|
Secretaris-Generaal VN
Geregistreerd: 9 december 2010
Berichten: 36.784
|
Citaat:
Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Tavek
Ik heb trouwens nog steeds geen enkel fatsoenlijk tegenargument gevonden buiten het feit dat mensen schreeuwen van: gij durft te raken aan de democratie !!!! PANIEK !
Wel, wij hebben nu ook al geen democratie, maar een particratie. We laten nu als lammen ons lot in handen van pintenzuipende mooipraters zonder inhoud. Misschien een switchen naar professionals die WEL iets kunnen doen voor ons behalve salaris incasseren.
|
Voila se
Citaat:
Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Tavek
Wat voor blahblah verkondigt gij hier.
|
En wat voor blahblah verkondigt U hier ?
Citaat:
theglobeandmail - its-true-bankers-really-do-control-the-world-study/article2212592/
The study says the United States takes home first prize with 24 companies cracking the list of the top 50 most powerful global firms.
Global Exchange
It’s true, bankers really do control the world: study
catherine mclean
WINTERTHUR, SWITZERLAND— Globe and Mail Blog
Posted on Tuesday, October 25, 2011 8:52AM EDT
Here’s a gift to Occupy Wall Street protesters around the world: you now have scholarly proof that banks control the world.
Researchers at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich, also known as ETH, have published a paper that argues just 147 companies account for a large chunk of the total economic value of all the transnational companies around the world. No exact dollar figures, but it’s obviously a vast sum.
...
The research shows “a large portion of control flows to a small tightly-knit core of financial institutions,” authors Stefania Vitali, James Glattfelder and Stefano Battiston wrote in their study entitled: The network of global corporate control.
...
So they set out to study the elaborate ownership structures of 43,060 transnational companies, eventually uncovering more than one million ownership ties within that network.
The authors believe this level of control among a small number of players has a significant impact on the world’s economic health. The 147 companies in the “core” control 40 per cent of the total economic value of all transnational corporations.
|
Big banks, too big too fail natuurlijk volgens jou, een lijstje
The top 50 of the 147 superconnected companies
1. Barclays plc
2. Capital Group Companies Inc
3. FMR Corporation
4. AXA
5. State Street Corporation
6. JP Morgan Chase & Co
7. Legal & General Group plc
8. Vanguard Group Inc
9. UBS AG
10. Merrill Lynch & Co Inc
11. Wellington Management Co LLP
12. Deutsche Bank AG
13. Franklin Resources Inc
14. Credit Suisse Group
15. Walton Enterprises LLC
16. Bank of New York Mellon Corp
17. Natixis
18. Goldman Sachs Group Inc
19. T Rowe Price Group Inc
20. Legg Mason Inc
21. Morgan Stanley
22. Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group Inc
23. Northern Trust Corporation
24. Société Générale
25. Bank of America Corporation
26. Lloyds TSB Group plc
27. Invesco plc
28. Allianz SE 29. TIAA
30. Old Mutual Public Limited Company
31. Aviva plc
32. Schroders plc
33. Dodge & Cox
34. Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc (R.I.P.)
35. Sun Life Financial Inc
36. Standard Life plc
37. CNCE
38. Nomura Holdings Inc
39. The Depository Trust Company
40. Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance
41. ING Groep NV
42. Brandes Investment Partners LP
43. Unicredito Italiano SPA
44. Deposit Insurance Corporation of Japan
45. Vereniging Aegon
46. BNP Paribas
47. Affiliated Managers Group Inc
48. Resona Holdings Inc
49. Capital Group International Inc
50. China Petrochemical Group Company
Meer : newscientist - revealed--the-capitalist-network-that-runs-the-world.html
Deze jongens verdringen nu de verkozenen 'om de wereld te redden van Armageddon en wereldoorlog III'en willen de Technocratie opdringen,dit om een crisis op te lossen die ze zelf moedwillig aangemaakt hebben. Via fearmongering willen Mercozy, Cameron en andere toppolitiekers ons overleveren aan de genade van deze instellingen. Democratie... de vuilbak in.
Is dit werkelijk in het belang van de burger ? 
Verder nog,
Citaat:
Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Tavek
Een stukje tekst, wat ik interessant vond, om over te debatteren:
Citaat:
Technocracy vs. Liberal Democracy
Posted on November 26, 2008 by Will Wilkinson
Upon return from Singapore, Bryan Caplan writes:
Singaporean bureaucrats are less afraid to criticize their government than American bureaucrats are to criticize theirs. Neither group would be afraid of legal punishment; but the Americans would be more worried that saying the wrong thing would hurt their careers.
Why is that? Commenter Devin Finnbar writes:
I believe it. Tocqueville noted that American democracy had less free speech than the European monarchies, because of the overwhelming social pressure to say the right thing.
I find this fascinating. Let me see if I can flesh out this idea a bit more.
In a true democracy, policy shifts due to shifts in public opinion. Random changes in public opinion won’t do. They have to be coordinated. Opinion is coordinated through signaling and sanctions, both subtle and unsubtle. So, in a democracy, stating an opinion is a move in a delicate coordination game. There is a lot of pressure to be on the team. Coalition democratic politics is largely about trying to sabotage the other side’s attempts at solving the opinion-coordination problem. If you are a bureaucrat, you will be especially sensitive to the demands of conformity and solidarity in producing policy change, so you will tend to toe the line. You probably won’t think about this strategically. People whose sincere opinions tend to track the needs of their political coalition will be trusted within political coalitions, and will tend to get assigned to desirable government jobs.
In a Singapore-style technocracy, public opinion is just one of many constraints to take into account in formulating policy. But then public opinion can’t serve as the basis for a sense of the legitimacy of a policy or a policymaker. If the technocrat actually cares about legitimacy, then she probably cares a lot about effectiveness. The reason its okay to go over the heads of the people is that what you’re doing actually works to make them better off. Additionally, if you’re a bureaucrat, have a good idea, and can argue for it, it just might become policy. Especially if you are willing to let your boss take credit for it. In a well-functioning technocracy, status accrues to people who produce new ideas for effective policy.
So bureaucrats in a technocracy will be motivated to explore ideas, while bureaucrats in a democracy will be motivated to signal and recruit fidelity to the coalition’s pre-assigned ideas. Free-thinking exploration could spell defeat!
bron: Will Wilkinson
|
|
Citaat:
If I were in authority in Singapore indefinitely without having to ask those who are governed whether they like what is being done, then I would not have the slightest doubt that I could govern much more effectively in their interests.”
- Lee Kuan Yew, 1962
“What are our priorities? First, the welfare, the survival of the people. Then, democratic norms and processes which from time to time we have to suspend.”
- Lee Kuan Yew, 1986 National Day Rally
“Now if democracy will not work for the Russians, a white Christian people, can we assume that it will naturally work with Asians?”
- Lee Kuan Yew, Asahai Shimbun symposium, May 9, 1991
“I am often accused of interfering in the private lives of citizens. Yes, if I did not, had I not done that, we wouldn’t be here today. And I say without the slightest remorse, that we wouldn’t be here, we would not have made economic progress, if we had not intervened on very personal matters – who your neighbour is, how you live, the noise you make, how you spit, or what language you use. We decide what is right. Never mind what the people think.”
- Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew, Straits Times, 20 April 1987
Citaat:
Singapore is taking the first steps to true democracy
Our campaign proves people have had enough of one-party rule. With the help of new media, Singaporeans can shed their fear
...
The Singapore Democratic party (SDP), of which I am leader, was one of the six opposition parties that contested the ruling Peoples' Action party (PAP). We saw an unprecedented surge in the number of people coming forward to volunteer their help. Medical professionals, lawyers, educators, managers and students, poured forth and came into our office by the hundreds. I could see one message written all over their faces: "We have had enough, we want change!"
In any other democracy, no one would bat a eyelid over such a development. But this is Singapore – a country which has seen one-party rule for more than half a century, where citizens are locked away without trial for dissent, and where protests can only occur with a licence from the authorities.
...
But years of autocratic rule have taken their toll and undoing this will take more than just one election campaign, a campaign limited to nine days.
|
In any case, we saw Singaporeans come alive politically and express themselves in quite unprecedented ways. (Doet U dat niet aan ZBIGNIEW BRZEZINSKY AWAKENED denken ??)
To be sure, there is still much fear among the people, especially the older generation who have witnessed the heavy hand of the PAP's patriarch and "Minister Mentor" Lee Kuan Yew. But it is also Lee who is generating much of the resentment against the government of which his son, Lee Hsien Loong, is prime minister.
And it is this resentment, buttressed by the new media which has enabled citizens to come together, if only online, that has caused many Singaporeans to shed their fear.
(Speciaal bericht voor U beste @TAVEK)
There is no turning back now. The road to freedom is without doubt still long and arduous. But Singapore has taken that first crucial step to making parliamentary democracy a reality.
guardian - singapore-election-democracy-new-media
|
Lees en gruwel: singapore-democracy
Kijk en gruwel+meer videos ivm. Fabian Society, Globalisten en de depopulatie agenda: Technocratie, Fabian socialism en Eugenita in Singapore, China, Haiti...
Ik sluit nog vlug even af met deze belangrijke opmerking. Lee Kuan Yew is een gevreesd eugenist en lid van de Fabian Society (Fabian Socialist). Dat op zich zegt voldoende. Zoniet...
Citaat:
The Fabian Society gets a favourable review from the Wikipedia, an operation run by a Jew with agenda. This article is much more honest and was at Creeping Communism. The Wiki names various of the guilty. Fabian Society has more to say about them, none of it good. They remain highly influential in The Labour Party. Fabians were big in Eugenics, just like Adolf Hitler and his peculiar friends - see The Fabian Society And Their Evil. Shaw proved that his intent was vicious by using the Fabian Window.
...
FABIAN SOCIETY
The first Meeting of the Fabian Society was held at the home of Mr E R Pease, a Member of the London Stock Exchange. Two of the leading Members were, George Bernard Shaw and Sidney Webb (husband of Beatrix [ sic ] Potter, the writer). Other early Members were Eleanor Marx; theosophist and occultist, Annie Besant; and the author, H. G. Wells.
Fabian Socialism is a mixture of Fascism, Nazism, Marxism and Communism, all bundled together. However, it is much more deadly because it is much more clever and subtle. The only difference between Fabian Socialism and Communism is, that Communists take your house by directly sending in the ‘secret police’ to knock down your front door and Fabian Socialists do it much more subtly and cleverly by ‘gradually’ taking your individual rights away, by ‘gradually’ increasing property taxes and rates and finally, when you can’t pay them, they send in their Federal Tax Inspectors to take your house away but the end result is the same.
British PM Tony Blair and President George Bush Jr’s globalist ‘war on terror’ is a classic Fabian Socialist strategy.
The philosophy of the Fabian Society was written in 1887 and included the statement: The Fabian Society acknowledges the principal tenet of Marxism and the abolition of private property etc. (Of course, this does not apply to the elect oligarchy at the top, who end up owning the lot.)
...
In June 2001, at the Federal Government joint standing committee on Treaties, inquiry into whether Australia should support a Statute of the United Nations Criminal Court which would affect the “Sovereignty” of all Australians, when critiqued by an Australian Patriotic Group, Labour Party Senator, Chris Schacht, sarcastically exclaimed, that he had been a Member of the Fabian Society for 20 years and further said: “You probably were not aware that us Fabians have taken over the CIA, KGB, MI-5, ASIO, IMF, THE WORLD BANK and many other organisations.”
...
During the last century, members of the British Fabian Society, dynastic banking families in the City of London, financed the Communist takeover of Russia [ Antony Sutton, a very perceptive historian of Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution would not agree. He fingers Americans - Editor ] Trotsky, in his biography [ on line at My Life There is no reference to Brits financing Trotters - Ed. ], refers to some of the loans from these British financiers from as early as 1907. By 1917, the major subsidies and funding for the Bolshevik Revolution, were co-ordinated and arranged by Sir George Buchanan [ A good man it seems - Ed. ] and Lord Alfred Milner [ A cunning rogue - Ed. ]. The Communist system in Russia was a “British experiment” designed ultimately to become the Fabian Socialist Model for the British takeover of the world through the UN and the EU.
sunray
|
Nog een laatste quote:
Citaat:
Mr Lee Kuan Yew recently said at the Human Capital Summit held last month: "You marry a non-graduate, then you are going to worry if your son or daughter is going to make it to the university."
Don't gasp. The Minister Mentor was just restating his long-held view that smart people (read university graduates) produce smart people. Such a Hitlerian outlook is repulsive. But in Singapore, no one dares to oppose the man.
In his book A Nation Cheated, Dr Chee Soon Juan reproduces some of Mr Lee's comments on the subject and discusses how they have tragically moulded the Singaporean society:
If truth be told, the PAP's neglect of the poor stems directly from Lee Kuan Yew's personal philosophy. In 1967, the Minister Mentor said that every society has approximately 5 percent of the population:
who are more than ordinarily endowed physically and mentally and in whom we must extend our limited and slender resources in order that they will provide that yeast, that ferment, that catalyst in our society which alone will ensure that Singapore shall maintain its pre-eminent place in the societies that exist in South and Southeast Asia.
Lee repeated his ideas in 1969, this time even more forcefully:
Free education and subsidised housing lead to a situation where the less economically productive people in the community are reproducing themselves at rates higher than the rest. This will increase the total population of less productive people. Our problem is how to devise a system of disincentives, so that the irresponsible, the social delinquents, do not believe that all they have to do is to produce their children and the government then owes them and their children sufficient food, medicine, housing, education and jobs...We must encourage those who earn less than $200 per month and cannot afford to nurture and educate many children never to have more than two. We will regret the time lost if we do not now take the first tentative steps towards correcting a trend which can leave our society with a large number of the physically, intellectually and culturally anaemic.
The Minister Mentor, then Senior Minister, made this point again in 1993:
Singaporeans will not become successful and prosperous by talking and concentrating on dividing the pie. Our journalists write about who are the poor. Give them some money. If he can't study because he's too busy helping his father, we must look after his father and him. We are concentrating on our navels!
One of his faithful ministers, the late S Rajaratnam, echoed his sentiment by sneering, "We want to teach people the government is not a rich uncle. You get what you pay for. We are moving in the direction of making people pay for everything."
Eugenetica in Singapore
|
Grappige foto 
Minder grappige Video LEE KWAN YEW is New Hitler! STOP HIM! (Part One)
Het logo van PAP (Lee Kuan Yew)
Met komst van de Technocraten, die alles wat reeds getest werd voor en door de globalisten in Singapore, weet U wat Europa, de VS en anderen te wachten staat.
Hitler lacht zich rot.
Een Technocraat, een wolf in schaapkleren.
en is dikwijls een socialistisch Fabian, lid van de Fabian Society.(een uiterst gevaarlijke vorm van fascisme !)
__________________
Citaat:
Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Salah
Het zal weer het gekende Zonbron momentje zijn.
|
 HIER
|
18 november 2011, 23:38
