Document:The IMF Bank Job

A hilarious piece of satire - but closer to the truth about who calls the shots on events surrounding the Ukraine coup and what it really about, than any or all of the western MSM talking-heads combined.

 article  by Edmund Dalpe dated 2014/05/09

---

Subjects: Ukraine coup 2014, The Great Game, Vladimir Putin, Russia
Example of: Humour and satire
Source: Linguistic Determinism (Link)

Image right: Yats mug shot © Edmund Dalpe, MFA. All rights reserved. Author of, Linguistic Determinism: Ars Gratia Lingua. & moderator of Linguistic Determinism Blog Art, Language & Mind.

★ Start a Discussion about this document
The IMF Bank Job

---

Hawking (Overview)

An exclusive behind the scenes lowdown of one of the most breathtaking cons! It's an allegorical world where Murphy's Law reigns supreme amid the backdrop of an empirical machine and its machinations. It is filled with undercurrents and inexplicable turns, which appears to be an empire gone mad. Critics acclaim, "The IMF Bank Job is exhilarating! It's riveting, nail biting right to the knuckles action!"

The Mark Turns Bag-Man for the Inside-Man ...

My dad always told me you can learn more from a heavyweight than all of the books in the world, just by watching them work their magic. I mean I was in awe. Putin played them like the Pied Piper with all of the rats in tow. It was bait and switch by the master. Syria being the sting and the mega gas and oil deals being the payoff, Ukraine was a gambit!

When the IMF lunged for the cheese, the mark ended up being the Bag-Man delivering Crimea to the Inside-Man, followed by a torrent of threats that cemented the BRICS alliance, destroyed what was left of NATO, and sealed the mega gas and oil deals that the mark was trying to undermine to begin with. I mean no words can express my wonderment at the utter genius of the operation. Talk about blowing a toe clean off of your foot. WOW!

As a word of caution, non of us can know what is really going on. This may all be a show for the working slobs all over the world to keep us scared and stupid. I mean, have you ever tried to do something creative when you are scared? How did that work out for you?

I imagine a banquet where Putin's and Obama's coterie of co-conspirators are stuffing their faces as they chum it up with jokes galore. "All options are on the table", exclaims Obama, followed by gales of roaring laughter. "Orson Welles has nothing on us, retorts Putin", as he raises his glass on high.

We can not rule anything out! However, we will know soon enough, if the, I have no more money for health care or education USG, is able to build another fleet of pyramids (aircraft-carriers). Nevertheless, for the sake of a good story, I will make the assumption that what we are told has some measure of truth between the lines. This story is the product of my devious mind's interpretation of the subtext from the global soap-opera turned nightmarish.

The Setup & the Sting

Still from the 1973 film "The Sting" - a movie template for the theme of this article

The story begins with Putin noobing it up for a while, as the returning superpower. You know, ruffle a few feathers, nothing too serious, just getting back in the saddle would have the desired effect.

It's the inversion of romancing the mark. It's more like pushing your partners well worn buttons. You know, trigger words that will set your partner off and the decorum into the crapper. Very predictable stuff!

After a bit of chit chat, Putin waited for the approaching clouds, just to make sure they are as duplicitous as they ever were. Perfect! Apply a few trigger words and sit back and watch the show.

Sure enough and right on Q, the big fish (IMF) swallowed the hook, the entire line and the sinker. The IMF's attack dogs release a public service announcement, that the UN must have a no-fly zone over Syria to protect the Syrian cannibals, I mean freedom fighters, I mean ... , well you know what I mean.

The next phase of the con was a series of push offs or shut outs. You know, when you do not have the money to cover the actual bet, or the con is not fully in place. The first push off was the deployment of S-300 in Syria (another trigger word). Not happening. Move on. Nothing to do here. No one is giving air cover to cannibals, or whatever you call them.

At this point the mark became even more determined and quiet perturbed. Again and right on Q we have another public service announcement that Syria has used WMD, the red line has been crossed. We have to intervene. No time for even the UN. This is dire!

Again Russia throws a wrench into the machine. Russian War ships take position between the IMF Armada and Syria and Carrier Killers are deployed all along the coast. You are wrong, it was not Syria, here is the proof. And just for good measure, let us remove those pesky WMD from Syria so no one can manufacture any more stories. Again, move on, nothing to do here.

Next!

Now the IMF and its attack dogs were angry as hell. Perfect, unbalance by rage. So far, everything's Jake. Phase one of the con complete. Phase two, fill the honeypot with vinegar, which is a variation of the Spanish Prisoner scheme that has elements of the trap where the trapper steps in and can't get out.

Sure enough! As Paul Harvey used to say, "that's the rest of the story".

The Mark Cries Uncle With Crocodile Tears

Can you believe it, the mark actually had the temerity to ask the BRICS nations to release it from the trap. In colloquial terms, the BRICS told the empire to FOAD. Who in their right mind is going to let the trapper out of the trap. I mean get real.

Any pretense the IMF/US-NATO may have had left, which is zero outside of Western Main Stream Media (WMSM broadcasting, all horse shit all the time!). Putin removed that fig leaf permanently.

I mean if you are going to play in the big league, you have to accept it when you lose. Someone once told me, never bet with money you can not afford to lose. Most importantly, if you want to play the big con, you have to know the mark better than you know yourself and Putin appears to be the master of the game. IMF/US-NATO may want to rethink about Putin's generous offer of being partners again --partner! I imagine the hysterics behind the scenes and some general saying:

"If he calls me partner one more time, I'm going to take one gigantic mega-crap down his throat! BTW, who was the damn peckerwood that told me to throw away the reset button?"

The entire point of the con was to cement the BRICS alliance. Close those mega gas and oil deals with China and India and erode the foundation of NATO. However, the blogs are filled with the big question of when, where and how will Russia respond to IMF/US-NATO aggression? There are thousands encouraging Russia to respond militarily. They are either naive or they are shills playing their part.

I mean get serious, if someone slaps you in the face, that you recently humiliated, multiple times (Syria), and then runs into a house, turns and taunts you to follow them, would you go in? Need I say more? Who knows what would be in store for them with how many stolen nukes are out there? Putin knows what is going on and he knows who he is dealing with. This is his game and it is being played by his rules, not theirs.

Putin knows the mark better than they know themselves. They are threatening to engulf Eastern Europe in a war or worse. They are stirring up old hatreds in Eastern Europe in the Ukraine, Latvia, and Poland, while they "pivoted to Asia". Can it be any clearer?

In case you missed it, the answer to everyone’s question is, Russia has already responded on the QT. He is a bit more subtle than most are accustom to. Russia has flanked the empire on its left and rolled up its front line like a carpet by attacking the petrodollar. After their vitriolic public display last week, the mega gas and oil deals are in the bag. There is more at stake here than just the Ukraine. Most can't think beyond the minors; they would never cut it in the major league.

Forget about what they tell you on WMSM. Bankers bought up all communications. They even lie to themselves. They probably believe the yarns they spin. Who cares, they are the perfect mark! I mean come on, a world economy based on funny money? They are degenerate gamblers that expect everyone else to pay their bills when they loose (QE *) and now they want to blow up the world, because their pride was wrinkled!

Sure, they have always called the shots in the US, but, we always had sane people at the top to place restrains upon them. It's the same with the creative types at the ad agency that just don't understand what the term budget means. The art director is there to keep a leash on them.

Same with the executive branch of government. Historically, the position of the POTUS was never really more than a "bully pulpit". Like the art director, the Chief of Staff has always had the real power. I recall stories of the Watergate scandal where the generals refused calls from Nixon. They took his toys away from him, which in effect stripped him of his power.

However, this is the first US administration where we allowed bankers to occupy almost all of the top positions of power without any restraints whatsoever. Lets look at what that has yielded; corporate person-hood, mega-monopolies, bail ins, bail outs, perpetual wars, cannibals, beheadings, permanent economic depression, cavity searches, and the latest stroke of genius is to kick off a thermonuclear winter.

They are lighting matches anywhere and everywhere. The BRICS are obviously in the fire truck driving around putting out the fires, while IMF/US-NATO are caught pissing in the gas tank at every fire fight.

If you have any doubts about bankers, check this out: The IMF just approved a loan to the Ukraine to rebuild their country in the midst of a civil war or worse. Common sense dictates that you do not loan money to rebuild a region, if the junta in power is determined to set the place on fire! In an article titled, "The Globalizer Who Came In From the Cold" Palast writes:

"In 1999 the World Bank fired Stiglitz. He was not allowed quiet retirement; US Treasury Secretary Larry Summers, I'm told, demanded a public excommunication for Stiglitz' having expressed his first mild dissent from globalization World Bank style."

Palast's article is mix of logic and literary flare that explains the process from Loan to "In Flames". OK, are you convinced yet? As Putin stated, "They can not be reasoned with, they have to be stopped!"

We are in Strangelove territory. We need to put them back in their cages where they belong. Sure, it's great to have some synergy across disciplines, but this is absurd. They are not generals, they are bankers, geeks. If I may be so bold, the generals may want to think about not picking up the phone for a while, that is if the generals are not bankers too, which may be the case, as we have Yast the dictator and Obama's inner circle rife with bankers.

The Fallout!

Ukraine was just too irresistible to walk away from. This was the real stinky fromunda cheese that is irresistible to a rat-banker. Once in the trap, up to their eyeballs in quicksand, the IMF finally realized they were the real mark. That's when the show really began. They dropped their fig leaf and showed the world their true nature. They ordered the killing of innocent people in the Ukraine and the world knows it. They were absolutely livid.

I mean they were not just caught robbing, they were robbed in the act of robbing someone else with their hands in the cookie jar yelling, "stop thief"! Remember the look on Kerry's face? Priceless!

Putin deliberately broke the cardinal rule of the con, which is never let the mark know they were duped - Unless, that is the entire point of the cone from the get go; expose them for what they truly are.

We all saw Kerry coming unhinged and foaming at the mouth for days with Germany's Nipples in chorus, until Putin explained the situation to her. At that point the mark knew the gig was up.

They began showing signs of mental instability. They became noticeably unhinged in public, treating us all to the bizarre inner working of the mind of an international banker. Unfortunately, there are some things you just can't un-see or un-hear.

Their public threats of Armageddon was confirmation that they knew that we knew that they were played like common criminals. Their response was to turn the entire planet to ash --see if they laugh at us again! Next we had Chuck Hagel trying to sell his Strangelove option to the American public:

"I’m not interested in a fair fight, and I don’t want to be capable of only fighting the last war.”

Of course upon seeing this insanity, Russia immediately moved into fortress mode by placing their strategic assets on high alert and started military exercises to repel the angry dupes with access to nuclear weapons. Obviously, it's going to take some time for their partners to calm down and regain their senses, if ever! If not, who cares? With partners like that who needs enemies?

On Shills & Con-Clusions

Noam Chomsky is a trusted figure for many in the academic community, except when it comes to seminal social myths like; JFK, 9-11, and the current global myth being forged in Eastern Europe. In the big con, Chomsky is what is known as a shill. Shills are the accomplices to the grifter, who appear to have no apparent connection to the con, which is kind of hard to miss being that MIT has been his meal ticket. It is the Shill's job to give credibility to the larger confidence game.

For example, in his article, Red Lines in Ukraine and Elsewhere, Chomsky wrote:

"Russia's annexation of Crimea was an illegal act, in violation of international law and specific treaties. It's not easy to find anything comparable in recent years, ..."

The best way to know that you have been influenced by a shill is if you begin having self doubts, and mumbling to yourself. Those are classic signs. And the higher your education the more susceptible you are to Shills of Chomsky's ilk. Nevertheless, allow me to deconstruct his web.

The term annexation seems misleading, even for an aging linguist. Crimea voted overwhelmingly to rejoin Russia. The Crimea has been Russian territory long before America declared independence from England. This is closer to a family reunion than an annexation. They just needed some time alone after the Cold War. No biggie, we have all been there.

Chomsky's phrase "legal precedence" in context to acts of war by the US and its proxy against Russia approaches the absurd. In recent historical context, dating back to the Cuban Missile Crisis, US-NATO's continued push eastward to Russia’s borders is an act of war that Russia has been, up to now, amazingly civilized about.

There is no cogent argument, legal or otherwise, that can be used to shift the blame on Russia for the US violation of one sovereign state after the next with its fruit cocktail of revolutions. Or the US flushing international agreements like toilet paper. The term legal applies after the peace has been secured. I do not see any peace, all I see is lawlessness. Where was the legal international precedence when millions were murdered during WW II? The phrase legality during acts of war is a --non sequitur.

From an Online blog, The Vineyard of the Saker , the Saker talked about the three rules of law, which Chomsky seems to be adhering to rule #2. It went something like this:

1. When you have the truth on your side speak the truth.
2. When you do not have the truth on your side argue the law.
3. When you do not have the law or the truth on your side bang the table.

In context to Ukraine, Chomsky is using rule #2. He is using the law to frame the discourse on Crimea away from what is truthful to what is legal and thus in the realm of opinion. Socrates taught us that the law has nothing to do with the truth. It is the opinion of whomever is in charge. Even slavery was legal at one time!

This has the effect of excluding from the discourse the obvious conclusion, that Crimea would be subjected to the same terror that is being visited in Donetsk, Kharkiv and Odessa, if Crimea did not vote overwhelmingly to reconnect to its historic roots and rejoin the Russian Federation.

Nevertheless, we will entertain Chomsky's misleading assertion for the sake of legal semantic argument, by stating that the law does account for circumstances beyond ones control. There is a law that can be used as a consequence of events like a force of nature, a flood, tornado or when human beings become lawless in war. It is the law of Force Majeure (copied from Wikipedia). The understanding of force majeure in international law, as well as in many nations, is that it must pass three criteria:

• Externality -The defendant must have nothing to do with the event's happening.
• Unpredictability -If the event could be foreseen, the defendant is obligated to have prepared for it. Being unprepared for a foreseeable event leaves the defendant culpable.
• Irresistibility -The consequences of the event must have been unpreventable.

If we are able to see all of the facts from beyond the corporate curtain of WMSM, on all three criteria, Russia's actions are justified except the second criteria of Unpredictability. However, there is no way Putin was guaranteed that the rat would take the cheese. They could have come at him from any direction. Thus, making it a week legal argument.

Most understand that the IMF is the supranational institution that is acting beyond any law and human decency. The freedom to choose what form of government, free from coercion, is understood to be an inalienable right to everyone that does not consider themselves property of a banker. Bankers never had the power, our military has always had the power, that is until we allowed it to be privatized. This would be a good time to rethink the myth that privatization is better than state control.

Declare a global Jubilee! All debts forgiven, back to the drawing board. Reset! As for bankers, go directly to jail. Do not pass GO, and do not collect 200$.