They Have Us by the Gonads ?

LNR believes that the so-called and unqualified self-declaring economists in the media have it just the OPPOSITE. It's the USA that has a certain large Asian country by the "gonads" as it were.

The mainstream media wishes to extoll the vulnerability and control that the big Asian country has with its ownership of approximately ONE trillion of US debt- in T-bills. LNR has already explained the various reasons why that particular Asian country would NOT exercise its power to "dump" those T-bills- mainly because it would devalue the very debt they are trying to recover- dumping T-bills on that scale would turn the value of their debt to near zero. But, aside from the economic reality- that dumping that debt would hurt the Asian country more than America, the huge element of this "economic" theoretical debate is how easily America could retaliate. The economic counter-weapon that America has is MUCH more relevant to that Asian country than T-bills are to America. America's first counter-attack would be to slap a 300% tariff on the goods of that Asian country. America purchases over 372 billion USD of that Asian countries goods, which represents a whopping 9% of that Asian country's GNP and 20% of all its exports. Whereas, the one trillion of T-bills they hold of America represents only about 6.8% of America's GNP. Who has who by the gonads ? Let's also recognize the value of each of these potential financial weapons- the T-bills, this is not an insurmountable problem- with raising of rates there would be plenty of other foreign and domestic buyers. Also recognize that the 1 trillion in debt holdings has taken years to accumulate, whereas halting purchases of that Asian country's goods is valued on a "yearly" basis. This means that the loss of American purchases from that Asian country (imports) would amount to several trillion dollars lost to the big Asian country over just a few years- NOT an insurmountable problem- it would cause utter financial chaos- with tens of millions more unemployed and THE major loss of their foreign currency earnings.

The T-bill debt held by that Asian country is NOT a linchpin in the America economy- why ? Because the amount is small and the most important fact- it's denominated in the US dollar !! We can print all the legal tender we need in an emergency such as we face right now, it's simply absurd to think of the T-bill debt held by that Asian country is given such attention, when you have over 9.8 trillion dollars in stocks of money and quasi money, another 2 trillion under tarp, 19 trillion in domestic credit and 20 trillion in the US stock markets - aside from savings, retirements, home equities, etc, etc, that right there is over 51 trillion dollars available. How does the media continue to make a mere 1 trillion in t-bills owed to that large Asian country such a CONTROLLING threat to the American economy. .... its not a threat. ... it's just another old story being rehashed by incompetent journalists impersonating economists.

The T-bills held by the large Asian country is simply American money come home. These stories of foreigners holding American dollars or debt is not new. If you recall during the 1970's it was the threat that Saudi Arabia and other "Arab" nations had against America with all the petro-dollars gained by huge oil imports by America- in turn- ofcourse, paying for those oil purchases with American dollars. Where did those Arab countries put their money before they began massive infrastructure development projects at home? America- those petro-dollars came back to America in the form of investments and real estate purchases. At the time, the media was all ablaze at the "threat" of all those dollars being spent "buying up" America. That America would have to realign itself against Israel and in favor of the Arab nations because of the so-called "strangle-hold" the Arab nations had with its petro-dollars. .... of course- it never came to pass, because then- as now, the amount was actually not significant to the overall American economy and stock of money and credit and it could not be used as a weapon without hurting the aggressor more than the intended victim.

The second wave came with the Japanese as you may recall. As America imported much more than it exported to Japan, the Japanese also built up a huge amount of American dollars it held as reserves and turned to invest in America. If one is old enough to remember, the media - Time magazine, etc, was inundated with Japan as the NEW Rising Sun, soon to eclipse America- America's time was passed, Japanese money was buying up Rockefeller Center in New York, soon Japan would OWN America !
... it never came to pass. Even in those heady days of the 1980's Japan was never more than 3rd on the list of the biggest investors in America, behind Britain and Holland. It was a myth that America was going to be bought up, or controlled by Japanese money. And again, that money was NOT Japanese, it was "trade surplus" American dollars which were making its way back to America.

Now, the third wave- the same old story being hashed up about the t-bill debt held by that certain Asian country. If you look at the analysis, it seems all the great world economic powers know where to invest when they become rich- IN AMERICA ! The T-bill debt represents a vote of confidence in the American economy- it shows that when you hold a surplus of America dollars- where should you invest it ? Of course, as always, back into the American economy. And, those t-bills represent "AMERICAN" money coming home, NOT money produced by some other economy or country.

Climate Change Disaster !

Please write to LNR to explain, what exactly is the big disaster with a "slightly' warmer climate and some rising sea levels ? What is the huge danger that the pseudo-scientists are screaming about (the louder they scream the more funding they get right) ? Please submit a list of the "catastrophe" the earth is facing with a warmer climate of which the earth has experienced many times before without disaster ? Of course, that is if the weather people are actually even correct in their computer modeled extrapolation theories that are to take effect 100 years from now- despite their inability to tell me what the weather is going to be like next month.

UN Steals Money from America

Remember LNR's story a short while ago, saying that UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon was wrong in calling America a "deadbeat" for not paying UN dues. Check out today's story picked up by the Drudge report which substantiates what LNR was saying, the U.S. is delaying payments to the UN until audits and other investigations reveal WHERE the UN is spending American tax dollars. This latest investigation confirms the widespread abuse of American taxpay money by corrupt UN officials. LNR's author had worked for the UN for over 12 years and can attest to the top to bottom corruption. In fact, LNR's author made two separate official exposures of UN corruption in the UN's Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia. The response of the first was- silence from the UN's Oversight Committee in Vienna, and the second complaint resulted in the UN offering a "big" promotion within the UN's system in return for LNR's author "dropping" the second exposure. (this case is still pending)








Report: U.N. spent U.S. funds on shoddy projects
Updated 1d 5h ago | Comments 529 | Recommend 24 E-mail | Save | Print | Reprints & Permissions |




Yahoo! Buzz Digg Newsvine Reddit FacebookWhat's this?By Ken Dilanian, USA TODAY
WASHINGTON — Two United Nations agencies spent millions in U.S. money on substandard Afghanistan construction projects, including a central bank without electricity and a bridge at risk of "life threatening" collapse, according to an investigation by U.S. federal agents.
The U.N. ran a "quick impact" infrastructure program from 2003 to 2006 under a $25 million grant from the U.S. Agency for International Development. The U.N. delivered shoddy work, diverted money to other countries and then stonewalled U.S. efforts to figure out what happened, according to a report by USAID's inspector general obtained by USA TODAY under the Freedom of Information Act.


REPORT: Read full investigation

"Due to the refusal of the United Nations to cooperate with this investigation, questions remain unanswered," the report says.

Federal prosecutors in New York City were forced to drop criminal and civil cases because the U.N. officials have immunity, according to the report. USAID has scaled back its dealings with the U.N. and hired a collection agency to seek $7.6 million back, Deputy Administrator James Bever said. The aid agency hasn't heeded its inspector general's request to sever all ties.

"There are certain cases where working with the U.N. is the only option available," Bever said in an e-mail.

The quick-impact program was designed to demonstrate results and promote confidence in the reconstruction effort, but the report suggests it did the opposite.

One U.N. employee told investigators that "about $10 million of USAID grant money went to projects in other countries, to include Sudan, Haiti, Sri Lanka and Dubai." That witness said the Afghanistan country director for the U.N. Office for Project Services (UNOPS), which served as the contractor on the project for the U.N. Development Program (UNDP), spent about $200,000 in U.S. money to renovate his guesthouse. Witness names were withheld by USAID.

The development program hired UNOPS to do the work and kept a 7% management fee, the report says. The finances were "out of control," an unnamed project services manager told investigators.

An unnamed USAID contractor told investigators that the program was "ill conceived from the beginning. This was a political idea to do quick impact projects that would look good," the report said.

Investigators found that projects reported as "complete" were actually so shoddily built that they were unusable, the report said. For example:

•A bridge near Kandahar cost $250,000, had to be overhauled by other contractors and still was not safe. The U.N. claimed the bridge was damaged by flood, but a colonel in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers told investigators that "falls between absolute incompetence and a lie; the project was improperly constructed."

•An airstrip in the southern town of Qalat, originally budgeted at $300,000, cost $749,000 and could not accommodate military planes.

•A $375,000 headquarters for Afghanistan's central bank lacked electricity or plumbing, and basement flooding destroyed stacks of local currency.

Investigators found that UNDP withdrew $6.7 million from a U.S. line of credit without permission in 2007, months after the project had ended. UNDP has yet to explain what happened to that money, the report says.

"This is a disturbing report and an egregious example of the kind of fraud and waste that needs to be fixed," said Mark Kornblau, a spokesman for Susan Rice, the U.S. ambassador to the U.N. "The U.S. is committed to making the U.N. more accountable."

Vitaly Vanshelboim, UNOPS deputy executive director, did not dispute that some of his agency's work was substandard and that money was improperly diverted. He said UNOPS had overhauled itself dramatically since then. An internal U.N. investigation found serious irregularities by one former official that have since been addressed through management reforms, he said.

UNDP spokesman Stéphane Dujarric called the report "disturbing." Both officials denied that their agencies failed to cooperate with investigators.

"We are continuing to work closely with USAID to get to the bottom of all of the issues they have raised," he said in an e-mail.

USAID's inspector general, Donald Gambatesa told the Commission on Wartime Contracting during a February public hearing that he was "concerned" that his agency was continuing to do business with the U.N.

Commissioner Dov Zakheim, a former Pentagon controller, asked Gambatesa whether the agencies have immunity "if they siphon (their U.S. grants) all off into Swiss banks? Is that accurate? They will be totally immune, no matter what they do with the money?"

"My understanding is, yes," Gambatesa replied.

On Monday, Alonzo Fulgham, USAID's acting administrator, met in in New York to discuss the matter with Ad Melkert, the development program's acting administrator, USAID said in a statement.

"Mr. Melkert pledged UNDP's full cooperation with USAID in reforming UNDP's project management practices, improving financial accountability and in recovering any missing funds," the statement said.

Where are the JOBS?

LNR stated many months ago, when the financial "Tsunami" (you heard that term here first) hit America, that "jobs" was as important and required in parallel to keeping banks liquid. The banks have been indeed kept liquid (albeit at the common taxpayer's expense) and have kept many bankers happy that Uncle Sam has bailed them out. However, the common man has been let down- the jobs, the millions of jobs promised (and LNR has recommended that 4-5 million jobs need to be created) have not materialized. The recession will continue and NOT bottom out until millions of new jobs are created.

North Korea Defies the World and Obama....

Neville Chamberlain







does nothing...

except, appease the aggressor. What Obama needs to learn is that "sometimes" you do need an IRON FIST. As the author of LNR learned first hand in being in no less than 3 wars (Croatia, Bosnia and Kosovo) the dominant aggressors were bullie- as North Korea, and when those bullies, the Serbs, were challenged, they fell like a house of JELLO. (total Serb defeat in Croatia, Bosnia and Kosovo). Now we make the same mistake with North Korea. Instead, the use of massive artillery suppression fire, along with a massive airstrike would crumble that regime just as easy as the Serbs crumbled at the first signs of NATO attacks.

NATO Alliance NOT at Risk in Afghanistan

LNR comments on the following story:

As Afghanistan goes, so goes NATO. Interviews across the U.S foreign policy establishment reveal a unified belief that the authority of the transatlantic alliance will be won or lost in the Afghan war.There is an emerging U.S. consensus that if Europe does not reverse itself and significantly reinvest in the war effort, the transatlantic military treaty will cease to matter. (absolutely ridiculous- LNR)
NATO's credibility is on the line," (not at all- LNR) said Sandy Berger, who served as national security advisor during the Clinton administration. "NATO needs to succeed in Afghanistan," Berger added in an interview. "If it doesn't, it really does undermine the vitality of the alliance."
Or as John Bolton put it, "Ironically, the risk here is that Afghanistan looked like the future of NATO. It could become its graveyard."

The weakness in America’s foreign policy establishment is sickening. LNR completely disagrees with Berger and Bolton’s comments. Why ? It is because Afghanistan is NOT the litmus test for the durability of the NATO alliance for two main reasons: first, these pundits and others fail to recognize or mention that Afghanistan is a special case for NATO because it is an “out-of-area” operation. This in principle remains within the mandate of the NATO charter, however, NATO ‘s main purpose was NOT to engage in “out-of-area” operations, but rather a military bulwark against the Soviet threat. NATO was to maintain European-Atlantic stability through deterrence via massive combined conventional forces.

The second reason the pundits are completely wrong is because NATO’s main operating order of battle is NOT strategic or unconventional. In other words, NATO was not designed for use of nuclear weapons (except perhaps battlefield tactical nukes) nor unconventional “special forces” type warfare- as we have in Afghanistan. So, NATO’s actions in Afghanistan is operating on the periphery of NATO’s charter and raison d’ etre. This is why Afghanistan is hardly about NATO’s credibility, the operations there is NOT a case of “clear and imminent danger” to the broad security of NATO countries, i.e. invasion, occupation, total destruction- as it was meant to protect from.

New World Reserve Currency- yeah right

Could you believe the world staking their financial underpinnings by a country run by the Mafia and ex-KGB agents ? Supporting your economy with a currency run by Chavez in Venezuela ? The problem with expanding the use of the IMF's SDR's is that a currency run by people who don't have a stake in it makes the currency controllers too detached from the economies relying on that currency. So far the Euro has been a success, but that has been easy because of the global expansion over the past seven years. During these times, different EU members will require differing solutions to their financial problems. New EU member Hungary, for example, is waiting for the EU to step up to the plate and dump billions in aid for it- they will be waiting a long time. Reserve currencies like the dollar, EU and Yen are trusted because those who run it have a direct stake and interest in it- therefore, you get the best management possible. The current financial crisis has nothing to do with the dollar being the dominant reserve currency. Even if the IMF SDR's were dominant, that would not have prevented other countries from buying into exotic financial instruments and vehicles from America.

Look at the NUMBERS

Who is really shirking their responsibility in keeping world trade open ? Let’s look at the latest
Numbers to prove that the U.S. continues to be the world leading importer-and with its chronic trade deficits- it’s amazing that the U.S. is being accused as touting “protectionist” policies- when in FACT, it’s America who is buying more products from other countries than other countries are buying from America. That is FACT versus propaganda anti-American FICTION. Look at the latest trade figures with China: (this news item is directly from China.org)

During the first two months of the year, China's exports to the US declined by 16.1 percent to US$29.1 billion, and imports were US$10.4 billion, down 20.9 percent, resulting in a trade surplus of US$18.7 billion.


So the truth is clear, it’s actually CHINA which is buying less from America- rather than America buying less from China- so the ACTUAL truth is the REVERSE of what the media and foreign governments are reporting. It is AMERICA alone which continues to buy foreign products even during this financial crisis, more than what foreigners are buying from America. Since China imports from America were down 20.9 percent, it means that its’ actually CHINA that is buying less- since American purchases FROM China were down only 16.1 % versus 20.9% for China.
The TRUTH is revealed.