Financial Times 100 anos atrás: "Não se preocupem com o assassinato de Fraz Ferdinand"

O mercado continua o mesmo, como diz o site Zero Hedge, sempre argumenta que "coisas ruins estão precificadas e as boas, não".

Eu colocaria em outros termos, para mim o mercado continua o mesmo, sempre argumenta: "o que vale é o dinheiro, não se preocupem com questões menores como cultura, religião ou política".

China constrói uma Manhattan Fantasma

O site da Bloomberg relata que a China anda construindo uma cópia da Manhattan novaiorquina. O detalhe é quem ninguém mora ou trabalha por lá, é simplesmente construção por construção. Como diz um analista, as construções de prédios de moradia e escritório são apenas dinheiro jogado no lixo.

Leiam abaixo:

China Builds Its Own Manhattan -- Except It's a Ghost Town.

China´s project to build a replica Manhattan is taking shape against a backdrop of vacant office towers and unfinished hotels, underscoring the risks to a slowing economy from the nation’s unprecedented investment boom.

The skyscraper-filled skyline of the Conch Bay district in the northern port city of Tianjin has none of a metropolis’s bustle up close, with dirt-covered glass doors and cosntruction on some edifices halted. The area’s failure to attract tenants since the first building was finished in 2010 bodes ill across the Hai River for the separate Yujiapu development, which is modeled on New York´s Manhattan and remains in progress.

“Investing here won’t be better than throwing money into the water,” Zhang Zhihe, 60, said during a visit to the area last week from neighboring Hebei province to look at potential commercial-property investments. “There will be no way out -- it will be very difficult to find the next buyer.”

The deserted area underscores the challenge facing China’s leaders in dealing with the fallout from a record credit-fueled investment spree while sustaining growth and jobs in the world’s second-biggest economy. A Tianjin local-government financing vehicle connected to the developments said revenue fell 68 percent in 2013 to an amount that’s less than one-third of debt due this year.

---

Já são conhecidas as cidades fantasmas da China feitas para sustentar taxas de crescimento econômico, e não para se morar. O projeto Manhattan é apenas mais um exemplo. O crescimento econômico da China é a grande variável política, nenhum país joga tanto dinheiro fora.

Recessão nos Estados Unidos?

O site Zero Hedge divulgou o quadro acima com os 25 piores PIBs trimestrais da história dos Estados Unidos. O PIB do primeiro trimestre de 2014 nos Estados Unidos caiu 2,9% (variação trimestral anualizada, ajustada sazonalmente). Este resultado divulgado hoje para o primeiro trimestre dos EUA é o 17º pior resultado da história, mas estamos em recessão como ocorreu para todos os outros piores da história?

A crise de 2008 trouxe o segundo e o sexto PIB trimestral piores da história. Não chega a ser uma catástrofe neste sentido. Reagan enfrentou dois trimestre muito piores e teve uma recuperação econômica muito melhor. Aliás, a recuperação econômica sob Obama é a pior da história.

Vídeo: 5 pequenos (enormes) erros que livros de história contam

Achei muito legal e divertido o vídeo abaixo, que tem ainda legenda para português.

No tempo de Colombo as pessoas achavam que a Terra era quadrada? Não, estúpido. Os Vikings usavam a capacetes com chifres? Não, tá louco?. Napoleão era pequeno? Nem tanto, tinha 1m 70cm.

Divirtam-se.





(Agradeço o vídeo ao site Creative Minority Report)

Vídeo: Obama - A Falha Épica (um resumo)

Bom, eu disse quando ele foi eleito: Obama é a pior escolha já feita pelos Estados Unidos, e ele será um desastre!

Megyn Kell (junto com Brit Hume) relatam as decisões estúpidas e as conseqüências da Administração Obama. Vejam abaixo.





(Agradeço o vídeo ao site Culture War Note)

"Nós não sabíamos de nada". Governo Obama e fatos do mundo.

Interessante artigo da Fox News que contou 9 vezes que o governo Obama teria sido pego de surpresa com os acontecimentos do mundo. É comum governos apelarem para "nós não estávamos esperando isso", "nós somos inocentes, fomos pegos de surpresa" ou ainda "soubemos pela imprensa".

O que diferencia o governo Obama é o que diferencia a esquerda da direita. A esquerda tende a não respeitar leis, religião e hierarquia, despreza totalmente normas. E também despreza a guerra. Quando sofre efeitos políticos ruins de sues comportamentos, eles primeiro negam completamente, depois procuram algum culpado, finalmente dizem que erraram mas eram inocentes, não sabiam de nada.

Praticamente todas crises do governo Obama tiveram esta sequência.


Vejamos os nove fatos. Leiam o artigo clicando aqui.

1. Islamist militants gaining in Iraq

2. Russia's intervention in Ukraine

3. NSA spying on foreign leaders

4. VA waiting list scandal

5. IRS targeting scandal

6. HealthCare.gov failing

7. DOJ obtaining AP phone records

8. Fast and Furious scandal

9. Air Force One flyover in Manhattan

O que é Distributismo? E como resolve nossos problemas?

Joseph Pearce escreveu ótimo artigo sobre Distributismo publicado pela Crisis Magazine, revelando como se responde a alguns críticos que acham que o Distributismo é socialismo ou que acham que o Distributismo é um agrarismo (tentativa de obrigar o povo a voltar para agricultura).

Vou colocar aqui partes do texto de Pearce, leiam todo o texto clicando aqui:

What is Distributism? A Controversial Alternative to Socialism and Plutocracy

JOSEPH PEARCE

Distributism is the name given to a socio-economic and political creed originally associated with G. K. Chesterton and Hilaire Belloc. Chesterton bowed to Belloc’s preeminence as a disseminator of the ideas of distributism, declaring Belloc the master in relation to whom he was merely a disciple. “You were the founder and father of this mission,”Chesterton wrote in 1923. “We were the converts but you were the missionary…. You first revealed the truth both to its greater and its lesser servants…. Great will be your glory if England breathes again.” In fact, pace Chesterton, Belloc was merely the propagator and the populariser of the Church’s social doctrine of subsidiarity as expounded by Pope Leo XIII in Rerum novarum (1891), a doctrine that would be re-stated, re-confirmed and reinforced by Pope Pius XI in Quadragesimoanno (1931) and by Pope John Paul II in Centesimus annus (1991). As such, it is important, first and foremost to see distributism as a derivative of the principle of subsidiarity.

Since there are many who will be unaware of terms such as “subsidiarity” or “distributism,” it might be helpful to provide a brief overview of the central tenets of each. In the Catechism of the Catholic Church subsidiarity is discussed in the context of the dangers inherent in too much power being centralized in the hands of the state: “Excessive intervention by the state can threaten personal freedom and initiative. The teaching of the Church has elaborated the principle of subsidiarity, according to whicha community of a higher order should not interfere in the internal life of a community of a lower order, depriving the latter of its functions, but rather should support it in case of need and help to co-ordinate its activity with the activities of the rest of society, always with a view to the common good.” Put simply, the principle of subsidiarity rests on the assumption that the rights of small communities—e.g., families or neighborhoods—should not be violated by the intervention of larger communities—e.g., the state or centralized bureaucracies. Thus, for instance, in practical terms, the rights of parents to educate their children without the imposition by the state of “politically correct” school curricula would be enshrined by the principle of subsidiarity. Parental influence in schools is subsidiarist; state influence is anti-subsidiarist.

“Subsidiarity’” is an awkward word but at least it serves as an adequate definition of the principle for which it is the label. Distributism, on the other hand, is an awkward wordand an awkward label. What exactly does it advocate distributing? Are not communists and socialists “distributists” in the sense that they seek a more equitable distribution of wealth? Yet Belloc argues vehemently that distributism is radically at variance with the underlying ideas of communism and socialism. It is for reasons of clarity, therefore, that modern readers might find it useful to translate “distributist” as “subsidiarist” when reading Belloc’s critique of politics and economics.

Belloc’s key works in this area were The Servile State (1912) and An Essay on the Restoration of Property (1936), whereas Chesterton’s The Outline of Sanity (1925) and his late essay, “Reflections on a Rotten Apple,” published in The Well and the Shallows(1935), represent further salient and sapient contributions to the distributist or subsidiarist cause. It should also be noted that Chesterton’s novel, The Napoleon of Notting Hill, is essentially a distributist parable.

...

Unlike the socialists, the distributists were not advocating the redistribution of “wealth”per se, though they believed that this would be one of the results of distributism. Instead, and the difference is crucial, they were advocating the redistribution of the means of production to as many people as possible. Belloc and the distributists drew the vital connection between the freedom of labor and its relationship with the other factors of production—i.e., land, capital, and the entrepreneurial spirit. The more that labor is divorced from the other factors of production the more it is enslaved to the will of powers beyond its control. 

...

Belloc was, however, a realist. Indeed, if he erred at all it was on the side of pessimism. He would have agreed with T.S. Eliot’s axiomatic maxim in “The Hollow Men” that “between the potency and the existence falls the shadow.” We do not live in an ideal world and the ideal, in the absolute sense, is unattainable. Yet, as a Christian, Belloc believed that we are called to strive for perfection. 

...

In practical terms, the following would all be distributist solutions to current problems: policies that establish a favorable climate for the establishment and subsequent thriving of small businesses; policies that discourage mergers, takeovers and monopolies; policies that allow for the break-up of monopolies or larger companies into smaller businesses; policies that encourage producers’ cooperatives; policies that privatize nationalized industries; policies that bring real political power closer to the family by decentralizing power from central government to local government, from big government to small government. All these are practical examples of applied distributism.

The constitution of the European Union is fundamentally centralist in its very nature, so much so that all reference to “subsidiarity” in EU documents amounts to a scandalous employment of Orwellian doublethink. As such, what has become known as “Euro-scepticism,” the view that the European Union is a gross monolith that needs to be dismantled, is fundamentally subsidiarist. Similarly the rights of rural cultures to enjoy their traditional ways of life are essentially subsidiarist, whereas urban-driven legislation banning traditional rural pursuits is a violation of subsidiarity. In the United States the right to gun ownership and in the United Kingdom the right to hunt foxes would fit into this category. (It is not a question of ‘gun control’ or ‘animal rights’ but of the right of rural cultures to choose their way of life without the imposition of unwanted urban value-judgments.) The continual erosion of states’ rights within the United States and the consequent increase in the power of the Federal Government and the Supreme Court is a violation of subsidiarity. Many more examples could be given but these should suffice for our present purposes. In short, and in sum, distributism as a variation of the principle of subsidiarity offers the only real alternative to the macrophilia and macromania of the modern world.

O Fim da História de Fukuyama, não é nem História.

Em 1989, Francis Fukuyama declarou que o liberalismo venceu, e como, para ele, não havia mais competição ideológica, a história tinha acabado.

Eu, apesar de ser economista, nunca tive paciência com Fukuyama porque considero que só mesmo um economista (influenciado pelo marxismo) para achar que a história se resume a fatores econômicos.

Recentemente Fukuyama revisitou seu argumento. Defende que o o liberalismo continua superior mas que as "democracias não vão bem" e por isso há regimes autoritários. Ai meu Deus, mais uma análise rasteira.

Para começar, se formos tratar de fatores puramente econômicos, uma coisa que tem há muito tempo perdido valor no mundo tem sido o liberalismo. Basta ver a União Europeia  e em como o governo dos Estados Unidos tem administrado o país. Sem falar, na América Latina e China.

John McGinnis também colocou um fator importante, os próprios povos de diversos países não gostam do liberalismo. E o próprio liberalismo é uma tensão de valores entre individualismo e democracia.

Para mim, a descrição de Fukuyama não chega nem a ser história, que tem valores muito mais profundas que os meros modos de produção. Por exemplo, tente explicar o capitalismo ocidental ou a aversão ao capitalismo no oriente sem usar questões culturais e religiosas. A economia é dominada pela cultura e não o contrário.


(Agradeço o texto de McGinnis ao blog de Mark Movsesian)

Vídeo: Chore de Rir (e de tristeza) nesta explicação da Copa do Mundo da FIFA

Se você entende inglês, não pode perder este vídeo de John Oliver explicando o que é a Copa do Mundo da FIFA.

Ri demais.

Indicador CNN: O que move o mercado? Medo ou Ganância?

O indicador da CNN está em quase 100% para ganância.

Para mim, há um problema básico com o indicador, pois o medo pode também significar ganância.

Mas o indicador é revelador da situação de um mercado em que não há fundamentos econômicos para justificar a euforia das bolsas de valores nos Estados Unidos.


(Agradeço o indicador ao site Zero Hedge)

O Lema Destrutivo: "Liberdade, Fraternidade e Igualdade"

Eu costumo falar da aberração que a ideia de liberdade trouxe para o mundo. Todos querem ser livres para fazer o que quiserem, inclusive matar e se matarem. Também da aberração da igualdade, na impossibilidade completa de sermos todos iguais e na destruição que é a busca disso. Mas nunca toquei no tópico fraternidade, parece-me mais tranquilo.

Mas o Dwght Longenecker escreveu um excelente texto destrinchando a destruição que é a busca do lema da Revolução Francesa, como a própria Revolução demonstrou cabalmente. Mas o mundo continua valorizando o lema.

Longenecker contrapôs o lema da Revolução Francesa com as virtudes teologais: Fé, Esperança e Caridade.

Vou colocar aqui parte do texto de Longenecker, publicado no site do The Imaginative Conservative, leiam todo o texto clicando no link:

Liberty, Equality and Fraternity: Those Three Impostors

by Dwight Longenecker

...My antipathy to the French Revolution was brought into focus by Dom Gregory Pilcher’s observation while I was visiting in his Arkansas parish last week. Enjoying a grumble and a glass of beer, Father Pilcher said, “The problem is that Americans have replaced Faith, Hope and Charity with Liberté, Egalité and Fraternité.

It is a kind of secular heresy, for heresy is not a lie, but a half truth. Heresy is one truth promoted to the exclusion of another. Heresy is also one truth promoted above another truth to which it should be subject. Heresy lacks the proper order of goods and ignores the hierarchy of truth. Heresy is truth distorted and disordered.

When this happens even the truth that is espoused becomes deformed. Without Faith, Hope and Charity, Liberty becomes License, Equality becomes the destruction of those who seem superior and Fraternity becomes no more than indolent tolerance.

Echoing the anthems of the French Revolution, the progressives in America have embraced Liberty, Equality and Fraternity as the only virtues. Consequently Liberty now means every man must be allowed to do whatever he pleases as long as he harms no one. What everyone misses is that this is the motto of the Satanists: “Do as you please, but harm none.”

The obsession with equality has been become an aggressive attack on any person who in any way might just possibly be racist, homophobic, misogynistic or just plan unkind in any conceivable way. Such individuals must be isolated, ostracized, punished and persecuted by the crowd howling for equality. Equality has become, as it was in the French Revolution, not just a mob rule, but a mob rampage.

Fraternity is not the fond embrace of one’s fellow man, but an indolent acceptance of every other person without discernment of character or recognition of accomplishment. For the modern progressive “Fraternity” is an obliteration of personality, a dumbing down of individual ideas and a leveling of the population so that everyone becomes a cipher, a comrade, a drone and a drudge.

While these three impostors might be called “virtues” notice that there is little about them which an individual soul might work on to become more truly virtuous. “Liberty!” may be a stirring battle cry, but how do I attain this virtue except by demanding that I be permitted to do whatever I want provided that I allow everyone else to do what they want? If I am simply doing what I want how is that virtuous, for virtue, by definition demands personal discipline and self sacrifice.

Notice how we always wish to be equal to those above us and not to those below. The cry “Equality!” must inevitably sound like “I am equal to you!” How then, might I obtain the virtue of equality without self assertion and hubris? I might try to consider others to be my equal, but this virtue is hardly more than a good idea, and should I try to put it into effect I should be prepared to receive a good knock on the head from the person I was trying to treat equally, for in doing so I had proclaimed him to be my inferior and patronized him in the process.

Fraternity is not a virtue, but a vague ideal. I may wish all men to be my brother, but I am like Edna St Vincent Millay who said, “I love humanity, but hate people.” What is there to bring me together with another human being? A shared ideology and a shared goal might make me cast an arm around his shoulder, but sharing a goal makes me a team mate, not a brother. Fraternity remains elusive for most attempts at brotherhood end as Cain and Abel’s did.

...

The conservative sees what is good in Liberty, Equality and Fraternity, but sees within these secular virtues a deeper and more original good. The theological virtues are supernatural gifts that inspire and empower not the Liberty, Equality and Fraternity of revolution, but the true Freedom that comes from Faith, the Fulfillment of the Individual and the Fire of Divine Love that purifies and transforms both the human soul and human society.

A União Europeia cria seus Monstros

Percebam como a notícia sobre o ressurgimento dos partidos de direita na Europa é sempre acompanhado da palavra extremista. Os jornalistas falam em "partidos de extrema direita". Mas veja se você consegue ver na televisão jornalistas chamando algum partido de "extrema esquerda". A extrema esquerda teria acabdo, só existe a esquerda, que virou o normal e a direita, que foi destruída e também se destruiu aderindo às teses esquerdistas, virou extremismo.

Hoje, eu li um interessante texto de Melanie Phillips publicado no Jerusalem Post, ela especialista em falar sobre judaísmo e judeus, e hoje trata da questão dos partidos de direita que ressurgem na Europa.

Nem sempre concordo com Phillips, claro, acho que ainda não se desvencilhou do pensamento politicamente correto, mas gosto bastante dos textos dela, e ela, com este texto, conseguiu desmistificar bastante o surgimento destes partidos, que a mídia global, dominada pelo esquerdismo, procura destruir.

E, finalmente, eu concordo com ela: a solução é acabar com a União Europeia.

Vou colocar aqui parte do texto de Phillipps, leiam o arquivo completo no site do jornal:

As I see it: Europe’s more complicated problem

By MELANIE PHILLIPS

The Jewish world has reacted with horror to the results of the European elections as displaying an upsurge of parties promoting Jew-hatred. Certainly, the results give plenty of cause for such concern. But in significant respects, such a response is wildly off-beam.

Some parties which surged, such as Greece’s Golden Dawn, Hungary’s Jobbik and Germany’s National Democratic Party (NPD), are undoubtedly fascist or bigoted. And France’s National Front, which avoids the open Jew-hatred of its founder, Jean-Marie Le Pen, nevertheless retains troubling undertones.

But others lumped in with these truly noxious parties by anti-Semitism-watchers are not racist or fascist at all. Britain’s UKIP wants Britain to leave the EU, restore its democratic self-government and preserve its national identity. In Italy, the former comedian Beppe Grillo’s Five Stars movement campaigns against political corruption.

In Denmark, the Danish People’s Party is against Islamization and non-Western immigration and wants to maintain the Danish monarchy and uphold the Danish constitution. In Finland, the Finns Party welcomes work-based immigration and requires immigrants to accept Finnish cultural norms.

All these parties are being smeared by association with truly racist and fascist groups as giving cause for concern. Two important errors are being made here. The first is to confuse the populist defense of national identity with fascism and bigotry. The second is to assume that only the EU stands between us and the fascist hordes.

In fact, it’s the EU that has created all these groups, both populist democrats and anti-democrats.

The EU was founded in the wake of World War II on the assumption that nationalism was the cause of fascism. Subsume national identity by pooling sovereignty among member states, went the thinking, and nationalism would be abolished and with it prejudice and war.

The EU’s supra-identity necessarily entailed the free movement of populations between those member states. That in turn reinforced the idea of multiculturalism, which meant that no culture could assert its values over any other.

This was supposed to outlaw bigotry. Instead, it outlawed all those who wanted to uphold their national identity and culture and give it political expression through democratic self-government.

There is nothing inherently racist to want to preserve your country’s cultural identity rather than see it transformed into a kind of international transit lounge by unlimited migration – or worse, steadily Islamized by radical Muslims who aim to colonize the West for Islam.

...
The way to nip the European neo-fascist movement in the bud is for Europe to become once again an alliance of self-governing nation-states.

Jews, meanwhile, should stop those knees from jerking and start to realize that Jew-hatred is not just a right-wing phenomenon.

Europa Tributando Poupadores

Apenas duas frases para este dia em que o presidente do Banco Central Europeu autorizou que bancos taxem quem coloca suas economias neles.

Mario Draghi negou e disse: "It's completely wrong to suggest we want to expropriate savers".

Tyler Durden ridiculariou dessa frase. Antes Durden tinha declarado: "Congratulations Europe: you now get to pay insolvent bank to keep your deposits for you.".

Bom, li todo a declaração de Draghi e nada vi que desautorize a declaração de Durden. Durden está certo, o povo, como é normal, continua salvando banqueiros e governos incompetentes.

No máximo, pode-se dizer Draghi está compensando a taxação sobre depósitos reduzindo os juros de crédito. Mas ele está sim penalizando poupadores, pois, na cabeça dele, é tirando dinheiro dos poupadores e jogando na economia que se consegue maior crescimento e maior inflação.

Mas se o poupador é realmente rico, ele simplesmente vai fugir da taxação colocando o dinheiro fora da Europa  e ainda consegue crédito barato (pois praticamente no mundo todo o crédito está mais barato, com exceção do Brasil, como é de costume). 

Quem paga o preço, como é corriqueiro, é a classe média.

25 anos do massacre da Praça Tiananmen na China e em Hong Kong

A foto acima mostra a Praça Tiananmen em Pequin no dia 28 de maio de 1989, quando manifestantes lutavam pela democracia e foram massacrados no dia 4 de junho daquele ano. E também mostra a Praça nos dias de hoje.

O jornal Wall Street Journal publicou um excelente artigo sobre como se celebra os 25 anos dos ataques aos ativistas da Praça de Tiananmen em Pequin (Beijing) e em Hong Kong. A celebração expõe as rachaduras políticas entre China e Hong Kong.

Vejamos parte do texto do jornal.

Tiananmen Square Anniversary: Hong Kong Vigil Exposes Political Fractures

By Isabell Steger and Chester Yung 

HONG KONG—Tens of thousands of people in Hong Kong rallied on Wednesday to mark the anniversary of the 1989 crackdown on student protesters in Beijing, but political fractures in the city were showing.

The annual candlelight vigil in the city is the biggest event globally marking the crackdown, and organizers were hoping the 25th anniversary would push the crowd above the 100,000 level it has hit in years past. Organizers put initial crowd estimates at 180,000 people, while police estimated that there were 99,500 participants.

From above the vigil, the park was a sea of candlelight, with people spilling out to the fringes. Call and responses echoed off nearby buildings. Videos were shown of Chinese activists thanking Hong Kong for holding the vigil.

"The Chinese communist regime cannot control everything," said Teng Biao, a prominent human rights lawyer in China, who joined the vigil for the first time, drawing loud applause as he took the stage in Victoria Park. "I believe the truth of June 4 crackdown will be known in China one day. There are many people in the mainland who are working hard for this day."

Mr. Teng, a visiting scholar at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, said he saluted visitors from the mainland attended the Hong Kong rally Wednesday night.

The Chinese government forbids mentions of the anniversary and in recent days has tightened security in Beijing, arrested activists and suspended some accounts on Chinese microblogging site Sina Weibo. Hong Kong is part of China but has its own legal system and retains some political autonomy, so the restrictions related to the anniversary on the mainland don't apply to the city.

Tensions between Hong Kong and mainland China have escalated in recent years, and they are coloring this year's vigil. A pro-Beijing group is holding its own event, while another rally is focused on local politics. Another division is emerging between the rally's long-time organizers and young activists emboldened by a successful protest against a Beijing-imposed school curriculum.

As in previous years, mourners dressed in black attended the candlelight memorial organized by the Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Democratic Movements of China, featuring the usual rundown of events such as singing and speeches.

But there was a new and controversial face this year. For the first time, the Voice of Loving Hong Kong, a pro-Beijing group, set up a counter-rally outside Victoria Park. Its chairman, Patrick Ko, said the group would show a video that is critical of the Alliance for not knowing the "full truth" of the event.

"The student leaders could have exaggerated the number of deaths," said Mr. Ko. "Beijing had to take inevitably, extreme actions to restore social order and maintain social security."

The presence of the group is one indicator of the fractiousness of Hong Kong society, which has become increasingly divided over mainland China's political and economic influence in the city, with pro-Beijing supporters often appearing at protests organized by local pro-democracy activists.

...

In Taiwan, several hundred people gathered at Liberty Square in downtown Taipei on Wednesday evening to commemorate the 1989 crackdown, with many also taking a localized view on the vigil.

Alexandra Lee, a student at National Taiwan University, said she saw a common cause between recent Taiwanese student protests, known as the Sunflower Student Movement, and the student protesters in China in 1989.

"As a human being, I feel I must stand up and do something about political oppression," Ms. Lee said. "Maybe I can't do much, but at least I should learn about it. Ignorance will only allow government oppression to repeat over and over again."

In a video statement to the crowd in Taipei, Wang Dan, one of the former Tiananmen protest leaders who now lives in Taiwan, said, "Democracy is the real China dream."

Taiwan President Ma Ying-jeou called on the Beijing to "seriously ponder and quickly redress" the injustices that occurred during the 1989 crackdown.

In Hong Kong, a new permanent museum on the June 4 crackdown that opened this year is providing another venue to learn about the crackdown.

On Wednesday morning, the small museum received more visitors from the mainland than usual, museum staff said. On Tuesday night, they said a corporate group of 51 people touring Hong Kong from Hangzhou visited the museum, which is housed in a nondescript building in the Tsim Sha Tsui district.

A trio of 24-year-old university graduates from Dongguan in neighboring Guangdong province closely read displays describing the events leading up to the June 4 crackdown, diligently scanning the QR codes on the walls with their smartphones. The three, which did not want to give their names, said they came to Hong Kong especially to visit the museum and attend the vigil.

Another man from Zhejiang province who declined to be named, arrived at the museum before its 10 a.m. opening time. He fervently leafed through a clear folder containing copies of Hong Kong newspapers from 1989, and watched a video of the Tiananmen mothers giving testimonies of what happened to their children on June 4. He said he learned about the museum through the BBC's Chinese news service, taking out hisiPhone to open up the app.

---

Rezemos pela China. Os mortos de Tiananmen ainda gritam por democracia.

Vídeo: A História do Federal Reserve

Rothschild acima e Greenspan abaixo têm toda razão sobre o Federal Reserve. Que, como o vídeo abaixo explica, não é "federal", nem "reserve" e foi criado por uma elite de banqueiros de forma secreta, tornado em lei por um presidente "progressista".

Vejam o interessante vídeo abaixo:





No Brasil, querem também tornar o Banco Central independente do governo. Será que se tornará mais transparente com isso? A história do Fed diz que a resposta é não.


(Agradeço o vídeo ao site Zero Hedge)