New Zealand is in a secret war with our government wake up, stand up, join the fight, stop following the preverbal sheep
Tuesday, 24 April 2012
Not Just Spain Cash Ban Spreads Around The World......?
A. M. Freyed
Infowars.comApril 24, 2012
Home Secretary Theresa May announced in January 2012 that the government would ban cash trading for scrap metal dealers under the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill. Under the proposals ‘rag and bone’ itinerant collectors who are registered with their local authority to trade scrap metal will still be able to pay cash for scrap. The move has drawn criticism from the BMRA, which claims that itinerant traders are getting ‘special treatment’ from the government. – Let’s Recycle.com
The death of cash is much in the news these days, following Spanish government’s abrupt announcement banning cash transactions over 2,500 euros.
But what is surprising is how far advanced this trend is. Cash is being done away with in both bites and gulps. There have been articles in the alternative media discussing this on occasion but the mechanism is both subtle and overt.
The subtle part comes from the way cash is being whittle away at in certain industries. The US for instance has no overt , national cash bans in place but plenty of businesses are making it harder and harder to pay in cash.
US states have gotten into the act too. Louisiana, for instance, last year banned cash transactions for second-hand merchandise – making flea markets problematic.
In many states, pawn shops are under strict scrutiny when it comes to cash transactions, with a good deal of paper work now demanded.
In some Central and South American countries, finger-printing is required by certain stores and businesses if one pays in cash with US$100 or more. Western Union has certain policies in place that require finger-printing outside the US.
Then there are countries themselves. Mexico, for instance, has restrictions on numerous cash transactions including the purchase of real estate with cash. And there are restrictions on how much cash one can spend on vehicles, boats, airplanes and luxury goods.
Here’s something from the Economic Policy Journal back in February:
It’s Really, Really Getting Crazy: [Bloomberg has reported that] Italians Banned from Cash Transactions of More than 1,000 Euros … “Prime Minister Mario Monti, in office just over a month, wants landlords, plumbers, electricians and small businesses to stop conducting large transactions in cash, which critics say helps them evade taxes. The government on Dec. 4 reduced the maximum allowed cash payment to 1,000 euros from 2,500 euros” … The noose is tightening, everywhere. The elitists and banksters are clearly going for the big play. They want to monitor every transaction you make and they want to monitor you.
Greece, Italy, Spain … The idea, repeated over and over is that cash is for criminal activity and that it is often used to evade taxes.
But these days, so much is being criminalized that one begins to lose track. What is one to think when something that has been legal for centuries is suddenly deemed “criminal?”
In Spain, many are said to pay as much as half of the cost of a house in cash, thus diminishing tax liability a good deal. This is the practice in other high-tax European regions.
The higher the taxes, the more prevalent these gray and black-market transactions become. This is simple logic.
Lawmakers have forgotten (long ago, in fact) that the “best” laws are best applied within the ambit of natural law.
When government continually seeks to go perniciously against the wishes and practices of the governed people, nothing good can result. Inevitably, laws will be broken.
The more unreasonable the laws, the more law- breaking there will be. This becomes a vicious feed-back loop that conditions people to break laws, which leads to contempt for government activities generally.
Lawmakers may believe they are taking stances for “the greater good.” But the more they depart from reasonableness and common sense, the more difficulties they are likely storing up for civil society generally. It cannot end well.
As cash is continually restricted, if indeed it continues to be, people will turn to barter. If their actions are subject to scrutiny, the state will become increasingly intrusive, leading in turn to increased resentment.
The Internet is a factor in this as well, informing people of how others feel about unjust legislation and the moves they are taking to counteract the worst of it.
All of this has a deleterious effect on society. At some point such governmental actions become significantly counterproductive.
The global elites – those shadowy dynastic families behind much of this mischief – may wish to continue this process to consolidate the world government they apparently seek.
They are obviously not averse to provoking violence as it provides an excuse for further crackdowns and overt social and economic control. Time will tell if they are correct or are misjudging.
NGO crackdown: Gagging democracy or national self-defense?
Egypt has denied licenses to eight US-based non-profit groups, saying they violated the country’s sovereignty. Many states are concerned that foreign government-backed NGOs are really agents for their sponsors, rather than independent action groups.
Among the organizations banned from continuing their work in Egypt are the Carter Center for Human Rights, set up by former US President Jimmy Carter, Christian group The Coptic Orphans, Seeds of Peace and other groups.
Egyptian authorities warned that if the NGOs try to work without a license, Cairo would “take relevant measures”.
Local media speculate that the rejection may be temporary, and licenses could be granted later, after the presidential election due on May 23 and 24.
Monday’s move revives a crackdown by the Egyptian authorities on foreign-funded NGOs, which recently provoked a serious diplomatic row with long-term ally US. In late December 2011, security forces raided offices of a number of groups suspected of receiving money in violation of Egyptian legislation.
In February, prosecutors charged 43 people with instilling dissent and meddling in domestic policies following last year’s mass protests, which resulted in the ousting of President Hosni Mubarak. Among them were citizens of the US, Germany, Serbia, Norway and Jordan.
In March, an Egyptian court revoked the travel ban for 17 indicted Americans following Washington’s threat to withdraw $1.3 billion annual military aid to Cairo. The decision provoked a wave criticism of the ruling military council in Egypt. Many activists accused them of betraying national interests under American pressure.
But shortly after the suspected Americans left the country, Cairo’s prosecutors decided to target more people allegedly involved in the case, who were not in Egypt when the charges against their colleagues were made. Egypt asked Interpol to issue “red notices” for 15 NGO workers, including 12 Americans, two Lebanese and a Jordanian.
On Monday, Interpol’s French headquarters announced that the Egyptian request had been turned down, because it contradicted rules that strictly forbid the organization “to undertake any intervention or activities of a political, military, religious or racial character.”
Not so non-government
There may be a good reason why national governments in troubled countries mistrust US-funded NGOs. For instance, NATO’s intervention in Libya was partially justified by exaggerated reports of human rights organizations alleging that Muammar Gaddafi’s forces committed crimes against humanity and breached international law in other ways, reports RT’s Maria Portnaya. After the war some of them admitted to giving ungrounded reports.
Powerful NGOs like Human Rights Watch or Amnesty International are supposed to be objective monitors and not take sides, but in reality they “enter into an excessively cozy relationship with for example the United States government, but also other powerful Western allies, over Libya and over other issues,” John Laughland from the Institute of Democracy and Cooperation told RT.
This is what happened in Libya and is now happening in Syria, he added.
“The equivalent, if you like, of the Libyan League of Human Rights, which is called the Damascus Centre for Human Rights, has played exactly the same role. They’ve alleged crimes against humanity. They’ve called for safe havens, and armed intervention in that country. And they are quite clear political lobbyists, who are trying to secure a military intervention against Syria along the lines of the one approved last year against Libya,” Laughland explained.
Another example is the group behind the Kony 2012 initiative. The California-based NGO Invisible Children is calling to stop the use of child soldiers and is promoting peace in the Ugandan civil war. But the same organization provided Uganda’s authorities with intelligence that led to the arrest of several regime opponents, as a US embassy cable published by WikiLeaks revealed.
“I’m willing to believe that was not the one time that Invisible Children provided information to the Ugandan authorities. What else do we not know, in terms of their relations with the Ugandan Government?” asks Milton Allimadi, Editor-in-chief of the Black Star News.
The viral video calling on a campaign to stop Joseph Kony’s Lord’s Resistance Army appeared just months after President Obama decided to send 100 US military advisors to the region to help local governments remove Kony “from the battlefield”. Some human rights organizations criticized the move, saying among those receiving American aid is South Sudan’s People’s Liberation Army, which is known to exploit child soldiers just like Kony does.
NGOs are not currently held accountable for the information they publish, no matter how much collateral damage false facts may cause. Critics say some of those organizations actually pave the way for conflict rather than advocating peaceful solutions.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)