Wednesday, October 31, 2012

BPN - OS RIQUINHOS

"Dinheiro transferido em 5 anos 
BPN envia 439 milhões para o Brasil 
O Grupo Banco Português de Negócios (BPN) transferiu para o Brasil, entre Abril de 2003 e Setembro de 2008, mais de 439 milhões de euros. Só o Banco Insular, um dos alvos das investigações do Banco de Portugal e do Ministério Público, enviou para aquele país da América do Sul uma verba superior a 232 milhões de euros – montante que representa 64 por cento do seu próprio buraco financeiro, de 360 milhões de euros, e 33 por cento do prejuízo oficial, 700 milhões de euros."


"A nova administração do Banco Português de Negócios (BPN), liderada por Francisco Bandeira, decidiu substituir o auditor externo da instituição. A BDO, que desempenhava aquelas funções desde meados de 2003, foi substituída pela Deloitte, que desempenha papel idêntico na Caixa Geral de Depósitos (CGD), que é responsável pela gestão do BPN desde a nacionalização deste banco. 

Cinco anos depois de ter sido substituída pela BDO como auditor externo do BPN, durante a administração liderada por José de Oliveira Costa, a Deloitte volta a desempenhar aquelas funções."

"Caso BPN 
Oliveira e Costa construiu ‘bunker’ na Vidigueira 
Por Felícia Cabrita 
Os investigadores do caso BPN depararam-se com uma insólita descoberta: um bunker na herdade de Oliveira e Costa na Vidigueira. Com parte já edificada e outra em projecto. Câmaras de vídeo gravavam todos os movimentos. E os empregados teriam chips nas fardas como nos filmes de James Bond 

Oliveira e Costa mandou construir um bunker na Herdade Paço dos Infantes, na Vidigueira, para onde esteve projectado um dos maiores investimentos turísticos do grupo BPN no Baixo Alentejo. 

Com cerca de 100 metros quadrados e preparado para integrar um ultramoderno sistema de segurança e vigilância, este bunker, que o SOL descobriu, não chegou a ser terminado

DIANA'S DIARY PAGE


Tuesday, October 30, 2012

CASO KARACHI E BPN

"Abdul Raham El-Assir é suspeito de envolvimento no "Caso Karachi" e a sua detenção facilita a busca de 30 milhões do BPN

o intermediário de origem libanesa parceiro de Dias Loureiro no BPN, em negócio polémico em Marrocos e Porto Rico

foi detido a 20 de maio em Genebra

o procurador Jorge Rosário Teixeira fica agora em condições de pedir a colaboração das autoridades suiças.

BPN injecção da CGD em 4600 milhões de euros, 800 milhões à margem do conhecimento público

movimentação milionária do Banco Insular estimada em 9,7 mil milhões (4 Pontes Vasco da Gama)

Dias Loureiro compra empresas em Porto Rico no montante de 56 milhões"

José Sócrates responsabilizou-os pelo buraco no défice. Teixeira dos Santos falou deles, diversas vezes, no preâmbulo do Orçamento do Estado, agora aprovado. Os submarinos entraram, de rompante, nas contas públicas. Com muitos zeros à direita. Mas onde esta história deveria entrar era num manual de defesa dos contribuintes. Que pagaram mais, por menos. E que são o elo mais fraco de uma negociação entre um gigante (o German Submarine Consortium, GSC), assessorado por advogados experientes e banqueiros argutos, e um Estado que, seguramente, podia ter feito mais para precaver os interesses de quem, no fim, custeia a nova coqueluche da Marinha portuguesa.

Tudo começou a 25 de novembro de 2003 O Governo, liderado por Durão Barroso, aprovou a proposta alemã, do GSC, de dois submarinos por 844 milhões. Depois, Paulo Portas, o ministro de Estado e da Defesa,  negociou uma descida no preço, para 769, 3 milhões, prescindindo de parte do equipamento proposto. Esse foi o valor contratualizado. Mas só vigoraria até ao dia 1 de janeiro de 2004. No dia 21 de abril desse ano foi fechado o negócio. Já não pelos 769 324 800 euros, mas por um preço "actualizado" através de um mecanismo contratual. Quando Portas assinou o contrato, já custavam 820,7 milhões. Os dois submarinos U209PN fornecidos pelos alemães da MAN/Ferrostaal, Thyssen e estaleiros HDW, juntos no consórcio GSC, sofreram uma "atualização" diária do preço, mediante uma taxa de 3,5% anuais, sensivelmente 230 mil euros por dia, até que o acordo entrasse, de facto, em vigor. Só entrou no dia 24 de setembro. Cinco meses e 64 milhões de euros depois de ser assinado. Para se ter um termo de comparação: um hospital novo, de raiz, como o de Cascais, custou 100 milhões de euros.


Estranhamente, não havia no extenso contrato nenhuma cláusula que penalizasse, da mesma forma, o consórcio GSC. Nomeadamente uma norma que fizesse depender o pagamento dos submarinos do cumprimento das contrapartidas (no valor de 1 210 milhões de euros) que os alemães garantiram gerar, em Portugal, decorrentes da encomenda dos submarinos.


Há uma curiosidade. No dia 24 de setembro, quando o contrato entrou em vigor, o preço já estava nos 832 milhões, graças às "atualizações" previstas no anexo 14 do contrato. Muito perto do preço original, pedido pelos alemães - mas sem os "extras" que eram oferecidos, à partida...


A fórmula e o 'spread'


Um outro anexo, o 15, demora sete folhas e 12 fórmulas matemáticas para calcular o "preço final global" dos submarinos. Para se ter uma ideia, uma das fórmulas é esta: B1i=[Mi x (Dai - Di)/ 360 x (EuriborDi (Dai - Di) - 0,125%] x  [1 + (Euriborj - 0,125%) x (Dj+l - Dj)/ 360].


E não se explica em poucas linhas. Digamos, apenas, que se trata de um dos muitos ajustamentos previstos ao preço final dos submarinos.


Complicado? Seguramente. As autoridades tiveram de recorrer à ajuda de quadros do sistema financeiro para decifrar estas fórmulas.


Já não estamos a falar, somente, de transparência legislativa ou de "juridiquês". Estamos a falar de um contrato que o Estado terá, na opinião de um conhecedor do processo, "muita dificuldade em monitorizar".


Para não falar do pagamento...


Quando quis comprar submarinos, o Estado português fez o que faria um jovem casal à procura da primeira casa. Foi ao banco. Contraiu uma espécie de empréstimo (chamado swap sintético). Os juros foram indexados à Euribor a seis meses com um spread (lucro bancário) normalmente praticado (à data, em 2004) para o crédito à habitação: 0,25 por cento.



A única diferença entre o Estado e um qualquer casal reside na aparente facilidade com que o banco aumenta o spread acordado sem que o caso vá parar à Deco.


Foi o que se passou, quando o concurso para o financiamento terminou. À data da apresentação de propostas, o Deutsche Bank pediu um spread de 0,26%, enquanto a proposta do Crédit Suisse First Boston International associado ao Banco Espírito Santo se ficava por 0,196 por cento. Ganhou a mais baixa. Mas uma "renegociação" posterior permitiu à aliança do CSFBI/BES um lucro real de 0,25%, na operação.


Este consórcio bancário garante aos portugueses do BES 25% da operação. E é a estes dois bancos, e não aos alemães do GSC, que o Estado português deve, agora, segundo o ministro Augusto Santos Silva, uma verba "ligeiramente acima dos €1000 milhões".


Logo em setembro de 2004, os submarinos começaram a ser pagos. A primeira tranche (ou "meta de progresso", como vem definida no contrato), foi de 197 232 604 euros.


Semestralmente, os bancos pagaram aos alemães, ao sabor das (grandes) oscilações da Euribor (cujos juros começaram pouco acima dos 2%, chegaram aos 5% e agora voltaram a descer para pouco mais de 1 por cento). Hoje, falta pagar uma pequena parcela de 19,2 milhões.


O que foi contratado, garante o atual ministro da Defesa, Santos Silva, "determinou que o pagamento dos submarinos ao consórcio fornecedor se verificasse ao longo do processo de construção". Agora, "com a entrega do segundo submarino", prevista para o primeiro trimestre de 2011, o Estado terá "que ressarcir o consórcio bancário dos pagamentos efetuados ao consórcio fornecedor, valor esse a que acresceriam os juros contratualizados".


Contas feitas, os juros (e o spread) representam cerca de 200 milhões de euros. Um valor próximo daquele que o Estado poupou ao cortar o abono de família a mais de um milhão de portugueses.



As 'armadilhas' dos contratos


1-Independentemente dos danos causados pelo incumprimento das contrapartidas, o consórcio alemão nunca pagará mais do que 10% do valor contratualizado. Esse limite de 10% está previsto mesmo que o incumprimento seja "por dolo ou negligência". Quer dizer que os alemães podem simplesmente decidir não executar as contrapartidas e só pagam 10% de penalização.



2 - Ao exigir a assinatura de um contrato de contrapartidas associado ao contrato de aquisição dos submarinos, o Estado português assumiu um aumento do preço final que pode ir até 15 por cento. Ora, com a cláusula penal de 10%, o valor que o consórcio pagaria pelo incumprimento seria sempre inferior ao aumento de preço que o Estado acordou em troca das contrapartidas.


3 - Está implícito nos contratos que o Estado Português pague a totalidade dos submarinos, mesmo antes de o contrato de contrapartidas ter sido executado integralmente.


4 - O contrato não inclui os custos de manutenção dos submarinos, ao longo do período de vida útil deste equipamento (cerca de 40 anos), o que, segundo especialistas, pode ascender a duas vezes a verba neles investida.


O Governo abdicou de recorrer aos tribunais em caso de litígio, aceitando que conflitos num negócio desta ordem de grandeza sejam dirimidos por simples arbitragem.


 5 - O Governo abdicou de recorrer aos tribunais em caso de litígio, aceitando que conflitos num negócio desta ordem de grandeza sejam dirimidos por simples arbitragem.


O atraso milionário


Esta foi a primeira grande compra feita através de um "swap sintético". E por que razão? Uma, de peso: atrasar a entrada do custo nas contas do Estado. Em 2004, o Governo liderado por Durão Barroso, cuja ministra das Finanças era Manuela Ferreira Leite, escolheu a única opção que o Eurostat reconhecia válida para remeter esta despesa para o longínquo ano de... 2010.


Entre 2004 e 2010, o Estado autorizou o pagamento de 12 prestações (a última das quais em setembro passado) ao GSC, apesar do reconhecido incumprimento das contrapartidas acordadas. Apesar dos processos judiciais que envolvem altos dirigentes da Ferrostaal, na Alemanha. Apesar dos dois inquéritos que correm no Departamento Central de Investigação e Acção Penal sobre a compra dos submarinos e a alegada fraude na concretização das contrapartidas.


Augusto Santos Silva justifica a aparente inércia de quatro ministros da Defesa (Paulo Portas e os seus sucessores no cargo, os socialistas Luís Amado, Severiano Teixeira e o próprio Santos Silva): "Face ao modelo contratual adotado em 2004, o Estado Português tem o dever de cumprir na íntegra as obrigações contratualmente assumidas naquela data."


De facto, como vimos, não há nenhuma cláusula no contrato que assegure ao Estado português o direito de renúncia ao pagamento.


Santos Silva afirma que "o atual Governo garantirá, através de todos os mecanismos que lhe assistem, que o consórcio fornecedor cumpra igualmente as obrigações que assumiu, quer no contrato de aquisição quer no contrato de contrapartidas".


No entanto, não se pronuncia sobre um dos principais enigmas deste negócio.


Por que razão Paulo Portas assinou, em abril de 2004, um contrato que só seria homologado no dia 5 de agosto pela resolução 122/2004 do Conselho de Ministros? E por que motivo o fez, sabendo que, por cada dia, o Estado pagaria aos alemães da GSC mais de 230 mil euros?


O ex-ministro respondeu a um conjunto de perguntas da VISÃO, pedindo mais tempo para fundamentar as suas respostas. Como o prazo do líder do CDS não coincidia com o fecho da revista, adiantámos a nossa disponibilidade para, na próxima edição, publicar as suas respostas.


No passado, confrontado com esta "atualização" do preço dos submarinos, Paulo Portas justificou que se devia a um atraso de "largos meses" no processo de vistoria obrigatória do Tribunal de Contas (Correio da Manhã, 3 de abril de 2010).


Todavia, o Tribunal (TC), à VISÃO, esclarece que "o referido contrato deu entrada em 22 de junho de 2004 e foi devolvido ao Ministério da Defesa, para esclarecimentos, em 6 de julho, 29 de julho e 12 de agosto de 2004, tendo sido visado a 25 de agosto do mesmo ano".


O Tribunal demorou tanto tempo a visar o contrato como o ministro a enviar a documentação. Dois meses. Assinado em abril, só foi enviado ao TC em final de junho, e saiu, visado, em final de agosto. Demoraria mais um mês a entrar em vigor.


Começaria, então, a construção do Tridente e do Arpão. Um negócio que o advogado José Miguel Júdice considera ser "um caso exemplar de como as coisas não devem ser feitas". Júdice, que representou o consórcio francês derrotado na escolha do Governo, não se alonga muito mais sobre o assunto.


Hubert Kogel, porta-voz da Ferrostaal, recusa-se, mesmo, a prestar esclarecimentos: "Para já muito obrigado pelas suas perguntas. Mas peço-lhe que compreenda que em relação a isso não damos quaisquer indicações." O mesmo faz o BES, que alega "sigilo bancário".


No meio de tantos silêncios, documentos desaparecidos do Ministério da Defesa, fórmulas matemáticas rebuscadas e investigações judiciais, resta uma certeza. Os mais de mil milhões de euros que vão ser gastos no próximo ano.



Alemães ganham 64 milhões em nove meses



25 de novembro de 2003


Governo decide adjudicar contrato dos submarinos aos alemães. A proposta é de 844 milhões de euros por dois submarinos. Segue--se um processo negocial em que se reduz o preço para 769 milhões, mas retirando uns "extras" ao equipamento


1 de janeiro de 2004


O preço de referência é de 769 milhões de euros  e a partir desse dia começa a ser aplicada a fórmula do anexo 14 do contrato que atualiza diariamente o preço dos submarinos a uma taxa de 3,5% anuais, até à entrada em vigor do contrato


24 de abril de 2004


É assinado o contrato de aquisição e o de contrapartidas. Nessa data, mediante a aplicação da fórmula do anexo 14, o valor dos submarinos já atinge os 820 milhões.


24 de setembro de 2004


Entra em vigor o contrato. O preço final dos submarinos é fixado em 833 milhões de euros. Em nove meses, o preço dos submarinos sofre um aumento superior a 8%, quase 64 milhões de euros. Nesse período, o aumento diário médio foi de 230 mil euros.




Monday, October 29, 2012

Bloquearam-me o meu Facebook!!!


The beginning of the criminal trial regarding military offset agreements between the Portuguese state and the German Submarine Consortium (GSC) related with Portugal’s purchase of two submarines has been slated for 19 November.
The court will try three top directors from multinational company Man Ferrostal and seven Portuguese businessmen.
The long-drawn up case was spiced up by a love affair between the president of outside consultant INTELI and one of the public prosecutors that advised the criminal investigation department.
The case goes back many years to when current European Commission President José Manuel Durão Barroso was prime minister and Portugal’s current minister for foreign affairs, Paulo Portas, was minister of defence.
Allegations involve back-handers and dodgy paperwork.
This politically-charged case has been one of the slowest ever in the country and is still being investigated by the police.

E bloqueiam-me as teclas e páginas do blogue!!!

Tuesday, October 23, 2012

"Numa conversa telefónica em 2009, Paulo Portas diz que contrato de compra dos submarinos tinha de estar no Ministério da Defesa

Os alemães do German Submarine Consortium (GSC) – o consórcio que contratualizou a venda de dois submarinos ao Estado português em 2004 – tinham receio de fazer pagamentos a uma offshore porque isso poderia trazer problemas com as entidades fiscais alemãs. A mensagem de preocupação dos alemães foi passada à ESCOM – a empresa do Grupo Espírito Santo que fez a sua assessoria na negociação das contrapartidas e que terá criado a offshore – pelo advogado português que estava em contacto com o GSC.

“A 1 de Abril de 2003, a ESCOM recebe uma mensagem (...) indicando que os alemães estavam com algumas reservas em efectuar pagamentos para uma empresa offshore, uma vez que esse pagamento poderia não ser aceite pelas entidades fiscais alemães”, lê-se numa cronologia que consta do processo agora arquivado pelo DCIAP em que era arguido o advogado Bernardo Ayala, e que o i consultou. Para convencer os alemães, a ESCOM terá, através do seu advogado, apresentado “uma explicação sobre o Grupo Espírito Santo e as relações entre as várias empresas do grupo”. Meses antes, a 21 de Janeiro, a ESCOM terá assinado um acordo com o Feltree Investment Fund: “caso vencesse o concurso dos submarinos”, diz o processo, cederia créditos ao Feltree Fund “num valor entre os 13 e os 20 milhões de euros”. O DCIAP enviou cartas rogatórias, ainda sem resposta, a pedir para serem desbloqueadas no estrangeiro contas bancárias que poderão explicar se houve ou não subornos no negócio. Uma das suspeitas do Ministério Público é de que um pagamento de 30 milhões feito pelo GSC à ESCOM “tenha sido utilizado para pagamentos indevidos e como contrapartidas a decisores políticos e a grupos políticos envolvidos nas negociações”, conforme o “DN” adiantou ontem.

Portas “nervoso” com escutas

As conversas interceptadas e que foram transcritas para o processo mostram que, em 2009, Paulo Portas desconfiava que estava sob escuta e andava tão obcecado que até as secretárias tinham ordens para fazer e passar determinadas chamadas apenas para o fixo. Pedro Brandão Rodrigues, ex-presidente da Comissão de Contrapartidas, chegou a aplicar os adjectivos “nervoso” e “maluco” para falar desta obsessão de Portas. Em Outubro de 2009, Portas chegou a dizer-lhe que agora tinha percebido que um dos dois estava sob escuta, porque na tentativa de ligação anterior tinha dado sinal de interrompido. Brandão Rodrigues teve de explicar-lhe que isso acontece sempre que duas pessoas tentam ligar uma para a outra ao mesmo tempo.

A 29 de Setembro, na sequência de uma notícia sobre as buscas aos escritórios de advogados, quer o ministro quer Pedro Brandão Rodrigues manifestaram a certeza de que o contrato de compra dos submarinos deveria estar no ministério, “nos arquivos do Estado”. “Basta pedirem ao ministério, não?”, questionava Portas. No despacho de arquivamento do inquérito redigido em Agosto deste ano, o procurador do DCIAP alega que documentos relacionados com os contratos desapareceram do Ministério da Defesa."

Monday, October 22, 2012

Drugs and The Monarch Project
On August 18-20, 1996, a California newspaper, the San Jose Mercury, published a series of articles implicating elements of the U.S. government in running tons of cocaine into U.S. cities during the 1980s. Based upon recently declassified government documents, eyewitness reports, and court records, Mercury reporter Gary Webb provided a detailed account of how the Contras financed their war against the Sandinista regime of Nicaragua by flying tons of cocaine into the West Coast, where it would be turned into the deadly, instantly addictive "crack," and sold to such street gangs as the Cryps and the Bloods.

All of this began after the U.S. Congress in the early 1980s passed the Boland Amendment, which stopped all official financing for U.S. intelligence's "covert war" in Nicaragua. The whole project was taken "off-line," and financed by drug sales-the subject of Webb's articles.

Indignation exploded when Mercury series hit the streets. Maxine Waters, Congresswoman for South-Central Los Angeles, one of the areas hardest hit by crack and drug-related violence, sent a letter to Central Intelligence Agency chief John Deutsch demanding an investigation of the Agency, in which she said, "As someone who has seen how the crack cocaine trade has devastated the South-Central Los Angeles community, I cannot exaggerate my feelings of dismay that my own government may have played a part in the origins and history of this problem. . . . The impact and the implications of the Meneses/Blandon/Roiss Contra CIA crack cocaine connection cannot be understated. We all have an obligation to get to the very bottom of the origin, development, and implementation of this seedy enterprise."

While many were shocked at the news of apparent U.S. government drug-pushing, to me it was one more confirmation of a key aspect of the Franklin case. As I had discovered early on (as had Gary Caradori), the sexual abuse of children was only one part of the Franklin story. During the 1980s, many of the children, such as Alisha Owen and Paul Bonacci, said that they had been used as drug couriers to bring cocaine in from the West Coast for Alan Baer, Larry King [not Larry King of CNN talk radio fame; this Larry King is a black man who ran the Franklin Credit Union], and others.

Then, on September 11, 1996, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Representative Harold James, chairman of Pennsylvania's Legislative Black Caucus, and a former undercover narcotics cop himself, also put out a call for an investigation. In the course of that press conference another name popped up, that I knew well from the Franklin investigation: George Bush.

Flanked by political leaders of both the city and the state, James declared: "As a retired undercover Philadelphia police officer who worked on narcotics cases, I know we can better impact the flow of drugs if we stop drugs from coming into this country, arrest those at the top levels of control, and punish the white-collar dealers who try to keep their hands clean while they run the entire operation. On this occasion, we must not allow anyone to use the 'pretext of national security to accomplish another cover-up. We need an investigation that goes right to the top."

As to where the "top" might be, James charged, in his release to the press, "previous investigations of the Iran-Contra scandal, particularly the U.S. House and Senate joint hearings in 1987, revealed the central role played by then Vice-President George Bush in covert intelligence operations. . . . One of Bush's key lieutenants was Lt. Col. Oliver North. Bush was also appointed by Reagan to run the National Narcotics Border Interdiction Sys- tem, which supposedly coordinated efforts of all federal, state and local anti-drug agencies, especially along the south Florida coast. Bush was responsible for the White House anti-drug effort while, at the same time, according to the recent newspaper reports, tons of cocaine were allegedly supplied to street gangs by CIA-related networks."

Concluded James, "There's something wrong with this picture." In response to a question from one of the ten reporters in attendance about the role of Bush, Philadelphia City Council President John Street replied, "If George Bush is involved in it, someone should find it out. This kind of activity has been going on for well over a decade."

Lt. Col. Oliver North - whom at least one witness reported seeing at a party thrown by Larry King-had overseen the Contra resupply effort, and had been fully aware of the plane-loads of drugs coming into the United States. A U.S. Senate subcommittee report under Massachusetts Senator John Kerry cited extensive evidence that the Contras were involved in drugs, and North had noted the fact in his publicly exposed note-books.

From what I know from my own corner of the world, there is excellent reason to investigate Bush for possible involvement in the dope business. Think back to what I reported in Chapter 13, "The Washington Connection," about how George Bush and Larry King were linked in multiple ways, including eyewitness reports placing Bush at King's sex parties. Think about the constant rumors that King was financing the Contras, who have now been proved to have been running dope by the ton.

The first investigative reporter to ever look at Franklin, the World Herald's James Flanery, told associates that King was "running guns and money into Nicaragua," and that the CIA was heavily involved. (Flanery was soon taken off the story and shipped out of state for a year.)

Records exist to show that Larry King was a top contributor to a Contra "support committee," the Citizens for America (CFA). King's own public relations firm was also used by the Contras.

I became convinced early on that King was deeply involved with the Contras. I am reminded of the phone call State Senator Loran Schmit received on the Senate floor as the Franklin case was just beginning to break. The caller warned him off the case, because "it would lead to the highest levels of the Republican party." I am reminded of when Larry King was finally arrested-just as he was about to go to a breakfast party in Omaha for his buddy, George Bush! I am reminded of the reports I used to hear that certain people in Omaha were charging that Omaha Police Chief Bob Wadman was protecting the expansion of the Cryps and Bloods into Omaha-far from their home turf of Los Angeles.

So, was Larry King's buddy George Bush the country's "drug kingpin" in the 1980s? I don't know. But what I do know, is that if Bush were running the Contra affair, and drugs were a big part of it, that would certainly jibe 100% with everything known or rumored about Bush, Larry King, and the Franklin Credit Union. Congresswoman Maxine Waters and Representative Harold James are right - let's investigate!. . .

As follow-up investigation from the Franklin case shows, drugs are not the deepest level of government -sponsored evil. I think the lowest level of Hell is reserved for those who conjured up and carried out the "Monarch Project."

"Monarch" refers to young people in America who were victims of mind control experiments run either by U.S. government agencies such 'as the Central Intelligence Agency, or military intelligence agencies.

The story told by Monarch victims - one of whom is Paul Bonacci - is that they were tortured for the purpose of creating "multiple personalities" within them. These multiple personalities could then be programmed as desired - as spies, "drug mules," prostitutes, or assassins.

Because of legal cases still pending, I am severely limited in what I can say about the Monarch Project. Suffice it to say at this point:

Major intelligence programs in this country did and do exist for the purpose of protection of this country and to learn what other countries, particularly our Cold War enemies, were doing in this area of mind control.

I asked Bill Colby [former CIA director murdered in a staged 'canoing accident'] to tell me what he could or would, about this. He said:

"Of course the CIA in particular was involved in investigating, learning and, on occasion, using, everything we could learn about mind control-and with extremely good reason. Following the Korean War, this country's military and intelligence communities went through a period of absolute paranoia about just how far our enemies were ahead of us in mind control and related activities.

"There was no particular program called' Monarch,' contrary to what you want to think. 'Monarch' was merely a name that some participants in the program-who knew very little about it, other than from their own limited participation-were given to identify themselves. But, as far as the CIA was concerned, there was no such program named 'Monarch.'

"But, with respect to mind control, I will tell you that this country spent millions upon millions supposedly catching up to our Cold War adversaries, because we believed they had developed mind control technology which exceeded anything we had. In fact, we at the Company [CIA] truly believed for a substantial period of time, that technology and techniques and drugs had been developed by Russia which would enable them to have agents who in fact really were able to have and use ESP-extra sensory perception.

"Can you imagine," Bill continued, "how dangerous for this country it would be if you could have had someone meeting the President of the United States, who was actually able to read what was in the President's mind?

"I know," Bill continued, "it may sound silly today to get all carried away with this fear; but I can tell you that we took it all very seriously and believed this ESP thing for some significant time period.

"I will tell you one other thing," Bill said, somewhat ominously, "we are not behind in knowledge of mind control. In fact, we never were, but we only found that out much later, after we had poured incredible resources into this area. And yes, I am sure, there were some problems and abuses that occurred and we will talk about them at another time."

We did have that other talk. And, I intend, when I am freed from court restrictions, to tell that entire story in an upcoming book. I have deposited extensive documentation on the Monarch Project with people who have the means, the motivation, and, most importantly, the guts, to print the entire story, should I suffer an "accident" before I get around to it. Here, I will merely quote from the work of one of America's finest investigative reporters, Anton Chaitkin.

I had known of Chaitkin, who writes for Executive Intelligence Review magazine, from the book he co-authored with Webster Tarpley, George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography. This 659-page-book is a devastating expose of Bush, and it played a notable role in helping to shape the 1992 presidential campaign, which Bush happily lost.

Perhaps it was because the name "Bush" was all over the Franklin scandal, that Chaitkin showed up one day in my Lincoln law office. I told him, "Look, I know you have been in some tough spots before, but are you really sure you want to poke around in this? This question of 'mind control' - the Monarch Project - is the most scary and, dangerous thing I have ever encountered." As I came to know Anton, probably all that little lecture did was to spur him on. Chaitkin got his story on the Monarch Project, and printed it in the December 13, 1993, New Federalist newspaper under the headline, "Franklin Case Witnesses Implicate FBI and U.S. Elites in Child-Torture and Murder."

Eric Clapton - Cocaine ( HD )

Tuesday, October 16, 2012

OBAMA'S DIRTY SECRETS


"The Contact
It was not the proverbial 3:00 a.m. phone call, but close enough. And it was not made to the White House, but to my house, which is not white, nor is it in DC. It was about 2:30 a.m. on 25 April 2012, and the call itself was somewhat unexpected. I had anticipated the telephone call from my DHS insider much earlier the previous day, but our schedules didn’t synch up. I was traveling on an investigative assignment, while my source was in meetings all day. I had just fallen asleep, and was slumbering no more than 20 minutes when the phone rang.
In most households, a ringing phone at that time of night causes concern for everyone who hears it. In my household, it seems to surprise only my surly, 140 pound light-sleeping German Shepherd. He let out an objective grunt as I stepped over him to take the call in another room. It was “Rosebud,” the code name given my insider source.
About Rosebud
Just a little bit here about my source and his “super-secret code name.” I’ve known this government insider since 1979, when he first became a municipal patrol officer. He took a job in a bigger city and had a very successful run as a cop. Before retirement and after the events of 9/11, he was tapped by the feds, where he worked in various capacities under the umbrella of DHS. He worked his way up, and suddenly found himself in what he terms the inner sanctum of the “TEC” building. TEC, he explains, is an acronym for what he calls “The Estrogen Challenged,” which houses the upper echelon of the Department of Homeland Security. I’ll leave it at that.
As far as his code name, it originates from an incident that occurred at the end of the disco era. It is something that we both privately laugh about, but rarely ever talk about. His “code name” is known to him, me, and at the time, a young woman who has since vanished amid the glitter of disco balls and constant replays of the Bee Gees in a dark nightclub some 32 years ago, and has no “cloak and dagger” origins.
But he is real, his position serious, and his knowledge vast. Unfortunately, that’s what makes the whole situation frightening and deadly serious.
The information
It began on Wednesday, 2 May 2012 with a 45-minute interview on TruNews with Rick Wiles when I first disclosed the information I received the previous week from my source. The information I relayed “went viral,” as [they say, across the internet.
To support the statements I made during that interview, I am showing my handwritten notes taken contemporaneously during our conversation. My notes consist of two pages and are, at various points, admittedly difficult to decipher. I ask that points not be deducted for my penmanship given the time of the morning which they were taken.
According to my source, there is talk among the highest levels of the uppermost echelon of the Department of Homeland Security, which he describes as effectively under the control of Barack Hussein Obama. During this call, he said that the DHS is actively preparing for massive social unrest inside the United States. He then corrected himself, stating that “a civil war” is the more appropriate term. Certain elements of the government are not only expecting and preparing for it, they are actually facilitating it,” stated my source.
“The DHS takes their marching orders from the Obama administration, from Obama himself, but mostly from his un-appointed czars. And Jarrett, especially Valerie Jarrett. Don’t think for a minute that the administration is doing anything to stabilize events in the U.S. They are revolutionaries, and revolutionaries thrive on chaos,” he added.
My source stated that he has not seen things this bad since he began working within DHS. “It’s like they [DHS agency heads] don’t care about what the American people see or feel about what the DHS agencies are doing. They figure that if the average American will put up with being “sexually groped and nuked” just to fly, they’ll accept almost anything. “That’s why their actions are becoming more overt. “It’s in your face and the brass actually chuckle about it” said my source.
New Information
Astounded by the information my source provided “going viral,” I spoke to him again early Sunday morning. This was a scheduled telephone call (as noted on page 2 of my notes) based on a high level meeting of DHS personnel that was scheduled for and took place in Chantilly, Virginia, on Saturday, 5 May 2012. He hoped to provide me with more information to supplement that which he already given. Although he was not personally present, his source was. While he would not say who was at the meeting on Saturday or give its precise location, he said that the many of the names would be recognizable. He spoke to his source late Saturday night.
I contacted him on his cellular phone early Sunday morning to get the promised update.
“Geez, nice job on getting the word out about what’s really going on at DHS and in this administration,” were the first words out of his mouth, followed by “thanks a lot.” I asked him why he would be thanking me. “I just wanna’ tell you that I’m going to have to hire someone to start my car, and I’m surely not going for any rides in small planes in the immediate future,” he said with a bit of nervous laughter. “I hope no one finds out who I am or it’s going to be more than my pension I’ll have to worry about.”
“I can tell you word is getting out that people are starting to wake up, which is causing a lot of ‘pissed off brass.’ I can’t tell if they are more desperate or upset about the exposure, but the tone is starting to become a lot more tense. I hope that we’re having something to do with that,” he added.
With that, he provided me with additional information to supplement that which he already given me on 25 April. For clarity purposes, I have combined the information together from both contacts. The following information includes the updated information provided to me Sunday morning.
Obama the revolutionary
Metaphorically speaking, there’s a revolution going on in the U.S., propped up by three legs. Economic chaos, chaos through racial division, and chaos through class division, all joined by one core element: Barack Hussein Obama and his stable of unelected czars. Obama is using the lessons learned in 1968 as the template for 2012, and many of those who were active in the late 1960s are now calling the shots for 2012.
“The Obama administration and many of the un-elected ‘czars,’ either directly or indirectly, are engaged in covert activities with the occupy movement, various labor protests, and other subversive activities inside the U.S.,” stated my source. Using untracked campaign funds, they are paying people to infiltrate the various movements to cause physical destruction of property and disrupt commerce. That began last year, but has increased ten-fold already this year,” stated this source. He added that they are using some lower level DHS agents to make the payments under the context of tracking subversives, but they are the unwitting subversives. “It’s like Fast & Furious” but in the social realm,” he added.
“Obama is using some high profile people as pawns to foment the revolution. I heard several times through very credible sources that [Louis] Farrakhan is on the CIA payroll. Other have been named as well, but I’m not prepared to identify them yet. Farrakhan is to coordinate the Blacks and the Muslims to prepare for riots this summer, using any means necessary.”
“Mentioned at the meeting Saturday were methods to use pawns to simulate the rioting in the Arab Spring countries, but to the benefit of this administration. A controlled chaos thing,” stated my source. They envision rioting starting in the urban areas first, such as New York and other major cities, followed by a disruption of business and commerce. This will allow the DHS to mobilize their various teams into the streets of America without objection of the people,” stated my source.
“They want to restrict travel, if not through high energy prices, then by checkpoints and curfews mandated by rioting and unrest. They understand we are the most well-armed nation in the world, yet they are aware of our vulnerabilities and intend to fully exploit them,” he added. The whole purpose is to keep Obama in office for another term, no matter how unpopular he is, as he is not finished changing our country from a Constitutional Republic. This is the run-up to the 2012 elections, or perhaps causing enough chaos to delay them – indefinitely.”
One statement that rattled me more than anything was that a great number of those already in power, whether in appointed or elected positions, actually want to see Obama stay in power, according to this source. “This is what we’ve been working toward and we’re closer now than we’ve ever been. If we lose now, we might not have another chance.”
This chilling common goal also explains the lack of interest in the Constitutional legitimacy of Obama. It is common knowledge that Obama is not an American, and neither is his agenda. Of course, criticism of his bona-fides feeds into the cries of racism, despite the massive fraud perpetrated on the American people. Party lines are meaningless when the common objective is the revolutionary overtaking of America.
Obama, the professor of Keynesian economics
“The Obama administration is working closely with Bernanke, Geithner and others not to save our economy, but to outright destroy it. He is not the first or only one to try this, but the most effective and most vetted for that purpose. Do you actually think that the fact that Timothy Geithner’s father worked with Obama’s mother in Indonesia was coincidental,” stated my source rhetorically. “What we’re seeing now is the fourth quarter of a game that started long ago, which also currently involves the Clintons. Obama would not be where he is if it were not for the Clintons, and to a lesser extent, Bush, but that’s for other reasons. Don’t be fooled, the Clintons never left or lost power,” he added.
“There are file drawers full of papers, heavily guarded papers at the ‘TEC building’ so I can only imagine what’s in them, about international financial dealings going back decades. I do know, or at least I was told, that they involve organizations that are the so-called conspiracy fringe groups, such as the Bilderberg group, the Trilateral Commission, and people including George Soros, Henry Kissinger, and current leaders of big industry. Some are fossils. They’ve been around a long time. Others are up-and-coming. They’ve got one thing in common, though, and that is to put in place a global system of governance, including a common currency. Economics is a huge part of this revolution, and they want to replace the dollar, to see it collapse. They expect, that is, they are working toward this very goal, and when this happens, it will cause chaos like never seen before in the history of this country.”
“Why do you think Jon Corzine is not only walking around, but heavily involved in Obama fundraising? They know it’s just a matter of time that Europe will implode economically, and when it does, start counting the days before we see massive hyperinflation and the ultimate collapse of the U.S. dollar,” stated this insider. “What will it look like in the streets of America when the general population realizes that there is no money? That’s right, chaos.”
Obama & the planned racial divide
According to this insider, the Trayvon Martin case is just the tip of the iceberg. “You certainly don’t have to be a genius to understand how Obama and his team played the public on this issue, and it’s far from over. But that’s not the sole element of what we’ll see this summer.”
“Remember the shots fired at the White House not too long ago?” asked my source. There was an element of outrage that was squandered, according to ‘team Obama.’ In fact, Obama and some of his closest advisors, especially [Valerie] Jarrett were incredibly angered that the outrage was seemingly tempered. It should have been an opportunity to use our force against the Tea Parties, the gun clingers, the Constitutionalists, and everyone who has complained about Obama. DHS should have stepped in right then, and used that event to start the clampdown,” this source stated about White House comments.
This source stated that from that point on, the DHS must become more responsive and aggressive.
Watch for a false flag event against Obama or his family, something that will outrage ‘black America.’ It will be carefully choreographed, but executed in a manner that will evoke the ugliest of reactions and create racial chaos in this country that will make the Watts riots, 1968 and the Rodney King riots pale in comparison. That’s the third leg in this.”
The planned end-game
Does Obama look worried about the upcoming elections? Look at his lavish vacations, his limited work schedule, and those with whom he is working. This is a very dangerous man who has, as his closest advisors, people who have orchestrated the revolutions of the 1960s. They know the “trigger points” in America.
The Obama administration, including his czars and along with his closets Progressive supporters, are planning a manufactured insurgency against America. He is using the media to his advantage to garner both sympathy and support for his unfinished goals. He is desperately seeking a way to remain in office, even if it means the surreal prospect of an indefinite postponement of elections – if it can be pulled off. So far, he’s got the support of the majority of the DHS “brass” behind him, according to my source.
“They’re power hungry, and they want to remain in charge,” stated this source.
The “surreal” aspect of suspended elections won’t look so surreal when you see any or all of the “trigger points” take place in the not-so-distant future.
“The end-game plan for America is its destruction as a Constitutional Republic, with the assistance of the agencies under the umbrella of the DHS.”
My sourced stated one more thing that seemed to tie things together. He urged me to recall the quote by Henry Kissinger who was speaking at a Bilderberg meeting at Evian, France, on 21 May 1992:
Today Americans would be outraged if U.N. troops entered Los Angeles to restore order; tomorrow they will be grateful. This is especially true if they were told there was an outside threat from beyond, whether real or promulgated, that threatened our very existence. It is then that all peoples of the world will plead with world leaders to deliver them from this evil. The one thing every man fears is the unknown. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well being granted to them by their world government.
That threat need not be from beyond. All it might take is a world of starving, broke and desperate people."
From: source