Fiscal Deficit properly, will be complete loss of dollar confidence and the bursting of the Treasury/Debt exchange bubble – where all foreign countries stop buying useless US Treasury Bonds, and cease paying for America’s on-going credit and debt mistakes and excesses respectively.

And from this point on, America will have to pay back her massive debts all on her own.

Since September 2008, the US National Debt has been increasing by $464 million per day.

Current US Fiscal Debt or Deficit = $60 trillion and rising. . . .

Fannie and Freddie Bailout: Opinions and Wrath

So the decision has finally and predictably been made and the US government will now pay out huge sums of taxpayer’s money to take over both Freddie an Fannie.

Here are some expert opinions and comments from The Gurus regarding this buy-off :

Jim Rogers says: “I don’t know where these guys get the audacity to take our money, taxpayer money, and buy stock in Fannie Mae…. So we’re going to bail out everybody else in the world. And it ruins the Federal Reserve’s balance sheet and it makes the dollar more vulnerable and it increases inflation…These companies were going to go bankrupt if they hadn’t stepped in to do something, and they should’ve gone bankrupt with all of the mistakes they’ve made. What’s going to happen when you Band-Aid and put some Band-Aids on it for another year or two or three? What’s going to happen three years from now when the situation’s much, much, much worse?…They’re ruining what has been one of the greatest economies in the world”

Warren Buffet has referred to Fannie and Freddie and said that the “Game is Over”. He also has said the Fannie and Freddie:“… were able to borrow without any of the normal restraints. They had a blank check from the federal government. They priced risk wrong…. They don’t have any worth“

George Soros commented that a ’solvency crisis’ was coming and went on to say: “This is a very serious financial crisis and it is the most serious financial crisis of our lifetime … It is an idle dream to think that you could have this kind of crisis without the real economy being affected”

Marc Faber said on ABC TV:”What should happen is basically that the people that were running these financial institutions are responsible and the shareholders that own the shares and the bond holders of these institutions, they should take the haircut and not the taxpayer, the simple man on the street, bailing out the rich kids on Wall Street“

Paul Volcker, ex-Fed Boss, referred to the current US financial system as:”…dysfunctional. That is a polite way of saying it failed.” and had this to say: “This bright new system, this practice in the United States, this practice in the United Kingdom and elsewhere, has broken down..Growth in the economy in this decade will be the slowest of any decade since the Great Depression, right in the middle of all this financial innovation.”

Greenspan comments:“The Federal Reserve has been unable to find any credible purpose for the huge balance sheets built by Fannie and Freddie other than the creation of profit through the exploitation of the market-granted subsidy….The strong belief of investors in the implicit government backing of the Government Sponsored Enterprises(GSEs) does not by itself create problems of safety and soundness for the GSEs but it does create systemic risks for the U.S. financial system as the GSEs become very large”

Surprising that two ex-Fed bosses – Volker and Greenspan – should also both have said that Fannie and Freddie should be broken up and left to die. It also seems that the Gurus are talking sensible economics. While all the snappy Wall Street Fund managers are of opposing opinions. On one side we have the weathered and experienced opinion of tried experts, and on the other we have the opposite opinions of the desperate, slick survivors crying “Save us…Save us, Dear God !!” — this from some very rich and now extremely relieved Wall Street Fund Managers.

But the sharks are still circling in the murky waters of financial US insolvency and their numbers now are bound to increase. I fear that they will be there for a long time to come and so the feeding frenzy will continue unabated and unrestrained by the natural, primal laws of the free markets.

KGB Tales 2008

FSB Coat of Arms

“All warfare is based on deception.”

Sun Tzu, The Art of War

Since the upheavals of Yeltsin’s time, the West was both impressed and relieved by the democratizing of Russia. The description “USSR” disappeared and the old and more comfortable name of “Russia” re-appeared. And the old KGB was dissolved and morphed into the new FSB – The Federal Security Bureau. It has a very Western ring to it doesn’t it ?– Sounds a bit like FBI.

When the KGB Chairman — Vladimir Kruchkov — led a failed coup to take over the government, Yeltsin split up the KGB, which ceased to exist on 6th November,

KGB Symbol

1991. Like it or not, but the Old KGB Guard is still in place however, and the KGB or FSB — pick any fancy synonym you like – which still remains both historically and operationally, the most deceptive agency which the experts refer to as “The world’s most effective intelligence agency”. Their record and capacity for obtaining foreign secrets, creating propaganda for deliberate disinformation, human target elimination methods and their patient ability to wreck and politically take over governments is renowned. Indeed, if you look closely and compare the coat of arms of the KGB and FSB they are apparently the same — except that within the new FSB symbol the sword has been blatantly moved behind the shield. Perhaps the FSB is diffferent now in some subtle way.

Putin Still Working with the Old Guard

Putin’s reign of Russia has been very successful so far. When he took over from Yeltsin, he did so quietly and bided his time. Since this period Russia has become richer by its oil, and Putin has remained steadily at the helm, the pin-up of Russia’s adoration. But during his reign the “KGB” style exploits are ongoing. Many journalists, satellite leaders and ex-KGB defectors have been successfully eliminated, and the Russia’s intelligence plays have become even more daring, patient and subtle.

Lech Walesa – A Communist “Sleeper” ?

In 2000, Walesa – the famous Solidarity Union Leader who defeated a Polish Communist government in the 1980s – was tried as a suspect Communist collaborator for the Polish secret police by the politically powerful Kaczynski twins; these accusations were later thrown out of court by the judge and Walesa was released. This year – in June – an investigative book has been published in Poland called “The Secret Police and Lech Walesa” by two eminent Polish historians. This Book sets out to prove without much doubt that Walesa was indeed a Communist and collaborator within the SB (Polish Secret Police). See the following articles in The Times and also a very convincing face-to-face interview in SpiegelOnline with Slawomir Cenckiewicz — one of the book’s authors. This article is called ‘Positive Proof’ Lech Walesa was a Communist Spy. If Lech Walesa – unbelievably – was a Communist collaborator, then the KGB/FSB have certainly done their work well. If the story is true then we must also safely assume that Poland – at all levels of governance and judiciary right now – is perhaps even more riddled with communist spies and collaborators than ever before.

And Poland is the country that Bush has picked to base his so-called “Anti-Iranian” missile defence system. He may well have been double bluffed and might even be playing right into Putin’s hands.

If these proposed US Polish bases hadn’t caused such a dangerous state of affairs – it would indeed be laughable, but once again shows how the KBG legacy methods are still payng such rich dividends for Russia . . .