| 
             
              Death of the American Empire 
             
            
              America is self-destructing & 
              bringing the rest of the world down with it 
            
              By Tanya Cariina Hsu 
             | 
           
          
            | 
            
             | 
           
          
            
            
              
              Global Research, October 23, 2008  
             | 
           
         
        
          I believe that banking institutions are more 
          dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. (Thomas 
          Jefferson, US President; 1743 - 1826) 
         
        America is dying. It is self-destructing and bringing 
        the rest of the world down with it. 
        Often referred to as a sub-prime mortgage collapse, 
        this obfuscates the real reason. By associating tangible useless failed 
        mortgages, at least something 'real' can be blamed for the carnage. The 
        problem is, this is myth. The magnitude of this fiscal collapse happened 
        because it was all based on hot air. 
        The banking industry renamed insurance betting 
        guarantees as 'credit default swaps' and risky gambling wagers were 
        called 'derivatives'. Financial managers and banking executives were 
        selling the ultimate con to the entire world, akin to the snake-oil 
        salesmen from the 18th century but this time in suits and ties. And by 
        October 2009 it was a quadrillion-dollar (that's $1,000 trillion) 
        industry that few could understand. 
        Propped up by false hope, America is now falling like 
        a house of cards. 
        It all began in the early part of the 20th century. 
        In 1907 J.P. Morgan, a private New York banker, published a rumour that 
        a competing unnamed large bank was about to fail. It was a false charge 
        but customers nonetheless raced to their banks to withdraw their money, 
        in case it was their bank. As they pulled out their funds the banks lost 
        their cash deposits and were forced to call in their loans. People now 
        therefore had to pay back their mortgages to fill the banks with income, 
        going bankrupt in the process. The 1907 panic resulted in a crash that 
        prompted the creation of the Federal Reserve, a private banking cartel 
        with the veneer of an independent government organisation. Effectively, 
        it was a coup by elite bankers in order to control the industry. 
        When signed into law in 1913, the Federal Reserve 
        would loan and supply the nation's money, but with interest. The more 
        money it was able to print, the more 'income' for itself it generated. 
        By its very nature the Federal Reserve would forever keep producing debt 
        to stay alive. It was able to print America's monetary supply at will, 
        regulating its value. To control valuation however, inflation had to be 
        kept in check. 
        The Federal Reserve then doubled America's money 
        supply within five years, and in 1920 it called in a mass percentage of 
        loans. Over five thousand banks collapsed overnight. One year later the 
        Federal Reserve again increased the money supply by 62%, but in 1929 it 
        again called the loans back in, en masse. This time, the crash of 1929 
        caused over sixteen thousand banks to fail and an 89% plunge on the 
        stock market. The private and well-protected banks within the Federal 
        Reserve system were able to snap up the failed banks at pennies on the 
        dollar. 
        The nation fell into the Great Depression and in 
        April 1933 President Roosevelt issued an executive order that 
        confiscated all gold bullion from the public. Those who refused to turn 
        in their gold would be imprisoned for ten years, and by the end of the 
        year the gold standard was abolished. What had been redeemable for gold 
        became paper 'legal tender', and gold could no longer be exchanged for 
        cash as it had once been. 
        Later, in 1971, President Nixon removed the dollar 
        from the gold standard altogether, therefore no longer trading at the 
        internationally fixed price of $35. The US dollar was now worth whatever 
        the US decided it was worth because it was 'as good as gold'. It had no 
        standard of measure, and became the universal currency. Treasury bills 
        (short-term notes) and bonds (long-term notes) replaced gold as value, 
        promissory notes of the US government and paid for by the taxpayer. 
        Additionally, because gold was exempt from currency reporting 
        requirements it could not be traced, unlike the fiduciary (i.e. that 
        based upon trust) monetary systems of the West. That was not in 
        America's best interest. 
        After the Great Depression private banks remained 
        afraid to make home loans, so Roosevelt created Fannie Mae. A state 
        supported mortgage bank, it provided federal funding to finance home 
        mortgages for affordable housing. In 1968 President Johnson privatised 
        Fannie Mae, and in 1970, Freddie Mac was created to compete with Fannie 
        Mae. Both of them bought mortgages from banks and other lenders, and 
        sold them onto new investors. 
        The post World War II boom had created an America 
        flush with cash and assets. As a military industrial complex, war 
        exponentially profited the US and, unlike any empire in history, it shot 
        to superpower status. But it failed to remember that, historically, 
        whenever empires rose they fell in direct proportion. 
        Americans could afford all the modern conveniences, 
        exporting its manufactured goods all over the world. After the Vietnam 
        War, the US went into an economic decline. But people were loath to give 
        up their elevated standard of living despite the loss of jobs, and 
        production was increasingly sent overseas. A sense of delusion and 
        entitlement kept Americans on the treadmill of consumer consumption. 
        In 1987 the US stock market plunged by 22% in one day 
        because of high-risk futures trading, called derivatives, and in 1989 
        the Savings & Loan crisis resulted in President George H.W. Bush using 
        $142 billion in taxpayer funds to rescue half of the S&L's. To do so, 
        Freddie Mac was given the task of giving sub-prime (below prime-rate) 
        mortgages to low-income families. In 2000, the "irrational exuberance" 
        of the dot-com bubble burst, and 50% of high-tech firms went bankrupt 
        wiping $5 trillion from their over-inflated market values. 
        After this crisis, Federal Reserve Chairman Alan 
        Greenspan kept interest rates so low they were less than the rate of 
        inflation. Anyone saving his or her income actually lost money, and the 
        savings rate soon fell into negative territory. 
        During the 1990s, advertisers went into overdrive, 
        marketing an ever more luxurious lifestyle, all made available with 
        cheap easy credit. Second mortgages became commonplace, and home equity 
        loans were used to pay credit card bills. The more Americans bought, the 
        more they fell into debt. But as long as they had a house their false 
        sense of security remained: their home was their equity, it would always 
        go up in value, and they could always remortgage at lower rates if 
        needed. The financial industry also believed that housing prices would 
        forever climb, but should they ever fall the central bank would cut 
        interest rates so that prices would jump back up. It was, everyone 
        believed, a win-win situation. 
        Greenspan's rock-bottom interest rates let anyone 
        afford a home. Minimum wage service workers with aspirations to buy a 
        half million-dollar house were able to secure 100% loans, the mortgage 
        lenders fully aware that they would not be able to keep up the payments. 
        So many people received these sub-prime loans that 
        the investment houses and lenders came up with a new scheme: bundle 
        these virtually worthless home loans and sell them as solid US 
        investments to unsuspecting countries who would not know the difference. 
        American lives of excess and consumer spending never suffered, and were 
        being propped up by foreign nations none the wiser. 
        It has always been the case that a bank would lend 
        out more than it actually had, because interest payments generated its 
        income. The more the bank loaned, the more interest it collected even 
        with no money in the vault. It was a lucrative industry of giving away 
        money it never had in the first place. Mortgage banks and investment 
        houses even borrowed money on international money markets to fund these 
        100% plus sub-prime mortgages, and began lending more than ten times 
        their underlying assets. 
        After 9/11, George Bush told the nation to spend, and 
        during a time of war, that's what the nation did. It borrowed at 
        unprecedented levels so as to not only pay for its war on terror in the 
        Middle East (calculated to cost $4 trillion) but also pay for tax cuts 
        at the very time it should have increased taxes. Bush removed the 
        reserve requirements in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, from 10% to 2.5%. 
        They were free to not only lend even more at bargain basement interest 
        rates, they only needed a fraction of reserves. Soon banks lent thirty 
        times asset value. It was, as one economist put it, an 'orgy of excess'. 
        It was flagrant overspending during a time of war. At 
        no time in history has a nation gone into conflict without sacrifice, 
        cutbacks, tax increases, and economic conservation. 
        And there was a growing chance that, just like in 
        1929, investors would rush to claim their money all at once. 
        To guarantee, therefore, these high risk mortgages, 
        the same financial houses that sold them then created 'insurance 
        policies' against the sub-prime investments they were selling, marketed 
        as Credit Default Swaps (CDS). But the government must regulate 
        insurance policies, so by calling them CDS they remained totally 
        unregulated. Financial institutions were 'hedging their bets' and 
        selling premiums to protect the junk assets. In other words, the asset 
        that should go up in value could also have a side-bet, just in case, 
        that it might go down. By October 2008, CDS were trading at $62 
        trillion, more than the stock markets of the whole world combined. 
        These bets had absolutely no value whatsoever and 
        were not investments. They were just financial instruments called 
        derivatives - high stakes gambling, 'nothing from nothing' - or as 
        Warren Buffet referred to them, 'Weapons of Financial Mass Destruction'. 
        The derivatives trade was 'worth' more than one quadrillion dollars, or 
        larger than the economy of the entire world. (In September 2008 the 
        global Gross Domestic Product was $60 trillion). 
        Challenged as being illegal in the 1990s, Greenspan 
        legalised the derivatives practise. Soon hedge funds became an entire 
        industry, betting on the derivatives market and gambling as much as they 
        wanted. It was easy because it was money they did not have in the first 
        place. The industry had all the appearances of banks, but the hedge 
        funds, equity funds, and derivatives brokers had no access to government 
        loans in the event of a default. If the owners defaulted, the hedge 
        funds had no money to pay 'from nothing'. Those who had hedged on an 
        asset going up or down would not be able to collect on the winnings or 
        losses. 
        The market had become the largest industry in the 
        world, and all the financial giants were cashing in: Bear Stearns, 
        Lehman Brothers, Citigroup, and AIG. But homeowners, long maxed out on 
        their credit, were now beginning to default on their mortgages. Not only 
        were they paying for their house but also all the debt amassed over the 
        years for car, credit card and student loans, medical payments and home 
        equity loans. They had borrowed to pay for groceries and skyrocketing 
        health insurance premiums to keep up with their bigger houses and cars; 
        they refinanced the debt they had for lower rates that soon ballooned. 
        The average American owed 25% of their annual income to credit card 
        debts alone. 
        In 2008, housing prices began to slide precipitously 
        downwards and mortgages were suddenly losing value. Manufacturing orders 
        were down 4.5% by September, inventories began to pile up, unemployment 
        was soaring and average house foreclosures had increased by 121% and up 
        to 200% in California. 
        The financial giants had to stop trading these 
        mortgage-backed securities, as now their losses would have to be visibly 
        accounted for. Investors began withdrawing their funds. Bear Stearns, 
        heavily specialised in home loan portfolios, was the first to go in 
        March. 
        Just as they had done in the 20th century, JP Morgan 
        swooped in and picked up Bear Stearns for a pittance. One year prior 
        Bear Stearns shares traded at $159 but JP Morgan was able to buy in and 
        take over at $2 a share. In September, Washington Mutual collapsed, the 
        largest bank failure in history. JP Morgan again came in and paid $1.9 
        billion for assets valued at $176 billion. It was a fire sale. 
        Relatively quietly over the summer Freddie Mac and 
        Fannie Mae, the publicly traded companies responsible for 80% of the 
        home mortgage loans, lost almost 90% of their value for the year. 
        Together they were responsible for half the outstanding loan amounts but 
        were now in debt $80 to every $1 in capital reserves. 
        To guarantee they would stay alive, the Federal 
        Reserve stepped in and took over Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. On 
        September 7th 2008 they were put into "conservatorship": known as 
        nationalisation to the rest of the world, but Americans have difficulty 
        with the idea of any government run industry that required taxpayer 
        increases. 
        What the government was really doing was handing out 
        an unlimited line of credit. Done by the Federal Reserve and not US 
        Treasury, it was able to bypass Congressional approval. The Treasury 
        Department then auctioned off Treasury bills to raise money for the 
        Federal Reserve's own use, but nonetheless the taxpayer would be funding 
        the rescue. The bankers had bled tens of billions from the system by 
        hedging and derivative gambling, and triggered the portfolio inter-bank 
        lending freeze, which then seized up and crashed. 
        The takeover was presented as a government funded 
        bailout of an arbitrary $700 billion, which does nothing to solve the 
        problem. No economists were asked to present their views to Congress, 
        and the loan only perpetuates the myth that the banking system is not 
        really dead. 
        In reality, the damage will not be $700 billion but 
        closer to $5 trillion, the value of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae's 
        mortgages. It was nothing less than a bailout of the quadrillion dollar 
        derivatives industry which otherwise faced payouts of over a trillion 
        dollars on CDS mortgage-backed securities they had sold. It was 
        necessary, said Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, to save the country 
        from a "housing correction". But, he added, the $700 billion taxpayer 
        funded takeover would not prevent other banks from collapsing, in turn 
        causing a stock market crash. 
        In other words Paulson was blackmailing Congress in 
        order to lead a coup by the banking elite under the false guise of 
        necessary legislation to stop the dyke from flooding. It merely shifted 
        wealth from one class to another, as it had done almost a century prior. 
        No sooner were the words were out of Paulson's mouth before other 
        financial institutions began imploding, and with them the disintegration 
        of the global financial system - much modelled after the lauded system 
        of American banking. 
        In September the Federal Reserve, its line of credit 
        assured, then bought the world largest insurance company, AIG, for $85 
        billion for an 80% stake. AIG was the largest seller of CDS, but now 
        that it was in the position of having to pay out, from collateral it did 
        not have, it was teetering on the edge of bankruptcy. 
        In October the entire country of Iceland went 
        bankrupt, having bought American worthless sub-prime mortgages as 
        investments. European banks began exploding, all wanting to cash in 
        concurrently on their inflated US stocks to pay off the low interest 
        rate debts before rates climbed higher. The year before the signs had 
        been evident, when the largest US mortgage lender Countrywide fell. Soon 
        after, the largest lender in the UK, Northern Rock, went under - London 
        long having copied Wall Street creative financing. Japan and Korea's 
        auto manufacturing nosedived by 37%, global economies contracting. 
        Pakistan is on the edge of collapse too, with real reserves at $3 
        billion - enough to only buy a month's supply of food and oil and 
        attempting to stall payments to Saudi Arabia for the 100,000 barrels of 
        oil per day it provides to the country. Under President Musharraf, who 
        left office in the nick of time, Pakistan's currency lost 25% of its 
        value, its inflation running at 25%. 
        Meanwhile energy costs had soared, with oil reaching 
        a peak of almost $150 per barrel in the summer. The costs were 
        immediately passed on to the already spent homeowner, in rising heating 
        and fuel, transport and manufacturing costs. Yet 30% of the cost of a 
        barrel of oil was based upon Wall Street speculators, climbing to 60% as 
        a speculative fear factor during the summer months. As soon as the 
        financial crisis hit, suddenly oil prices slid down, slicing oil costs 
        to $61 from a high of $147 in June and proving that the 60% speculation 
        factor was far more accurate. This sudden decline also revealed OPEC's 
        lack of control over spiralling prices during the past few years, almost 
        squarely laid on the shoulders of Saudi Arabia alone. When OPEC, in 
        September, sought to maintain higher prices by cutting production, it 
        was Saudi Arabia who voted against such a move at the expense of its own 
        revenue. 
        Europe then decided that no more would it be ruined 
        by the excess of America. 'Olde Europe' may have had enough of being 
        dictated to by the US, who refused to compromise on loans lent to their 
        own broken nations after WWII. On October the 13th, the once divided EU 
        nations unilaterally agreed to an emergency rescue plan totaling $2.3 
        trillion. It was more than three times greater than the US package for a 
        catastrophe America alone had created. 
        By mid October, the Dow, NASDAQ and S&P 500 had 
        erased all the gains they made over the previous decade. Greenspan's 
        pyramid scheme of easy money from nothing resulted in a massive 
        overextension of credit, inflated housing prices, and incredible stock 
        valuations, achieved because investors would never withdraw their money 
        all at once. But now it was crashing at break-neck speed and no solution 
        in sight. President Bush said that people ought not to worry at all 
        because "America is the most attractive destination for investors around 
        the globe." 
        Those who will hurt the most are the very men and 
        women who grew the country after WWII, and saved their pensions for 
        retirement due now. They had built the country during the war production 
        years, making its weapons and arms for global conflict. During the Cold 
        War the USSR was the ever-present enemy and thus the military industrial 
        complex continued to grow. Only when there is a war does America profit. 
        Russia will not tolerate a new cold war build-up of 
        ballistic missiles. And the Middle East has seen its historical ally 
        turn into its worst nightmare, be it militarily or economically. No 
        longer will these nations continue to support the dollar as the world's 
        currency. The world's economy is no longer America's to control and the 
        US is now indebted to the rest of the world. No more will the US be able 
        to demand its largest Middle Eastern oil supplier open up its banking 
        books so as to be transparent and free from corruption and terrorist 
        connections lest there be consequences - the biggest act of criminal 
        corruption in history has just been perpetrated by the United States. 
        It was the best con game in town: get paid well for 
        selling vast amounts of risk, fail, and then have governments fix the 
        problem at the expense of the taxpayers who never saw a penny of shared 
        wealth to begin with. 
        There is no easy solution to this crisis, its effects 
        multiplying like an infectious disease. 
        Ironically, least affected by the crisis are Islamic 
        banks. 
        They have largely been immune to the collapse because 
        Ilamic banking prohibits the acquisition of wealth via gambling (or 
        alcohol, tobacco, pornography, or stocks in armaments companies), and 
        forbids the buying and selling of a debt as well as usury. Additionally, 
        Shari'ah banking laws forbid investing in any company with debts that 
        exceed thirty percent. 
        "Islamic banking institutions have not failed per se 
        as they deal in tangible assets and assume the risk" said Dr. Mohammed 
        Ramady, Professor of Economics at King Fahd University of Petroleum & 
        Minerals. "Although the Islamic banking sector is also part of the 
        global economy, the impact of direct exposure to sub-prime asset 
        investments has been low" he continued. "The liquidity slowdown has 
        especially affected Dubai, with its heavy international borrowing. The 
        most negative effect has been a loss of confidence in the regional stock 
        markets." Instead, said Dr. Ramady, oil surplus Arab nations are 
        "reconsidering overseas investments in financial assets" and speeding up 
        their own domestic projects. 
        Eight years ago, in May 2000, Saudi Islamic banker 
        His Highness Dr. Nayef bin Fawaaz ibn Sha'alan publicly gave a series of 
        economic lectures in Gulf states. At the time his research showed that 
        Arab investments in the US, to the tune of $1.5 trillion, were 
        effectively being held hostage and he recommended they be pulled out and 
        reinvested in the tangibles of the Arab and Islamic markets. "Not in 
        stocks however because the stock market could be manipulated remotely, 
        as we have seen in the last couple of years in the Arab market where 
        trillions of dollars evaporated" he said. 
        He warned then that it was a certainty that the US 
        economic system was on the verge of collapse because of its cumulative 
        debts, ever-increasing deficit and the interest on that debt. "When the 
        debts and deficits come due, they just issue new Treasury bonds to cover 
        the old bonds due, with their interest and the new deficit too." The 
        cycle cannot be stopped or the debt cancelled because the US would no 
        longer be able to borrow. The consequence of relieving this cycle would 
        be a total collapse of their economic system as opposed to the partial, 
        albeit massive, crash of 2008. 
        "Islamic banking", said Dr. Al-Sha'alan, "always 
        protects the individuals' wealth while putting a cap on selfishness and 
        greed. It has the best of capitalism - filtering out its negatives - and 
        the best of socialism - filtering out its negatives too." Both systems 
        inevitably had to fail. Additionally, Europe and Japan did not need to 
        be held accountable and indebted to America anymore for protection 
        against the Soviets. 
        
          "The essential difference between the Islamic 
          economic system and the capitalist system", he continued "is that in 
          Islam wealth belongs to God - the individual being only its manager. 
          It is a means, not a goal. In capitalism, it is the reverse: money 
          belongs to the individual, and is a goal in and of itself. In America 
          especially, money is worshipped like God." 
         
        In sum, the crash of the entire global economic 
        system is a result of America's fiscal arrogance based upon one set of 
        rules for itself and another for the rest of the world. Its increased 
        creative financing deluded its people into a false sense of security, 
        and now looks like the failure of capitalism altogether. 
        The whole exercise in democracy by force against Arab 
        Muslim nations has almost bankrupted the US. The Cold War is over and 
        the US has nothing to offer: no exports, no production, few natural 
        resources, and no service sector economy. 
        The very markets that resisted US economic policies 
        the most, having curbed foreign direct investments into America, are 
        those who will fare best and come out ahead. 
        But not before having paid a very high price. 
        Tanya Cariina Hsu is a political researcher 
        and analyst focusing on Saudi Arabian and US relations. One of the 
        contributors to recent written testimony on the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia 
        for the US Congressional Senate Judiciary Committee on behalf of FOCA 
        (Friends of Charities Association) in its Hearing on Capitol Hill in 
        Washington D.C., her analysis has been published and critically 
        acclaimed throughout the US, Europe and the Middle East. 
        The first to break the barrier against public 
        discussion of the Israeli influence upon US foreign policy decision 
        making, in Capitol Hill's "A Clean Break" Symposium in Washington D.C. 
        in 2004, as the Institute for Research: Middle East Policy (IRmep) 
        Director of Development and Senior Research Analyst, Ms. Hsu remains an 
        International Fellow with the Institute. 
        Born in London, she re-located to Riyadh, Saudi 
        Arabia in 2005 and is currently completing a book on US policy towards 
        Saudi Arabia. 
        
          
            Please 
            support Global Research  
            Global Research relies on the financial support of its readers. 
             
            
              
            Your endorsement is greatly 
            appreciated 
             
  | 
           
          
            | 
            
            Subscribe to the Global Research e-newsletter | 
           
          
            
  | 
           
          
            
            
              Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole 
              responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those 
              of the Centre for Research on Globalization. The contents of this 
              article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre 
              for Research on Globalization will not be responsible or liable 
              for any inaccurate or incorrect statements contained in this 
              article. 
              
              
              To become a Member of Global Research
              
              The CRG grants permission to cross-post original Global Research 
              articles on community internet sites as long as the text & title 
              are not modified. The source and the author's copyright must be 
              displayed. For publication of Global Research articles in print or 
              other forms including commercial internet sites, contact:
               
              crgeditor@yahoo.com 
              
              
              www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use of 
              which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright 
              owner. We are making such material available to our readers under 
              the provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better 
              understanding of political, economic and social issues. The 
              material on this site is distributed without profit to those who 
              have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and 
              educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for 
              purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from 
              the copyright owner.
               
              For media inquiries:
               
              crgeditor@yahoo.com
              
              © Copyright Tanya Cariina Hsu, Global Research, 2008 
               
              The url address of this article is:
               
              www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=10651
             
             | 
           
          
             
            
             | 
           
         
           |