Podcast: Play in new window | Download | Embed

DOWNLOAD MP3 AUDIO of this report.

TRANSCRIPT:

This is James Corbett of The Corbett Report with your Sunday Update for this 17^th day of April, 2011. And now for the real news.

The issue of criminal culpability for the largest financial fraud in the history of human civilization has finally hit the pages of the so-called paper of record of the US, the New York Times.

On April 14^th, the paper ran a report by Gretchen Morgenson and Louise Story under the headline “In Financial Crisis, No Prosecutions of Top Figures” that finally brought mainstream attention to the question of why bankers and financial executives have avoided criminal proceedings for their part in the worldwide economic meltdown of 2008.

The article also revealed a secret policy by the SEC to limit civil actions against some of the big financial insitutions.

“The Securities and Exchange Commission adopted a broad guideline in 2009 – distributed within the agency but never made public – to be cautious about pushing for hefty penalties from banks that had received bailout money. The agency was concerned about taxpayer money in effect being used to pay for settlements.”

Others, including rogue economic analyst Max Keiser, have gone several steps further than the Wall Street-run and CIA-friendly New York Times in seeking justice for these financial crimes against humanity:

The Times piece was followed almost immediately by reports that Goldman Sachs CEO and a man who once declared himself to be doing “God’s work,” Lloyd Blankfein, may face criminal prosecution for his role in the crisis.

Carl Levin, chair of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, is set to refer Blankfein and other Goldman Squid executives to the Justice Department for possible criminal prosecution following a finding that Goldman lied to their clients about their holdings in the troubled housing market and then misled Congress about those actions.

Although the news that Blankfein and other Wall Street banksters may be prosecuted for their crimes will come as a relief to many, others are speculating that the foot-dragging by the American Justice Department and SEC in these proceedings is designed to lend credence to international institutions that are set to be strengthened in a so-called new international financial order.

Now, the so-called BRICS countries of Brazil, Russia, China, India and South Africa are stepping up their efforts to dump the US dollar as the world reserve currency in favour of a new international reserve system that will be more favourable to the developing nations.

Last week, the head of the China Development Bank, Chen Yuan, announced that the CDB wass preparing to establish a 10 billion yuan loan fund for other BRICS members, denominated in local currencies.

Now the G20 has decided that it is going to step up its oversight over individual member nations’ economies in order to prevent a repeat of the 2008 meltdown.

It remains to be explained how putting more power into the hands of so-called regulators at an international level will solve a problem created by a collusion between regulators and banksters at a national level. Instead, real economic analysts are noting that this will only make the international financial order even more of a network of cronies run by and for the banksters for the express purpose of exploiting the vast mass of humanity and their labour for the rest of human history.

In other news, US President Barack Obama, British Prime Minister David Cameron and French President Nicolas Sarkozy have admitted that they were lying when they said that regime change was not the aim of their military action in Libya, which they initially attempted to disguise as a humanitarian intervention.

In a startling admission, the trio penned an op-ed for the New York Times last week that confirmed what the alternative media has been saying since the start of this conflict is indeed the case, and that the end goal of the war is to force Qaddafi from office.

In an Orwellian display of doublespeak, the leaders wrote:

“Our duty and our mandate under U.N. Security Council Resolution 1973 is to protect civilians, and we are doing that. It is not to remove Qaddafi by force. But it is impossible to imagine a future for Libya with Qaddafi in power.[…]In order for that transition to succeed, Qaddafi must go and go for good.”

Not a single representative of the so-called media has so far questioned the leaders on how they can say that the goal of the war is not to remove Qaddafi from power at the same time as they say that the war will not end until Qaddafi has been removed from power.

Meanwhile, in an embarrassing turn of events for the three criminal leaders of the occupying NATO empire, on the very same day that their doublespeak editorial was running in the New York Times, another article elsewhere in the paper blithely admitted that the Arab uprisings occurring across North Africa and the Middle East have been funded, trained, supplied and fomented with help from American government and NGO organzations.

“A number of the groups and individuals directly involved in the revolts and reforms sweeping the region,” the paper reported, “received training and financing from groups like the International Republican Institute, the National Democratic Institute and Freedom House, a nonprofit human rights organization based in Washington.”

Oddly, the Times article neglected to mention that the Board of the International Republican Institute contains such warmongering luminaries of the military-governmental establishment as John McCain and Brent Scowcroft, that the Board of the National Democratic Institute boasts perennial warmongers of the phoney left like Madeline Albright and James Wolfensohn, or that Freedom House is a Soros-funded tool of destabilization to install western-friendly puppet regimes in countries around the world.

Look for the mainstream media to continue ignoring the fact that the so-called freedom fever sweeping the Arab states is a gambit on the parts of elite Western political power players and unproblematically trumpeting each new uprising in the region as a spontaneous people’s uprising that just happens to further isolate Iranian, Chinese and Russian interests in the region in the preliminary stages of World War III.