Crude Analysis of Libyan Liberation (by Chris Floyd)

[Octafish]

Sweet and Lowdown

Crude Analysis of Libyan Liberation

by CHRIS FLOYD
CounterPunch
August 25, 2011

Another war for oil? Surely not! But just to be on the safe side, the world’s oil barons are already moving in to seal some sweetheart deals on that sweet, sweet crude with the new, NATO-installed masters of Libya.

And guess what? It turns out that companies from the Western countries that eagerly rained tons of death-metal on the Libyan people are being given the inside track to the post-Gaddafi gusher. Meanwhile, countries that had urged caution in humanely intervening with thousands upon thousands of bombs, drones and missiles to, er, protect human life now face relegation to the outer darkness.

Libya’s old colonial masters, Italy, are leading the way in the new scramble, even ere the Green Pimpernel has been found. They, along with other Western oil behemoths, are being welcomed with open arms by the peace-loving democratic rebels, who murdered their own chief military commander just a few weeks ago. But for intervention skeptics like Russia, China and Brazil, there may be “some political issues” in renewing old deals and inking new ones, say the new regime’s oil honchos. NATO si, BRIC no.

SNIP...

Less regulation, fewer restrictions, sweeter deals, more oil, higher profits — no, there’s nothing there to interest the oil companies. Or the governments they “influence” so persuasively — and pervasively. So it must be true, as Cole asserts, that this noble endeavor was no more and no less than a humanitarian intervention designed to safeguard human lives (with those thousands of bombs and missiles), protect the right of free assembly (or at least the right to mill around in one of those wired, barricaded, kettled, corralled “free speech zones” now so prevalent in the freedom-loving, liberating lands of the West), and uphold “a lawful world order.”

CONTINUED...

http://www.counterpunch.org/2011/08/25/crude-analysis-of-libyan-liberation/

I'm so old, I remember when the United States of America was more than Wall Street and War Inc.

[nashville_brook]

1. k and r

[Octafish]

12. What the empire and its courtisans fear...

...the truth:

The war on Libya is against all of Africa

Published Aug 3, 2011 8:08 PM

Johnnie Stevens of Workers World Party gave the following talk at the July 30 meeting in New York’s Riverside Church protesting the war against Libya.

EXCERPT...

Our party’s first demonstration was in 1959 at Rockefeller Center in defense of Congo. This great country in the center of Africa was then still a colony of Belgium. Less than two years later, the CIA and Belgian colonialists tortured and murdered Congolese leader Patrice Lumumba on Jan. 17, 1961. President Eisenhower ordered Lumumba’s assassination.

The U.S., France, Britain and Italy are trying to recolonize Libya today, just like they recolonized Congo 50 years ago.

Back then the colonialists used a traitor named Moise Tshombe to seize mineral-rich Katanga province. Today the Libyan traitors have seized Benghazi.

The Rockefellers had a major stake in the Belgian mining giant Union Minière that exploited Congo’s incredible mineral wealth, particularly in Katanga province.

CONTINUED...

Articles like this almost make me want to become a commie. I don't believe I ever will, but I will -- as a loyal American and as as a registered Democrat -- work for economic justice.

[sabrina 1]

17. The usual suspects.

I read that the first draft of the 'new Constitution' wants an Islamist government with Sharia Law. If they are nice to the big Oil Cartels and their former Colonial Masters, I doubt that would be a problem.

Italy, thrown out after murdering a Libyan hero back in the fifties or somewhere around that time, back in business in Libya. I wonder how the majority of the Libyan people will feel about that? I guess we'll never know, anyone who dares to express their objections, will be silenced.

[hifiguy]

2. The latest chapter in global disaster capitalism

Read Naomi Klein's "The Shock Doctrine" and this will seem as predictable as the sun rising in the east.

[Octafish]

13. Naomi Klein is a must-read.

For those new to the subject:

Naomi Klein on DemocracyNow!

[hifiguy]

18. Just finishing "The Shock Doctrine"

The most important, terrifying and depressing read of the last 25 years.

If I were teaching a high school or college class remotely related to politics or economics every single student would be required to read this book. Maybe twice.

[MinM]

26. Re: "The Shock Doctrine"

Jim DiEugenio had a great review
last night (8:55 into this interview).

[inna]

33. Speaking of which.... "Disaster capitalism swoops over Libya" by Pepe Escobar:

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/middle_east/mh25ak02.html


Two other must-reads by the same author:


R2P is now Right 2 Plunder:
http://atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/MH27Ak03.html


and

Sweet crude of mine:
http://atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/MH26Ak01.html

[RaleighNCDUer]

3. C'mon. Seriously. Is ANYBODY surprised at this? nt

[Octafish]

15. For me, I'm not surprised as much as disgusted.

As a Democrat, I believe in elections.

We don't have to kill people, whether they're despots or innocents.

For the realistic community. I know oil's important: It's the black gold that makes the machine go chunka-chunka.

[amborin]

4. K&R an imperialist war for oil, etc....

Who are the rebels?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1815582

great article here (posted by Inna):

"Why the West Is Committed to the Murderous Rebels in Libya"

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/patrick-cockburn-why-the-west-is-committed-to-the-murderous-rebels-in-libya-2329161.html#disqus_thread

[Octafish]

6. For a short time, America did not side with the Colonialist Powers...

Thank you, amborin! Great OP and articles!

Since 1953, when Yuropeeon colonial powers and Amurka join forces, it's to carve up something worth stealing. There was a brief, 34-month respite:

JFK Cried for Congo

EXCERPT...



The above caption, by Jacques Lowe, personal photographer to JFK, reads:

"On February 13 1961, United Nations Ambassador Adlai Stevenson came on the phone. I was alone with the President; his hand went to his head in utter despair, "On, no," I heard him groan. The Ambassador was informing the President of the assassination of Patrice Lumumba of the Congo, an African leader considered a trouble-maker and a leftist by many Americans. But Kennedy's attitude towards black Africa was that many who were considered leftists were in fact nationalists and patriots, anti-West because of years of colonialization, and lured to the siren call of Communism against their will. He felt that Africa presented an opportunity for the West, and, speaking as an American, unhindered by a colonial heritage, he had made friends in Africa and would succeed in gaining the trust of a great many African leaders. The call therefore left him heartbroken, for he knew that the murder would be a prelude to chaos in the mineral-rich and important African country, it was a poignant moment."

(end quoting from 1983 book "Kennedy A Time Remembered" by Jacques Lowe)

[amborin]

16. bookmarked for later, Octafish, and thanks for posting this!

[Octafish]

23. Imagine Africa the economic equal of Europe or North America?

Like so much else of what George Orwell told us, he was accurate about the fate of Africa. Its nations have never had a chance to survive on their own without interference. However, had President Kennedy been allowed to live and enact his policies for Africa, that continent could be equal today to Europe and America.

[amborin]

24. not what TPTB wanted, or want...though they do want to gobble up huge swaths of it, as usual

[MinM]

25. Dag Hammarskjöld's plane crash, while defending Congo, has just been solved too.

Dag Hammarskjöld: evidence suggests UN chief's plane was shot down

Eyewitnesses claim a second aircraft fired at the plane raising questions of British cover-up over the 1961 crash and its causes

* Julian Borger and Georgina Smith in Ndola
* guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 17 August 2011 19.20 BST

New evidence has emerged in one of the most enduring mysteries of United Nations and African history, suggesting that the plane carrying the UN secretary general Dag Hammarskjöld was shot down over Northern Rhodesia (now Zambia) 50 years ago, and the murder was covered up by British colonial authorities.

A British-run commission of inquiry blamed the crash in 1961 on pilot error and a later UN investigation largely rubber-stamped its findings. They ignored or downplayed witness testimony of villagers near the crash site which suggested foul play. The Guardian has talked to surviving witnesses who were never questioned by the official investigations and were too scared to come forward.

The residents on the western outskirts of the town of Ndola described Hammarskjöld's DC6 being shot down by a second, smaller aircraft. They say the crash site was sealed off by Northern Rhodesian security forces the next morning, hours before the wreckage was officially declared found, and they were ordered to leave the area.

The key witnesses were located and interviewed over the past three years by Göran Björkdahl, a Swedish aid worker based in Africa, who made the investigation of the Hammarskjöld mystery a personal quest since discovering his father had a fragment of the crashed DC6.

"My father was in that part of Zambia in the 70s and asking local people about what happened, and a man there, seeing that he was interested, gave him a piece of the plane. That was what got me started," Björkdahl said. When he went to work in Africa himself, he went to the site and began to question the local people systematically on what they had seen.

The investigation led Björkdahl to previously unpublished telegrams – seen by the Guardian – from the days leading up to Hammarskjöld's death on 17 September 1961, which illustrate US and British anger at an abortive UN military operation that the secretary general ordered on behalf of the Congolese government against a rebellion backed by western mining companies and mercenaries in the mineral-rich Katanga region.

Hammarskjöld was flying to Ndola for peace talks with the Katanga leadership at a meeting that the British helped arrange. The fiercely independent Swedish diplomat had, by then, enraged almost all the major powers on the security council with his support for decolonisation, but support from developing countries meant his re-election as secretary general would have been virtually guaranteed at the general assembly vote due the following year...

Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/aug/17/dag-hammarskjold-un-secretary-general-crash

Probe V6N3: Midnight in the Congo:
The Assassination of Lumumba and the
Mysterious Death of Dag Hammarskjöld
http://www.ctka.net/pr399-congo.html

Of course -- $24 trillion (equivalent to the combined Gross Domestic Product of Europe and the United States) worth of untapped deposits of raw mineral ores, including the world’s largest reserves of cobalt and significant quantities of the world’s diamonds, gold and copper... -- does funny things to people.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mining_industry_of_the_Democratic_Republic_of_the_Congo#Natural_Resources

[Octafish]

32. Zero coverage in the NYT of Dag Hammarskjöld.

Thank you, MinM, for the heads-up on the news regarding Dag Hammarskjöld. To the international gagsters, no one is tolerated who stands in their way.

There has been little, if any coverage, on ABCNNBCBSFixedNutsNoiseworken on this news. Thank you very much, a must-read for anyone who gives a damn for the world, justice and democracy.

Typical vital news black out: The UN was never the same. And neither's been Africa for the colonial powers. What an inconvenience! Rather than direct theft, they've had to loot its nations through the various surrogates they bribe and prop up.

I haven't read this, but it looks like an excellent resource:

Looting Africa -- The Economics of Exploitation.

Now that I see it in print, I'll viddy and get back to you and DU. As you know, we are dealing with the theft of trillions of dollars and the mass murder of millions of innocent people.

[sabrina 1]

36. Very interesting, thank you. I guess this is why no one stands

up to them anymore. It is not wise, if you want to live. How very sad.

[Distant Observer]

5. Guess Obama wanted to succeed where Bush failed. And Gaddafi was a useful tyrant

[pampango]

7. Juan Cole's myth #10 about Libya - This was a war for Libya’s oil.

http://www.juancole.com/2011/08/top-ten-myths-about-the-libya-war.html

10. This was a war for Libya’s oil. That is daft. Libya was already integrated into the international oil markets, and had done billions of deals with BP, ENI, etc., etc. None of those companies would have wanted to endanger their contracts by getting rid of the ruler who had signed them. They had often already had the trauma of having to compete for post-war Iraqi contracts, a process in which many did less well than they would have liked. ENI’s profits were hurt by the Libyan revolution, as were those of Total SA. and Repsol. Moreover, taking Libyan oil off the market through a NATO military intervention could have been foreseen to put up oil prices, which no Western elected leader would have wanted to see, especially Barack Obama, with the danger that a spike in energy prices could prolong the economic doldrums. An economic argument for imperialism is fine if it makes sense, but this one does not, and there is no good evidence for it (that Qaddafi was erratic is not enough), and is therefore just a conspiracy theory.

Juan Cole: Libya not a War for Oil (American oil companies lobbied on behalf of Qaddafi)

http://www.juancole.com/2011/06/libya-not-a-war-for-oil.html

The allegation out there in the blogosphere that the United Nations-authorized intervention in Libya was driven by Western oil companies is a non-starter. The argument is that Muammar Qaddafi was considered unreliable by American petroleum concerns, so they pushed to get rid of him. Nothing could be further from the truth. Bloomberg details the big lobbying push by American oil companies on behalf of Qaddafi, to exempt him from civil claims in the US.

The United States in any case did not spearhead the UN intervention. President Obama and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, along with the Pentagon brass, considered the outbreak of the Libya war very unfortunate and clearly were only dragged into it kicking and screaming by Saudi Arabia, France and Britain. The Western country with the biggest oil stake in Libya, Italy, was very reluctant to join the war. Silvio Berlusconi says that he almost resigned when the war broke out, given his close relationship to Qaddafi. As for the UK, Tony Blair brought the BP CEO to Tripoli in 2007, and BP had struck deals for Libya oil worth billions, which this war can only delay.

Not only is there no reason to think that petroleum companies urged war, the whole argument about UN and NATO motivations is irrelevant and sordid. By now it is clear that Qaddafi planned to crush political dissidents in a massive and brutal way, and some estimates already suggest over 10,000 dead. If UN-authorized intervention could stop that looming massacre, then why does it matter so much what drove David Cameron to authorize it?

An argument you sometimes here is that the new Transitional National Council in Benghazi will be pliant toward Western interests. But Qaddafi himself had come back in from the cold and all sorts of deals were being struck with him by Western powers. Those who more or less support Qaddafi and wanted to let him roll tanks on civilian protesters has weaved itself into a pretzel with all these conspiracy theories, while conveniently managing to leave out of the account ordinary Libyans, so many of whom are willing to risk their lives to bring about the end of Qaddafi’s murderous and mercurial regime.

[Amonester]

8. +1

Wish replies could get recs.

:thumbsup:

[EFerrari]

9. NATO nations set to reap spoils of Libya war

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x623429

[sabrina 1]

22. That's the talking point, the facts are very different and as Bvar's

post below shows, it is not only about oil. Qadaffi was threatening to give Russia and China more contracts for one thing, and he was threatening to reduce the profits of the western Corps and keep more of them for Libya. But more than that he was building up a NATO like org for African nations and was donating a lot of money to back it up.

This was not a humanitarian effort by any means. I don't know why we keep falling for these lies. I feel sad for the Libyan people who before long, they are going to miss their own oppressive ruler, as the Iraqis began to miss Saddam, at least he was theirs.

[bvar22]

10. Its about a LOT more than just oil.

Libya was the biggest supporter and funder of the Pan Africa Movement.
(Africa FOR Africans, NOT Global Corporations)
Libya had blocked the predatory IMF by supplying CASH for development in the sub-Sarahan countries.
The IMF & predatory Global Banks didn't like that.

There is also THIS:

Goldman Sachs Lost 98% of Libya's $1.3B Sovereign Wealth Fund Investment
http://www.forbes.com/sites/afontevecchia/2011/05/31/goldman-sachs-lost-98-of-libyas-1-3b-sovereign-wealth-fund-investment/

and THIS:
Financial Heist of the Century: Confiscating Libya's Sovereign Wealth Funds (SWF)
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?aid=24479&context=va


not to mention THIS:

”Gaddafi is the perfect villain for this Anglo-French-American farce unworthy of French playwright Georges Feydeau. For all his dictatorial megalomania, Gaddafi is a committed pan-African - a fierce defender of African unity. Libya was not in debt to international bankers. It did not borrow cash from the International Monetary Fund for any "structural adjustment". It used oil money for social services - including the Great Man Made River project, and investment/aid to sub-Saharan countries. Its independent central bank was not manipulated by the Western financial system. All in all a very bad example for the developing world.”

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/MD27Ak01.html

Anyone who believes the US entered the Libyan Civil War
for Humanitarian reasons hasn't been paying attention for the last 60 years.
Freedom Bombs come with a heavy price.
Let the "Free Market" looting BEGIN!

What surprises me is that our government got away with this AGAIN,
so soon after the Invasion/Occupation of Iraq.
The Iraqi Oil now belongs to the Global Corporations (SEE: Iraqi Oil Law),
and Iraq has been turned into a NeoLiberal Free Market HELL.

At least before Iraq, there WAS a whisper of opposition in the Media.
There was NOTHING about opposition or an examination of the facts about Libya before Obama sent in the Freedom Bombers.
The Take Over is complete.

I am even surprised at the number of DUers who have completely bought the propaganda.
This is exactly the SAME SHIT that was used to Market the Iraq War.
All they did was scratch out "Saddam", and pencil in "Gaddafi".
If you're not FOR the New WAR in Libya,
you're WITH The Communists AlQaeda The Terrorists Saddam Qaddafi!!!



This only goes to show that you CAN fool MOST Americans ALL of the time.

[EFerrari]

11. Same sh!t, different day.

You can fool most people most of the time. Just make them feel superior and magnanimous, no matter how undeservedly, and they'll follow you right off a cliff.

[amborin]

14. thanks for another excellent post, bvar22, cites bookmarked for later!

[sabrina 1]

20. Thank you, excellent post bvar22

Same reason we hate Chavez. He has helped strengthen the newly won indepence of S. American countries out from under the West's oppressive puppet governments by helping to establish a South American version of NATO. Qadaffi probably sealed his fate, as he was okay, terrorist or not, brutal dictator or not, so long as he didn't try anything like that that might undermine the power of the New World Order's Masters of the Universe.

[sabrina 1]

19. Humanitarian, right. I read on the news today about the 'gruesome

scenes' outside Qadaffi's compound where the bodies of Black Africans are still 'lying in the streets'. The 'rebels' claim they were 'mercenaries' working for Qadaffi. I guess holding them as POWs wasn't a consideration in this new 'democracy'.

Iraq all over again. I wonder how many will die before the Oil is 'secured'?

As for the 'legitimate government' set up and 'recognized' by the Western Colonialists, how can a government be 'legitmized' by foreign powers? Was there an election we missed?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

21. Oil? Oil? Perish the thought.

Of course, the West's involvement was about freedom and democracy. Not about (Perish the thought!) oil.
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,782359...

Now, though, companies are hopeful that the incoming government -- however it might ultimately look -- will provide better conditions for doing business. During the meeting in Benghazi with the transitional council, the German economic leaders were assured that the private economy would be strengthened, says Meier-Ewert. Contracts signed with the Gadhafi regime are to be honored, and many Libyans with extensive business experience are planning to return from exile, the German delegation was told. "They make a very good impression," says Meier-Ewert.

Still, the Germans aren't the only ones who have begun exploring opportunities in post-Gadhafi Libya. Indeed, some companies are taking substantial risks in order to get their foot in the door early. The Italian oil concern Eni, for example, is doing what it can to defend its status as the largest foreign oil producer in the country. Even before the rebels stormed the Gadhafi residence in Tripoli this week, Eni technicians had begun preparing to restart the flow of oil. And Eni has the full support of the government in Rome. Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi is meeting with rebel leader Mahmoud Jibril on Thursday.

Pole Position for France

It is France, though, that could have the pole position when it comes to doing business with the new Libya. In March, Paris became the first Western capital to recognize the rebels' transitional council as Libya's legitimate government. Now Sarkozy hopes to not only profit from this, but also to set the tone for Libyan reconstruction. And he also has plans to meet with Jibril soon.

"Naturally it can be assumed that there will be a certain political gratitude," Meier-Ewert says.

[MinM]

27. Another war for oil? Surely not!

Chris Floyd nails it.

[Octafish]

30. The crude is sweet and the empire wants it now.

The socialist WSWS perspective:

Libya: The criminal face of imperialism

Bill Van Auken
27 August 2011

NATO’s assault on Libya, a criminal imperialist war from its outset more than five months ago, has descended into an exercise in out-and-out murder as special forces operatives and intelligence agents hunt down Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi.

From the beginning, the central objectives of this war have been to seize control of Libya’s oil reserves, the largest on the African continent, and carry out an imperialist show of force as a means of suppressing and diverting the mass popular movements that only months earlier had toppled the US- and NATO-backed regimes of Mubarak in Egypt and Ben Ali in Tunisia.

“Operation United Protector,” as NATO dubbed its military onslaught, would have been more accurately described as “Operation Imperialist Gang Rape.” The US, Britain, France and Italy, each pursuing its own interests in Libya and the broader region, managed to unite for the common purpose of “regime-change.”

SNIP...

During that period, US President Franklin Delano Roosevelt appealed to the democratic sensibilities of the American people—while no doubt positioning the US for the pursuit of its own imperialist aims—by demanding a “quarantine” of fascist aggression.

He declared in 1937, “Without a declaration of war and without warning or justification of any kind, civilians, including vast numbers of women and children, are being ruthlessly murdered with bombs from the air… Nations are fomenting and taking sides in civil warfare in nations that have never done them any harm. Nations claiming freedom for themselves deny it to others. Innocent peoples, innocent nations, are being cruelly sacrificed to a greed for power and supremacy which is devoid of all sense of justice and humane consideration.”

CONTINUED...

http://wsws.org/articles/2011/aug2011/pers-a27.shtml

Great map, MinM. Sweet and low in sulphur, Libya's crude is as good as it gets, fetches top dollar.

And, to top thing's off, there's no better profit margin in the extraction industries than when the black gold's stolen. What a rush!



Remember that film, "The Formula," with George C. Scott and Marlon Brando? Thirty years on and only the names of the energy barons have changed. Their infinite greed remains.

[Starry Messenger]

28. k&r

[malaise]

29. Duh!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sickening! The cheering on is even more frightening.

[geek tragedy]

31. More tears for Qadaffi the victim of Western imperialism. nt

[inna]

34. no, more tears for another country being fucked over by western imperialism

[geek tragedy]

38. So, Libya would have been better off if Qadaffi had massacred the rebels?

Your concern is not for the people of Libya, but rather rooting for an enemy of the US.

[sabrina 1]

35. I bet you 'loved Saddam' too.

One of the rightwingers' favorite, stupid charges against people's principled opposition to the Iraq War was that they 'loved Saddam'. Congratulations on dragging that old wet rag out of the garbage to use on Democrats who still oppose US interventions in oil rich Arab/Muslim countries consistent with the same principles that caused them to oppose Bush's illegal wars.

Just in case, maybe you were a supporter of the Iraq war and are now just being 'consistent'?

[Leopolds Ghost]

37. Cannot recommend because this is over a day old. ;-)

[Octafish]

39. Hiding Africa’s looted funds: Silence of Western media

News America won't see or hear on ABCNNBCBSFowlNoiseNutworks, buy should:

Hiding Africa’s looted funds: Silence of Western media

San Francisco Bay View
March 26, 2011
by Lord Aikins Adusei

EXCERPT...

Even though it is a common knowledge Western banks are acting as safe havens for looted funds from Africa, very little attention is received from the Western media to expose them. The media tend to focus their energies on the corrupt leaders with little or no mention at all as to where the monies they have stolen are being kept.

There has not been any concrete effort to expose the banks that collude and connive with these corrupt leaders who are impoverishing the people. No effort has been made by the political elite in Europe and America to force the banks to return these stolen monies to the poorest of the poor because they are often the shareholders and beneficiaries of profits made by these banks. They talk about corruption because it is embarrassing to them, but they have no agenda to fight it, as that would mean no fat dividends for them and no cheap credits for their citizens.

SNIP...

These are the banks whose shady dealings with the political and business elite in Africa continue to impoverish African countries but which for profit’s sake the media refuse to tell the world about. The banks know these corrupt leaders have stolen the money yet they pretend not to know until there is a scandal; then they begin to act as if they are responsible institutions.

Most of the above named banks have also been implicated for receiving billions of dollars of looted funds from the late Mobutu of Zaire, Lansana Conte of Guinea, Eyadema of Togo and a number of dictators and tyrants such as Omar Bongo of Gabon, Obiang Nguema of Equatorial Guinea, Dos Santos of Angola, Denis Sassou-Nguesso of Congo, Paul Biya of Cameroon, Arap Moi of Kenya, Jerry Rawlings of Ghana, Ibrahim Babadjinda of Nigeria and a number of sitting and ex-presidents in Africa. Yet Western media are silent about where the funds are being kept.

CONTINUED...

http://sfbayview.com/2011/hiding-africa%E2%80%99s-looted-funds-silence-of-western-media/

Thank you, Leopolds Ghost, for giving a damn.

[bobthedrummer]

40. Kick and a link to Bankster USA about the Over Lords above US...

http://www.banksterusa.org