Koch Bros. vs the BIS

Cultural, Economics, Premium POM20 Comments

"The balance of power has been changing. There are confrontations, economic powers emerging and consolidating and cooperating ... The world is becoming both global and interdependent and needs probably different layers in that safety net."  - Christine Lagarde

With so much happening over the summer on the geopolitical front, including increasing social unrest around the world, it's important to look in again on the International Monetary Fund's 2010 Quota and Governance Reforms.  Obviously the United States is still delaying the required congressional approval to enact the legislation in support of the reforms. 

The G20 countries have collectively given the American congress until the end of this year to pass the legislation, which is supported by the countries listed below as well as the American Executive Branch and the Treasury.  Earlier this year the reforms were attached to the aid package for Ukraine.  The IMF reforms and IRS proposed rule change were packaged together and became part of the aid bill, only to be dropped later so the aid bill for Ukraine could be passed. 

The IRS rule change would have limited freedom of speech in regards to the political activities of non-profit organizations.  The Koch brothers, who presumably would not have benefited from this rule change, bargained that the Ukraine aid package would be passed, along with the IMF reforms, as long as the IRS rule change was removed from the bill.  For whatever reason, the Democrats refused to separate the IMF reforms and IRS rule change, but the aid package was ultimately passed.

This tells us a few very important things. 

First, the Koch brothers are aggressively supporting Republican candidates in this years congressional elections which are to take place on November 4th.  The IRS rule change would have severely hampered their attempts at maintaining and growing political influence.  Is it possible that international banking interests, represented in the form of the Bank for International Settlements, is attempting to strip political influence away from American business interests?

Second, neither the Koch brothers, nor the republicans, are against the IMF reforms.  They are only against the IRS rule change which has been attached with the IMF reforms on every bill that is written.  It is perhaps a requirement of the international banking interests that IMF reform and a weakening of internal political power of each country are part and parcel of the same game plan.

Thirdly, given that the Executive Branch and the U.S. Treasury, being the representation of the Democrats, and presumably along with the Republicans by way of congressional representation, are all willing to enact the legislation supporting the IMF 2010 Reforms, it is highly likely that the reforms will be passed shortly after the November 4th elections, as demanded by the G20 countries.

Fourthly, the Koch brothers, who are likely the tip of the spear for a larger American industrial like-minded collective, are unwilling to give up the ability to influence national and local elections.  This American industrial representation likely accepts the inevitability of the IMF Reforms and the restructuring of the global economic structure, including the dollars removal as the worlds primary reserve currency, but are unwilling to accept relinquishing their influence over American political power.

And somehow the Keystone XL pipeline is also bundled up in this mess.  The Koch brothers are the largest foreign lease holders in the Canadian oil sands industry.  Not to mention that they own and control the holding tanks and shipment processing facilities located at Hardisty, Alberta, which is the beginning of the Keystone pipeline.  Obviously the Koch brothers will benefit greatly from the Keystone XL Pipeline, which is likely why the Democrats are holding up its approval - IRS rule change for pipeline approval. It's politics American style.

With the fast approaching restructuring of the global economy it is imperative for American business interests to close and secure as many resource deals around the world as possible.  If one looks closely enough behind the curtain of media propaganda, it is easy to see the resource security and allocation taking place in all the flash points around the world, from natural gas in Europe to oil in Iraq.  Where resources are not sold and paid for in dollars the American interests will have less bargaining leverage. 

And for an American economy not blessed with the worlds primary reserve currency, business contracts and overall profitability will require as much leverage as possible.

Could the internal civil unrest taking place within America be the product of external banking interests?  Could this unrest be used as leverage to get American industrial and business interests to agree with the larger mandate of economic reform and politically aligned mandates?

There is no doubt that the tools of propaganda and coercion are used on political groups and business conglomerates around the world in all countries.  We need to seriously consider that the United States was used by the international banking interests and have had no more control over their own dollar and its machinations than the homeowner has over the interest rate on his mortgage. 

And now that the banking interests no longer require the dollar for its broader goals, the American business and industrial interest will be brought to heel under the mandates of the Bank for International Settlements.

The Koch brothers could very well represent the last stand of American business and industrial sovereignty.  Whatever sovereignty was left to begin with.  Though I imagine they would sign that remaining sovereignty away for the right contract.

Below is the latest update on the 2010 Quota Reforms directly from the website of the International Monetary Fund.  - JC 

Acceptances of the Proposed Amendment of the Articles of Agreement on Reform of the Executive Board and Consents to 2010 Quota Increase

<

p class="hilite">Last Updated: August 12, 2014

In order for the proposed amendment on reform of the Executive Board to enter into force, acceptance by three-fifths of the Fund's 188 members (or 113 members) having 85 percent of the Fund's total voting power is required. As of August 12, 2014, 146 members having 77.07 percent of total voting power had accepted the amendment. Those members are listed below1.

For the quota increases under the 14th General Review of Quotas to become effective, the entry into force of the proposed amendment to reform the Executive Board is required, as well as the consent to the quota increase by members having not less than 70 percent of total quotas (as of November 5, 2010). As of July 8, 2014, 162 members having 79.54 percent of total quota had consented. Those members are listed below.

Countries that have accepted the amendment on reform of the Executive Board

Country

Number of Countries = 146

Voting Power %

(as of the date of the last update above)
Total = 77.07

 

Afghanistan

0.09

Algeria

0.53

Angola

0.14

Antigua and Barbuda

0.03

Argentina

0.87

Australia

1.31

Austria

0.87

Azerbaijan

0.09

Bahamas, The

0.08

Bahrain

0.08

Bangladesh

0.24

Belarus

0.18

Belgium

1.86

Belize

0.04

Benin   

0.05

Bhutan

0.03

Botswana

0.06

Brazil  

1.72  

Brunei Darussalam  

0.11  

Bulgaria 

0.28  

Burkina Faso  

0.05  

Burundi 

0.06  

Cambodia  

0.06  

Cameroon  

0.10  

Canada  

2.56  

Central African Republic  

0.05  

Chad  

0.06  

Chile  

0.37

China  

3.81  

Colombia

0.34

Comoros

0.03

Côte d'Ivoire  

0.16

Croatia  

0.17  

Cyprus  

0.09  

Czech Republic  

0.43  

Denmark  

0.78  

Djibouti  

0.04  

Dominica  

0.03  

Dominican Republic  

0.12  

Egypt 

0.40  

El Salvador  

0.10  

Equatorial Guinea  

0.05  

Estonia  

0.07  

Fiji  

0.06  

Finland  

0.53  

France  

4.29  

Gabon  

0.09  

Gambia, The  

0.04  

Georgia  

0.09  

Germany  

5.81  

Ghana  

0.18  

Greece  

0.47  

Guinea  

0.07  

Guinea-Bissau  

0.03  

Guyana  

0.07  

Haiti  

0.06  

Honduras  

0.08  

Hungary  

0.44  

Iceland  

0.08  

India  

2.34  

Indonesia  

0.85  

Iran  

0.62  

Ireland  

0.53    

Israel  

0.45  

Italy  

3.16  

Jamaica  

0.14  

Japan  

6.23  

Jordan  

0.10  

Kenya  

0.14  

Kiribati  

0.03  

Korea  

1.37  

Kosovo  

0.05  

Kuwait  

0.58  

Lao PDR  

0.05  

Latvia  

0.09  

Lesotho 

0.04  

Lithuania 

0.10  

Luxembourg 

0.20  

Macedonia, FYR  

0.06  

Malawi  

0.06  

Malaysia  

0.73  

Maldives  

0.03  

Mali  

0.07

Malta  

0.07  

Mauritius  

0.07  

Mexico  

1.47  

Moldova  

0.08  

Montenegro  

0.04  

Morocco  

0.26  

Mozambique  

0.07  

Myanmar   

0.13

Namibia

0.08

Nepal  

0.06  

Netherlands  

2.08  

New Zealand  

0.38  

Nicaragua   

0.08

Niger   

0.06

Norway

0.78

Oman

0.12

Pakistan  

0.44  

Panama  

0.11  

Papua New Guinea  

0.08  

Paraguay  

0.07  

Peru  

0.28  

Philippines  

0.43  

Poland  

0.70  

Portugal  

0.44  

Qatar  

0.15  

Romania  

0.44  

Russia  

2.39  

Samoa  

0.03  

San Marino  

0.04  

São Tomé and Príncipe  

0.03  

Saudi Arabia  

2.80  

Senegal  

0.09

Serbia  

0.21  

Seychelles  

0.03  

Sierra Leone  

0.07  

Singapore  

0.59  

Slovak Republic  

0.20  

Slovenia  

0.14  

South Africa 

0.77  

South Sudan 

0.08  

Spain  

1.63  

Sri Lanka  

0.19  

St. Vincent and the Grenadines  

0.03  

Sudan  

0.10  

Suriname  

0.07  

Swaziland  

0.05  

Sweden  

0.98  

Switzerland  

1.40  

Tajikistan  

0.06  

Thailand  

0.60  

Timor-Leste  

0.03  

Togo  

0.06  

Tonga  

0.03  

Trinidad and Tobago  

0.16  

Tunisia  

0.14  

Turkey  

0.61  

Turkmenistan  

0.06  

Ukraine 

0.57  

United Kingdom  

4.29  

Uruguay 

0.15  

Uzbekistan 

0.14  

Vanuatu  

0.04

Vietnam  

0.21

Total

77.07

Countries that have consented to their quota increase under the 14th General Review of Quotas

Country

Number of Countries = 162

Quota Share %

(as of the date of the last update above)
Total= 79.54

 

Afghanistan

0.07

Albania

0.02

Algeria

0.58

Angola

0.13

Antigua and Barbuda  

0.01  

Argentina  

0.97  

Armenia  

0.04  

Australia  

1.49  

Austria  

0.86  

Azerbaijan  

0.07  

Bahamas, The  

0.06  

Bangladesh  

0.25  

Barbados  

0.03  

Belarus  

0.18  

Belgium  

2.12  

Belize  

0.01  

Benin  

0.03  

Bhutan  

0.003  

Botswana  

0.03  

Brazil  

1.40  

Brunei Darussalam  

0.10  

Bulgaria 

0.29  

Burkina Faso  

0.03  

Burundi  

0.04  

Cambodia  

0.04  

Cameroon  

0.09  

Canada  

2.93

Central African Republic  

0.03  

Chad  

0.03  

Chile  

0.39  

China  

3.72  

Colombia  

0.36  

Comoros  

.004  

Congo, Dem. Rep.  

0.25  

Congo, Rep.  

0.04  

Côte d'Ivoire  

0.15  

Croatia  

0.17  

Cyprus 

0.06  

Czech Republic  

0.38  

Denmark  

0.76  

Djibouti  

0.01  

Dominica  

0.004  

Dominican Republic  

0.10  

Egypt

0.43  

El Salvador  

0.08  

Equatorial Guinea  

0.01  

Estonia  

0.03  

Ethiopia  

0.06  

Finland  

0.58  

Fiji  

0.03  

France  

4.94  

Gabon 

0.07  

Gambia, The  

0.01  

Georgia  

0.07  

Germany  

5.98  

Ghana  

0.17  

Greece  

0.38  

Guinea  

0.05  

Guinea-Bissau  

0.01  

Guyana  

0.04  

Haiti  

0.04  

Honduras 

0.06  

Hungary  

0.48  

Iceland  

0.05  

India  

1.91  

Indonesia  

0.96  

Iran  

0.69  

Iraq  

0.55  

Ireland  

0.39  

Israel  

0.43  

Italy  

3.24  

Jamaica  

0.13  

Japan  

6.12  

Jordan  

0.08  

Kenya  

0.12  

Kiribati  

0.003  

Korea  

1.35  

Kosovo  

0.03  

Kuwait  

0.64  

Lao PDR  

0.02  

Latvia  

0.06  

Lesotho  

0.02  

Liberia  

0.06  

Libya  

0.52  

Lithuania

0.07  

Luxembourg  

0.13  

Macedonia, FYR  

0.03  

Malawi  

0.03  

Malaysia  

0.68  

Maldives  

0.004  

Mali  

0.04  

Malta  

0.05  

Marshall Islands  

0.002  

Mauritius  

0.05  

Mexico  

1.45  

Moldova  

0.06  

Montenegro  

0.01  

Morocco  

0.27  

Mozambique  

0.05  

Myanmar  

0.12  

Namibia  

0.06  

Nepal

0.03  

Netherlands, The  

2.37  

New Zealand

0.41

Nicaragua  

0.06  

Niger  

0.03  

Nigeria  

0.81  

Norway  

0.77  

Oman  

0.09  

Pakistan  

0.48  

Palau  

0.001  

Panama  

0.10  

Papua New Guinea  

0.06  

Paraguay  

0.05  

Peru  

0.29  

Philippines  

0.40  

Poland  

0.63  

Portugal  

0.40  

Qatar  

0.12  

Romania  

0.47  

Russian Federation  

2.73  

Samoa 

0.01  

San Marino  

0.01  

São Tomé and Príncipe  

0.003  

Saudi Arabia  

3.21  

Senegal  

0.07  

Serbia  

0.22  

Seychelles  

0.004  

Sierra Leone  

0.05  

Singapore  

0.40  

Slovak Republic  

0.16  

Slovenia  

0.11  

Solomon Islands

0.005  

South Africa  

0.86  

South Sudan 

 

Spain  

1.40

Sri Lanka  

0.19

St. Lucia 

0.01

St. Vincent and the Grenadines  

0.004

Suriname  

0.04

Swaziland  

0.02  

Sweden  

1.10  

Switzerland  

1.59  

Tajikistan  

0.04  

Tanzania  

0.09  

Thailand  

0.50  

Timor-Leste  

0.004  

Togo  

0.03  

Tonga  

0.003  

Trinidad and Tobago  

0.15  

Tunisia  

0.13  

Turkey  

0.55  

Turkmenistan  

0.03  

Uganda  

0.08  

United Kingdom  

4.94  

Uruguay  

0.14  

Uzbekistan  

0.13  

Vanuatu  

0.01

Vietnam  

0.15  

Yemen  

0.11  

Zambia  

0.22  

Zimbabwe  

0.16  

Total  

79.54

 

20 Comments on “Koch Bros. vs the BIS”

  1. Excerpt: "We need to seriously consider that the United States was used by the international banking interests and have had no more control over their own dollar and its machinations"

    This is plainly the opposite case as illustrated by Title 18 USC Sec. 8, which lists all forms of bonds and banknotes as 'security' issues of the government.

    The fact is that banks are mere agencies given 'privilege' to borrow the bond 'security' and then lend the banknote 'security' of government's incorporated constituencies (knowingly or not).

    The entire banknote scheme is debt, start to finish.

    Money Is Weighed, Fictions Are Counted.

    1. You're preaching to the choir pal. Though every dollar in circulation was created through debt so I doubt your reference is relevant, even though it may be legally relevant. And ask yourself this question, "what is government?"

    1. As frustrated as I get with government sometimes and as true as Ludwigs statement is, its kind of funny how freely people give their liberty away.

      To this day people still think that their votes actually count.

  2. Very interesting post JC. When I bring up the Koch brothers my peers all scratch their heads wondering who they are. It stinks that America is still reaching out to effect other countries means for making a living such as the Keystone XL pipeline. I hope it is all cleared up soon and that it benefits more than just the Koch brothers pockets.

    Does anyone else see the resemblance between Charles Koch above and Henry Fonda in his later years? http://iv1.lisimg.com/image/6117899/600full-henry-fonda.jpg

    1. "Does anyone else see the resemblance between Charles Koch above and Henry Fonda in his later years?"

      LOL! Dane, that was the first thing I noticed too, when looking at the depiction of Koch.

      Cheers, DF

  3. Love this article JC.

    Koch will struggle with BIS dictates opposing but inevitably accepting IMF reform.
    Malevolent machinations.

    LOL though. Koch, Lagarde, the BIS castle dwellers et al. are destined for the same burning hell. Bye Bye demons!

    And the dollar swirls the toilet. Flush now and get on with it!

  4. JC, thank you for this insightful article. It begs the question whether international corporate and financial interests are aligned or not.

    Probably the lines of division are neither national nor functional, but rather factional. Factions are primarily divided by small differences in their vision on the destiny of humanity and or the timing and choice of events.

    Have you noticed any patterns that reveal the preferred timing and choice of events preferred by Koch's faction?

    In gratitude, DF

    1. The appearance of factions is about temporary often brief profitable alliance. Follow the money. These are empty shallow immature men who define themselves and their goals with simple addition and subtraction. The factions are based solely on "how much will I get". No conceptualization, no ethics, no complex plans for future, indeed minimal intellectual function. Simplistic ignorant selfish greed. Me, me, me, Cha ching, ha ha I have power, woopee, me me me ....

      Men of principle and wisdom are quite different.

  5. In the photo above the quote in the bottom left corner speaks volumes about Koch's thinking.

    "Most Power is the Power to Coerce somebody" - Charles Koch

    pow·er
    noun
    1. the ability to do something or act in a particular way, especially as a faculty or quality.

    2. the capacity or ability to direct or influence the behavior of others or the course of events.

    co·erce
    verb
    persuade (an unwilling person) to do something by using force or threats.

    synonyms: pressure, pressurize, press, push, constrain; More
    obtain (something) by using force or threats.

  6. Neither organized nor elite.
    Don't really think there is an organized elite. Just an occasional apparently unified pack of rats. Nothing organized about rats gorging, Nothing elite about hungry predators.
    When the vermin meet at Bilderberg etc. they are at first afraid as there are even bigger rats present and then they pursue their own self serving black agenda enthusiastically. The outsider (we humans) may think we observe organization, but from within it's bloody chaos.The rats will eat one another and even themselves if their inhibiting fears are even briefly assuaged.
    The term 'elite' should be reserved for caring intelligent humans who serve mankind. Were they to become organized we might really have something!

    1. Interesting perspective Roger! It makes a lot of sense and clarifies why so many spiritually underdeveloped entities can attain influencial positions: they rely on external power (which has nothing to do with internal strenght).

      External power is indeed very fragile and transient. It totally relies on the obedience of people (and things) outside of oneselve. It's a kind of trap based on a fundamental confusion about selfness.

      That still leaves the question whether is any long term planning and guidance for this planet and humanity in particulat at all. What is your view on that?

  7. Thieves and murderers from all nations that rule because they have no souls. These type of humans will not get along with each other to completely enslave mankind. Greed and Ego's will be their downfall. Only question is " Is there enough intelligent, one consciousness minded individuals brave enough to live the life we were meant to live as an example to all the other survivors?"

  8. I believe there is a plan for planetary and human freedom and liberation. I think that for the each individual the plan of action is the same; caring, sharing, dreaming, building.... whether help comes from above or not.
    Shine a light.

  9. France's Total is remaining with Russian Investment strategy. Looking deeper into this Wall Street Journal story it may connect with the Koch brothers tieing up the XL Pipeline. The article says Total's investment strategy includes the Canadian oil sands. Also, "Total and Novatek" Russia's largest independent oil and gas producer "together have a $27 billion project to develop a liquefied natural gas project in Yamal in the Russian Arctic, that should start producing in 2017. The field's proven reserves are estimated at around 800 million barrels of oil equivalent, from which the two companies could one day produce as much as 15 million tons a year of LNG." Is the Liquid Natural Gas race on?

    Also I wonder if Novatek, Russia's largest independent oil and gas producer is connected to the Ukrainian Pipeline because Total now holds 17% in Novatek.

    "Expanding in Russia fits Total's strategy of finding new reserves to meet growing demand from energy-hungry Asian customers" Which would explain why during the Ukrainian aid bill some congress people were trying to "open up" the LNG export law/agreement.

    http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304547704579563440680684458

Leave a Reply