EU / Ukraine Agreement a NATO Trojan Horse

 

Article: Is NATO’s Trojan Horse Riding Towards the “Ukraine Spring”? 

By: Dennis Kucinich

News Source: Huffington Post

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dennis-j-kucinich/ukraine-nato_b_4435637.html

Ukrainian citizens have rallied in the bitter cold at Independence Square in Kiev to demand a better economic future and to protest President Viktor Yanukovych's failure to sign an economic agreement with the EU.

But while the draft of the EU "Association Agreement" is being sold as an economic boon for Ukrainian citizens, in reality it appears to be NATO's Trojan Horse: a massive expansion of NATO's military position in the region. What's more, the Agreement occurs under the cover of nebulous economic promises for a beset population hungering for better wages.

In a country where the average monthly minimum wage stands at about $150 USD, it's not hard to understand why Ukrainians are in the streets. They do not want to be in Russia's orbit, nor do they want to be pawns of NATO.

But is the plight of Ukrainians being exploited to usher in a new military agreement under the guise of economic reform?

For NATO, the goal is expansion. The prize is access to a country that shares a 1,426-mile border with Russia. The geopolitical map would be dramatically reshaped by the Agreement, with Ukraine serving as the new front for Western missile defense at the doorstep of Russia. Should the U.S. nuclear deal with Iran fall apart, Ukraine could be employed in larger regional disputes, too.

As an EU deal appears imminent, few people are asking questions about NATO's role in the deal, which was meant to facilitate jobs and trade. Economic conditions in Ukraine are dire: $15 billion in IMF loans suspended, danger of default and a zero growth forecast.

While NATO is not specifically mentioned in the draft of the "Association Agreement," the proposal, which was posted online (and translated to English here) by the Ukrainian cabinet in August, pledges convergence of foreign and security policy.

Read: NATO expansion.

For instance, in the draft of the Agreement, foreign and security policy mandates:

“The Parties shall explore the potential of military and technological cooperation. Ukraine and the European Defence Agency (EDA) will establish close contacts to discuss military capability improvement, including technological issues.”

The draft of the Agreement's preamble links Ukraine to "ever closer convergence of positions on bilateral, regional and international issues of mutual interest" including the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) of the European Union and the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) -- which underscores the military nature of the agreement.

Since 22 of 28 members of the EU have NATO membership, there is little doubt that Ukraine is being drawn into the broad military arrangement with EU nations.

If the EU Agreement is ratified, Ukraine will inevitably spend a higher percentage of its GDP for military purposes, steering critical resources from social programs and job opportunities. In 2012, Ukraine's military budget already increased 30 percent to $2 billion, representing a comparatively low 1.1 percent of GDP. NATO members agree to spend at least 2 percent of GDP on defense.

NATO members are also under pressure to contribute more and more of their GDP to military expenditures. "It is time to move beyond the '2 percent rule,'" says the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

The former U.S. Ambassador to NATO, Ivo Daalder, in his farewell remarks in June, 2013, described the sentiment:

"The gap between American and European contributions to the Alliance is widening to an unsustainable level. Something must be done. The trends need to be reversed."

When military spending goes up, domestic spending goes down. The winners are unlikely to be the people of Ukraine, but instead the "people" of Lockheed-Martin, Northrop Grumman, Boeing and other defense interests. The Ukrainians didn't go to Independence Square to rally for NATO. Yet NATO's benefit is clear. Less clear is whether Ukrainians will receive key economic benefits they seek.

To wit, the preamble to the Agreement is hazy on the implementation of visa-free travel for citizens of Ukraine, a crucial incentive for struggling workers seeking better jobs. The draft of the Agreement is vague, calling for the visa issue to be introduced "in due course." It also asserts that EU nations could block the movement of self-employed Ukrainians to other job markets.

For Greece, Spain and others, EU membership hasn't turned out to be a shining economic savior. The return of austerity policies reminds one of Naomi Klein's warning about the perils of disaster capitalism, in which instability opens the door for exploitation from outside forces.

For the protesters in Kiev, standing tall for democracy and economic opportunity, there's suddenly a new worry: Disaster Militarism. Ukrainians may be pro-EU, but are the EU and NATO pro-Ukrainian?
---------------------------------

Dennis J. Kucinich is a former 16-year member of Congress and two-time U.S. presidential candidate.
Visit his Official website: www.kucinichaction.com

Dennis J. Kucinich - Facebook:

www.facebook.com/denniskucinich
Dennis J. Kucinich - Twitter:
www.twitter.com/Dennis_Kucinich

Links:

EU / Ukraine Association Agreement (PDF)(English)

http://glavcom.ua/pub/2012_11_19_EU_Ukraine_Association_Agreement_English.pdf
Draft of the EU Association Agreement (PDF)
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/com/2013/0290/COM_COM(2013)0290(PAR2)_EN.pdf
IMF Repeats Loan Demands on Ukraine
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-10-31/ukraine-vows-to-curb-reserves-plunge-as-imf-repeats-loan-demands.html

 

America Close to War with Syria: Obama Deployed US Troops to Jordan “Without Notifying Congress”

 

Source: Global Research

http://www.globalresearch.ca/america-close-to-war-with-syria-obama-deployed-us-troops-to-jordan-without-notifying-congress/5308151

Dennis Kucinich: the deployment of American troops in Jordan brings the US "immeasurably" closer to War with Syria

US Troops have been deployed to Jordan. They are close to the Syrian border. According to a statement of Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, 100 troops have been deployed to the Syrian border. US News reports quotes the statements of Congressman Dennis Kucinich:

Ohio Democratic Rep. Dennis Kucinich believes the deployment of American troops in Jordan — which was announced Wednesday — brings the United States “immeasurably” closer to being dragged into the civil war in Syria.

“I can see in a moment how it happens: we’re a few dozen miles from the Syrian border and all of a sudden we are within the reach of physical danger. All it takes is a single incident,” Kucinich said in a phone interview with U.S. News.

The Ohio congressman pointed to the fact that this troop deployment, which is described by the Jordanian government as “routine” (under a bilateral US-Jordan military cooperation agreement) was ordered by the president and commander-in-chief “without notifying Congress.”

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta disclosed on Wednesday that over 100 American troops had been sent to near the Jordanian border with Syria.

“As we’ve said before, we have been planning for various contingencies, both unilaterally and with our regional partners,” explained Pentagon spokesman George Little in a statement reported by The Associated Press.

According to Kucinich:

“Putting U.S. troops on that border draws the U.S. much closer to war in Syria, which is a nightmare already and can be more of a nightmare for our country”

“There’s a trail of causality here, … Once you position U.S troops on the border of a conflict area, it immeasurably increases the possibility of the U.S. getting drawn into the conflict — because we’re there.” (quoted in usnews.com, October 10, 2012)

Kucinich: “NATO Talks a Sham: War in Afghanistan is Not Ending”

By: Rep Dennis Kucinich

Source: Global Research
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=30998

Washington, May 21 - Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) today released the following statement as world leaders meet in Chicago for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) summit.

“The North Atlantic Treaty Organization is not a benevolent organization. NATO is not about the North Atlantic and it’s not about our collective defense.

“NATO is a cost-sharing organization that finances aggressive military action. By hiding behind the claim that the organization provides for ‘common defense,’ NATO allows us to wage wars of choice under the guise of international peacekeeping. The most recent example was the unconstitutional war in Libya where NATO, operating under a United Nations mandate to protect civilians, instead backed one side in a civil war and pursued a policy of regime change.

“Today, NATO leaders are meeting in Chicago to discuss the future of Afghanistan. The talks are being billed as discussions of plans to end the war. The war in Afghanistan is not ending. These talks are simply about financing the next phase of the war.

“The Strategic Partnership Agreement between the U.S. and Afghanistan commits us to the country for at least another decade, despite public support for the war being at an all time low. The United States will pay for half of the estimated $4.1 billion per year cost of supporting 352,000 Afghan army and police officers. Afghanistan’s contribution will be $500,000. The rest will be financed by our ‘NATO partners.’ It is not surprising that support for the war among NATO members is waning, with France threatening to pull out its troops by the end of this year.

“Our participation in NATO comes at a great financial cost to the U.S. We contribute the majority of funds for NATO’s common budget, including 25% of the military budget. Between fiscal years 2010 and 2012 alone, we contributed more than $1.3 billion to NATO’s military budget. We also incur significant costs through the deployment of our forces in support of NATO missions. According to The Atlantic, the war in Libya cost the United States $1.1 billion.

“NATO was originally founded to provide a strategic counterbalance to the Soviet Union. Its founding purpose no longer exists, but NATO continues to circumvent the authority of the United Nations and to provoke other nations. NATO is an anachronism. Instead of trying to bolster the organization, we should begin serious discussions to dismantle it.”

Five Yards and a Cloud of Dust

By: Willian Rivers Pitt
Source: Truthout
http://www.truthout.org/five-yards-and-a-cloud-dust57820



Last week, Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) made it clear to any and all that he was going to vote "No" on the health care reform package currently being considered by the House. His argument was simple, and on many levels, entirely correct: the current bill is half a loaf, does not contain any kind of public option and is a big, fat giveaway to the insurance and pharmaceutical industries.

Alarm bells started ringing all over the White House, and Representative Kucinich found himself invited for an Air Force One trip with the president. The plane landed, and Representative Kucinich emerged with an announcement that he would, in fact, be voting "Yes" on the bill. Moreover, he immediately swung into action and began whipping votes to make sure the bill gets passed, a move his colleagues described as "unprecedented."

What happened? Did Kucinich cave under pressure? Was there some savage arm-twisting going on during that plane ride? Perhaps. It is more than likely, however, that Mr. Obama sat Kucinich down and explained to him that failure to pass this health care bill would be, politically speaking, the end of the world for his presidency, and for the Democratic Party in general.

"I left with a real sense of compassion for our president and what he's going through," said Kucinich. "We have to be compassionate towards those who are called upon to make decisions for this nation. It's not an easy burden that he has taken up. One of the things that has bothered me has been the attempt to delegitimatize his presidency. That hurts the nation when that happens. He was elected ... this is a defining moment for whether or not we'll have any opportunity to move off square one on the issue of health care. I think it's important that - we have to be very careful that the potential of President Obama's presidency not be destroyed by this debate."

If that sounds more than a little strange to you, you're not alone. Representative Kucinich wasn't talking about the relative merits of the current proposal, or about what needs to be done to improve it. The nuts-and-bolts discussion was left aside in favor of a big verbal hug for the president, and this coming from one of Obama's most vocal Democratic critics in the House.

It would appear, at long last, that Mr. Obama and his administration have finally figured out what so many people have been trying to tell them since they came into office. They are in a war of extermination against an entrenched and ruthless foe. The GOP has no interest in working with the White House on anything. They want to beat the president wherever and whenever they can, not out of any sense of principle or because they disagree on issues of policy, but because they want to get back the power they lost in 2006 and 2008. If it wasn't health care, it would be something else.

After a year of ramming his head into the brick wall of bipartisanship, Mr. Obama finally seems to understand the nature of the fight he is engaged in, and the nature of the opponents arrayed against him. The fact that it took so long to realize the patently obvious fact that these people don't care about anything beyond slicing his hamstrings has made his task that much more difficult, and now it is crunch time. This was almost certainly the message Mr. Obama conveyed to Representative Kucinich, and given the alacrity with which Kucinich has moved to support and defend the White House, it must have been one hell of a convincing argument.

Robert Reich, who served as Labor Secretary under President Clinton, knows all too well what happens when the GOP successfully pulls out all the obstructionist stops and upends a major policy initiative by a Democratic president. In fact, he learned those lessons the last time a push for health care reform was undertaken. Reich wrote:

Health care reform is necessary, and House Democrats should vote for it because it's best for the nation. They should also remember the political lessons of history. To paraphrase Mark Twain, history doesn't repeat itself but it does rhyme. As the White House and the House Democratic leadership try to line up 216 votes to pass health care reform - and as Republicans, aided by the National Association of Manufacturers and abetted by fierce partisans like Newt Gingrich, try to kill it - I can't help thinking back to 1994 when the lineup was much the same.

I was serving in the Clinton administration at the time. In the first months of 1993 it looked as if Clinton's health care proposal would sail through Congress. But the process dragged on and by 1994 it bogged down. We knew health care was imperiled but none of us knew that failure to pass health care would doom much of the rest of Clinton's agenda and wrest control of Congress out of the hands of the Democrats. In retrospect, it's clear Republicans did know.

...
In early September, William Kristol of the Project for the Republican Future spelled out the next stage of the Republican battle plan: "I think we can continue to wrap the Clinton plan around the necks of Democratic candidates." And that's exactly what they did. On November 8 voters repudiated President Clinton. They brought Republicans to power at every level of government. Democrats went from a controlling majority of 257 seats in the House of Representatives to a minority of 204, and lost the Senate.

I remember how shocked we were the morning after the votes were counted. I asked one of Clinton's political advisors what had happened. "It was health care," he said, simply. (That advisor, by the way, is now in the Obama White House.)

Today's Republican battle plan is exactly the same as it was sixteen years ago. In fact, it's been the same since President Obama assumed office. They never were serious about compromise. They were serious only about regaining power. From the start, Republicans have remembered the lesson of 1994. Now, as they prepare to vote, House Dems should remember the lesson as well.

How and why the endgame for this health care legislation will play out has become quite clear at this point. Shamefully enough, this thing has to get passed, not because it is in the best interests of the American people, and not because it is a good bill. It has to get passed to salvage this presidency, to keep Congress from returning to Republican rule, and to show whoever might still be watching that this White House can crack the procedural whip and actually make use of the super-majority they've squandered so completely to date.

It is a disgraceful situation, but as Reich points out, victory (such as it is) beats the hell out of the alternative. Kucinich saw it that way, at least.

Kucinich Forces Congress to Debate Afghanistan

By: Robert Naiman
Source: Truthout
http://www.truthout.org/kucinich-forces-congress-debate-afghanistan57433


On Thursday, Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) introduced H. Com Res. 248, a privileged resolution with 16 original cosponsors that will require the House of Representatives to debate whether to continue the war in Afghanistan. Debate on the resolution is expected early next week.

Original cosponsors of the Kucinich resolution include John Conyers, Jr. (D-Michigan); Ron Paul (R-Texas); José Serrano (D-New York); Bob Filner (D-California); Lynn Woolsey (D-California); Walter Jones, Jr. (R-North Carolina); Danny Davis (D-Illinois); Barbara Lee (D-California); Michael Capuano (D-Massachusetts); Raúl Grijalva (D-Arizona); Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisconsin); Timothy Johnson (R-Illinois); Yvette Clarke (D-New York); Eric Massa (D-New York), Alan Grayson (D-Florida) and Chellie Pingree (D-Maine).

The Pentagon doesn't want Congress to debate Afghanistan. The Pentagon wants Congress to fork over $33 billion more to pay for the current military escalation, no questions asked, no restrictions imposed for a withdrawal timetable or an exit strategy.

Ideally, from the point of view of the Pentagon, Congress would fork over that money right away, before the coming Kandahar offensive that the $33 billion is supposed to pay for, because you can expect a lot of bad news out of Afghanistan in the form of deaths of American soldiers and Afghan civilians once the Kandahar offensive starts, and it would sure be awkward if all that bad news reached Washington while the $33 billion was hanging fire.

So it's a great thing that Kucinich and his 16 allies are forcing Congress to debate the issue, and it would be even better if more Members of Congress would be urged by their constituents to support Kucinich's resolution. That would be a signal to the House leadership that continuation of the open-ended war and occupation is controversial in the House, and the House leadership should not try to ram through $33 billion more for the war on a fast-track without ample opportunity for debate and amendment.

Every day the Afghanistan war continues is another day on which the United States government plays Russian roulette with the lives of American soldiers and Afghan civilians.

The British government has more urgency than the US government about ending the war - and is more supportive than the US of a political solution to end the conflict - because in Britain there is greater public outcry.

If there were greater public and Congressional outcry in the US, we could be more like Britain, and get our government on board the train to a political solution, instead of prolonging the war indefinitely.

The first step towards bringing our troops home is for members of Congress to hear from their constituents.

Kucinich: Afghan War, Threat to US National Security

Democratic congressman Dennis Kucinich has severely reprimanded US President Barack Obama for sending additional troops to Afghanistan.

Kucinich said in a statement on Thursday that extending the Afghan war would destabilize the United States at home.

"We are deeply in debt. Our GDP is down. Our manufacturing is down. Our savings are down. The value of the dollar is down. Our trade deficit is up. Business failures are up. Bankruptcies are up," his statement read.

The US president earlier on Tuesday announced plans to send 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan in his new war strategy.

"The war is a threat to our national security. We'll spend over $100 billion next year to bomb a nation of poor people while we reenergize the Taliban, destabilize Pakistan, deplete our army and put more of our soldiers' lives on the line," the Ohio congressman said.

"Meanwhile, back here in the USA, 15 million people are out of work. People are losing their jobs, their health care, their savings, their investments, and their retirement security. $13 trillion in bailouts for Wall Street, trillions for war; when are we going to start taking care of things here at home?"

The new US troop surge would put more than 100,000 American forces in Afghanistan at an annual cost of about $75 billion.

The US wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have cost 768.8 billion dollars and by the end of this fiscal year (October 2010) the price tag will approach one trillion.

Aside from the huge cost, the controversial wars have inflicted a high human death toll mostly on the civilian population of Iraq and Afghanistan.

"The people of Afghanistan don't want to be saved by us," Kucinich said on the House floor Wednesday.

"They want to be saved from us. Our presence and our Predator drones kill countless innocents, creating more US enemies and destabilizing Pakistan," he added.

Congressman Kucinich has long been a critic of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, repeatedly calling for withdrawal of troops.

Kucinich Introduces Impeachment Articles Against Bush

Tuesday, June 10th, 2008
by: Christopher Kuttruff, t r u t h o u t

Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) introduced 35 articles of impeachment against President George W. Bush late on Monday during a speech on the House floor.

Kucinich, a former contender for the Democratic presidential nomination, pointed to "high crimes and misdemeanors" committed by the Bush administration, including misrepresenting intelligence in the lead-up to the war, violating domestic and international laws against torture, illegally spying on American citizens, obstructing justice and governmental oversight, and dozens of other violations.

The impeachment resolution came four days after a June 5 Senate Select Intelligence Committee report that vigorously challenged statements made by the Bush administration regarding military intelligence in the runup to the invasion of Iraq. Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee John D. Rockefeller said in a press release, "Before taking the country to war, this Administration owed it to the American people to give them a 100 percent accurate picture of the threat we faced. Unfortunately, our Committee has concluded that the Administration made significant claims that were not supported by the intelligence."

"It is my belief that the Bush Administration was fixated on Iraq, and used the 9/11 attacks by al Qa'ida as justification for overthrowing Saddam Hussein," Rockefeller noted.

While House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-California) and other members of the Democratic leadership maintain that such a resolution is "off the table," Kucinich, along with a group of his colleagues, has consistently pressed for a more urgent and direct response to the often unilateral and controversial actions of the Bush administration.

Despite the unlikeliness of impeachment gaining much traction in Congress, advocates of such a resolution continue to demand greater accountability of the executive branch.

As Kucinich began to issue his remarks, shuffling and talking could be heard in the background of the House chamber. Responding to the disarray, Kucinich objected to the Speaker, "The House is not in order." After several strikes of Pelosi's gavel, Kucinich started reading his articles into the record.

"In violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of president ..." Kucinich stated, "George W. Bush ... both personally and through his subordinates ... illegally spent public dollars on a secret propaganda campaign to manufacture a false cause for war against Iraq."

Kucinich started his speech by referencing a variety of news and intelligence reports regarding White House communications, specifically the White House Iraq Group, which was composed of senior officials (then-National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, then-Deputy National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley, Karl Rove, then-Under Secretary for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs Karen Hughes, former chief of staff Andrew Card, then-chief of staff to the Vice President I. Lewis Libby, then-White House press secretary Scott McClellan and others) who "produced white papers detailing so-called intelligence of Iraq's nuclear threat that later proved to be false." These papers included later-debunked claims that Iraq sought uranium and specialized centrifuges for enrichment.

These claims, which were central to the administration's rationale for preemptive action against Iraq, were used, according to Kucinich, to "market an invasion of Iraq to the American people."

Kucinich also noted that the White House Iraq Group papers "were written at same time and by the same people as speeches and talking points prepared for President Bush and for some of his top officials."

Congressman Kucinich went on to challenge the administration's policies toward Iran, as well as its conduct regarding military interrogations.

The resolution comes days after a sharply written letter by 56 Congress members requesting that Attorney General Michael Mukasey investigate potential crimes committed by the Bush administration during the course of its interrogation program. The letter, signed by House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers, Barney Frank, Jan Schakowsky, Dennis Kucinich and other House Democrats, urged that the seriousness of the evidence on the program warrants a thorough investigation by a special counsel.

Revelations about the Bush administration's interrogations policies, along with its systematic practice of controlling information provided to the media and the American people, led Kucinich to conclude that the president has "misled the Congress and the citizens of the United States" and should be held accountable for violating his oaths of office to "faithfully execute the office of the president" and "preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution."

Economic Depression 2008

While most of us spend the very last few dollars we have or do not have on Christmas Presents, “The Oligarchy” rub their greedy palms together in anticipation of a huge payoff. The character “Mr. Potter” in the movie by Frank Capra “It’s a Wonderful Life” portrays these wealthy few very well, however, this is not a movie and there is no happy ending.

I hope an economic depression in 2008 is not so, but the build up to it, is gaining momentum. The immediate outlook for 2008 shows that, Consumer spending will weaken considerably due to maxed out credit in the New Year. That means there will be more people unable to purchase anything but necessity items. If you add the “Mr. Potter” like fiasco of the housing industry, rising Oil prices, the trade Deficit, and Inflated War Spending, the economy is looking very bad indeed. “Mr. Rockefeller Potter should suffer in hell for this!”

We can no longer point the finger of blame solely on “Trade Deficit” because energy prices control costs and the path that the economy takes. Lets face it; the insatiable thirst for oil is behind the War in Iraq and other places on the globe. The group that controls you, me, and our monetary system in this large fife we call the World are the members of the Bilderburg Group. You will also find these people connected to the CFR or “Council on Foreign Relations”. Our buddy Mr. Rockefeller or should I say, “Mr. Potter”, just happens to be involved in both groups.

Possible Solutions:

Some people believe that printing more money is the solution and will fix the economy. Others say it will eventually work itself out. But quite simply, the more money that is printed to meet this economic crises, the less valuable it becomes.

The “Money” that is printed in the USA by the “Federal Reserve” or should I say “Private International Bankers” is loaned to the government and the people with interest or added debt…the more money you print, the larger the debt and the weaker the dollar becomes. In short, the more money you print the more debt you are burdened with and the weaker the currency becomes.

Those so-called “Federal Reserve Dollars” are loaned to the government at an interest. So next month when GWB asks for 200 billion dollars more for his War, it comes with compound interest payable to people like the Rockefeller’s. That’s 200 Billion plus 4%.

Don't forget that the ultimate goal of the international private bankers is to control the issuance of money worldwide. But when the debt that they create and control becomes to big or too much for everyone to pay back, they crash the system by calling in loans to be paid immediately. When the loans cannot be paid, they seize all assets of the person, or company. The assets do not disappear into thin air. Once they have cleaned out most of those that cannot pay, they reset everything to zero and start a new currency.

The debt created when money is borrowed creates more debt in the form of interest, and it is this debt that eventually eats up all the wealth.

To start an economic depression, those that control the printing and the issuance of money simply recall all their loans. Ownership changes when payments cannot be met. That means economic ruin for people like you or me. Debt just cannot compound forever, so we are on borrowed time.

Outlook:

Once the US Dollar has tanked out, the Oligarchy will introduce the Amero. The new currency will be a combination of Canada, US, and Mexico's currencies. I am not for this, but this is the Oligarchy’s plan. If you want proof, all you have to do is watch the Canadian dollar stay at par with the U.S. dollar. It may stray up or down a bit but will not loose its parity when the time comes, like now.

The Canadian economy is doing very well. That is so because of the vast amounts of oil in the tar sands of Alberta, but our dollar is being held back for the planned collapse of the US economy and the US dollar.

The vast reserves of oil and water in Canada will spark the new American economy envisioned by the Trilateral Group. Any currency that is linked to Canada’s Natural Resources will increase in value. Remember, Europe does not have oil; they just have two major oil companies that steal it from everyone else (BP & Shell). Therefore, the Amero will surpass the Euro in value.

The Stage is Set:

The selling of oil in American dollars is quickly changing and being sold in Euros. The reason is simple; it is to protect the monstrous oil industry from the collapse of the U.S. dollar. Once the switch over is complete, the American dollar will collapse. Selling oil in Euros will not last however, due to the emergence of the Amero, which by the way will have Oil backing it. Remember, the Rockefeller’s not only control the printing of your money, they are also the majority owners of the oil companies, weapons companies, and own 80% or more of the politicians in Washington, who incidentally are CFR members. It’s No secret that the “Bush family” have been Rockefeller puppets for close to 100 years, so you shouldn’t be surprised about all the corruption.

Unfortunately, we North American people have been intentionally distracted while a few greedy families wreck havoc over our land, liberties, and freedoms. The prosperity we experienced after World War 2 will soon end and Sen. Rockefeller is hoping the George Bailey’s of the World do not stand in his way and stop him.
The only way to stop them will be to take back your constitution from the shredder that the current administration has tossed it into. If you do not act, in defense of your constitution then you will simply sink into poverty like the rest of the World that is owned by these families. You are almost at that poverty level now.

Solution:

Stop ALL spending for shadow operations, including War funding, CIA operations, foreign Aid in the form of war toys and weapons, but in God’s name STOP Rockefeller his CFR and all his political puppets in power! Vote Ron Paul or Dennis Kucinich and return your country to the people!

In the economic hard times ahead, Remember, “Wealth is in the Soul, not the bank”.

Bio: David Rockefeller
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Rockefeller

StewartB

Reply to:
Dollar’s Fall is Felt Around the Globe
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/23/AR2007122302441_Comments.html