AMERICA PLUNDERED BY GLOBAL ELITE
PART 2 of 2

 

 

 

Patrick Wood
December 13, 2005
NewsWithViews.com

Corporate Profits

Corporate earnings during this same time, however, have seen huge profits and consistent gains. Those global-minded companies in particular (e.g., corporate board members who belong to the Trilateral Commission) have profited even more.

According to the BEA, aggregate corporate profits totaled $874 billion in 2002, $1.02 trillion in 2003 and $1.2 trillion in 2004. Exxon increased its annual earnings from $21.5 billion in 2003 to $25.33 billion in 2004. This was not uncommon. From 1976 through 2004, corporate profits from U.S. companies totalled over $14 trillion. Foreign companies got a big share also.

Is it possible that the U.S. can be stripped to the bone while multinational corporations get rich? Was it planned this way from the beginning (circa 1973)? Yes, and yes.

There is another aspect of national bankruptcy that needs to be mentioned, namely, the landslide loss of technological genius that made America great in the first place. Putting aside the legal and illegal transfers of technology to China during the Clinton administration, consider the case of IBM:

That is, the very company that invented the PC and literally revolutionized the world has now sold 100% of their Personal Computing Division to a Communist nation who have sworn many times that they will bury us. Chinese engineers have now moved into IBM's Armonk, NY headquarters to take over.

Another example is that Steven Chen, a Taiwanese-born American citizen and one of America's most brilliant and top supercomputer designers, quit his post with Silicon Graphics and is moving to mainland China. He is choosing to build his next generation supercomputer in China.

According to IDC, the premier intelligence resource and forecaster in the computer world,

If America's technology prowess is a national treasure, then people like Steven Chen are national treasures also. How is it that we cannot offer enough enticement to keep such a talent in the United States? In an age where sports figures can command million of dollars per season for pure entertainment, this seems rather odd. It's not just that Chen isn't helping the U.S. but that he is helping a Communist government develop technology that can be used against us -- commercially and militarily.

Example of a "Blind Eye"

The New York Times carried an article on May 17, 2005, "Bush's Choice: Anger China or Congress Over Currency." China bought more than $200 billion in Treasuries in 2004, bringing their total ownership of U.S. debt to a whopping $650 billion. These purchases essentially finance a comparable trade deficit with China. Because China's currency, the yuan, is pegged to the U.S. dollar, China is in a position to manipulate the system (undervaluing its currency) and gain a whopping trade advantage over America.

U.S. Businesses have filed volumes of complaints with the U.S. Trade Representative, Rob Portman, about issues ranging from China's dumping of products at prices below cost of manufacturing, to widespread copyright and patent violations. Congress is somewhat sensitive to this issue and, bucking the president, is pushing for tariffs and quotas against China to punish them for milking the system.

Bush could choose to be critical of China (and infuriate China) or give China a clean bill of health and say that everything is fine (and infuriate Congress and the American people).

So, what do you do when you've invited an 800 pound gorilla into your living room? You pray he doesn't get mad when you ask him to leave.

Treasury Secretary John Snow was on the spot. In the past, he refused to criticize China openly, but rather sought to rely on "financial diplomacy" instead. He believed that China could be persuaded that flexible exchange rates were in its own best interest. On May 16, 2005, Snow was interviewed on CNBC:

Later in the year, according to the October 11, 2005 PR Newswire's "Quote of the Day", Snow stated:

Since when would China ever forego an opportunity to plunder the U.S. because Snow, et. al, are "anxious" to see them refrain from doing so?

It is easier to understand the conflict of interest if you look back a few years at John Snow's career. From 1994-1996, Snow was chairman of the Business Roundtable, an association of 250 chief executive officers of the largest corporations, representing over $3.7 trillion in combined revenues. During that time, he was a key player in supporting the passage of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).

He recently received the Marco Polo Award (2001), awarded by the U.S.-China Foundation for International Exchanges as the highest honor that can be given to a foreign business leader. He is a director of CarMax, U.S. Steel, Johnson & Johnson, Verizon Communications, sits on the boards of Johns Hopkins University, is chairman of the Kennedy Center Corporate Fund Board, and is a member of the Business Council and Business Roundtable.

In short, Snow has been at the corporate center of promoting globalism and in particular, building China's trade for many years. As Treasury Secretary, he is in an influential position of trust to protect the American people from economic harm. But, will he?

To understand more completely, ask yourself this question. Who invested money in, and built up, this 800 pound gorilla?

Take Bechtel for instance, one of the largest construction and engineering companies in the world. In 1994, Bechtel was the first U.S. company to receive a construction license in China. It has completed 80 major projects in China and has permanent offices located in Beijing, Shanghai, Taipei and Hong Kong. Its latest project is a $4.3 billion petrochemical complex in Daya Bay that will produce 2.3 million tons of products annually. It's being touted as one of the largest Sino-foreign investments to date, and is 50% owned by a subsidiary of Royal Dutch/Shell.

If we say, "China is really profiting from the U.S.", to whom are we really referring? It's true that the Chinese government is getting an advantage from the increase in economic activity, but who are the front-line collectors of revenue and aggregators of profit in China? That's right, it's the same multinational corporations.

So, as noted above, when John Snow reiterates his optimism that China will change policy on its own, you can see just how selective his vision is. As long as China's policy remains as it is, America gets plundered and the global corporations in China rack up record profits.

This article contends that America is for sale. The sale is "under the table" in that the American people don't have a clue that it's being slowly sold out from under their feet, one piece at a time. The sale is deceptive because as the red ink grows larger and larger, we are told by these same globalists that trade and budget deficits don't really matter that much. The sale is dishonest because it was planned from the beginning by elitist groups like the Trilateral Commission, to twist and manipulate the system to their own pecuniary benefit.

The fact that America's downward financial spiral started in earnest shortly after the Trilateral Commission was founded by David Rockefeller and Zbigniew Brzezinski, is not incidental. The very policies that brought us the "New International Economic Order" (their own phrase) have wrecked our country. They claimed that interdependence and globalization were inevitable; but in fact these were contrived as a scheme to multiply their own profits.

Conclusion

America is in a very grievous and trepid situation. Any number of isolated incidents could touch off a financial firestorm that burns our house to the ground. When a company goes bankrupt, it is seldom advertised in advance. Its customers, shareholders and debtors are invariably in a state of shock when the bankruptcy occurs, even though hind site shows that there were ample evidences of impending bankruptcy. So it is with America: There is evidence everywhere of what is happening to us, but there are few eyes to see it nor ears to hear it.

In 30-40 short years, America has gone from the strongest and most stable nation in the world, to one of the weakest and unstable.

Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall.
Humpty had a great fall.
All the king's horses,
And all the king's men,
Couldn't put Humpty together again.

Subscribe to the NewsWithViews Daily News Alerts! Enter Your E-Mail Address:

Most assume that it was Humpty's fault that he fell. If he was that fragile, why would he sit on the dangerous and lofty wall? A little investigation might have shown that Humpty didn't just fall, but that he was pushed -- by the same people who later failed to put him back together again!

Click here for part -----> 1

� 2005 Patrick Wood - All Rights Reserved