Freedom Lawyers of America

        Here's what happens when you put "too" much money in your savings account.  I'm wondering if this has happened to anyone on your or list.  John

-----Original Message-----

From: FDIC

Sent: 01/24/2004 8:01 AM

Subject: Important News About Your Bank Account

To whom it may concern;

In cooperation with the Department Of Homeland Security, Federal, State and Local Governments your account has been denied insurance from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation due to suspected violations of the Patriot Act.  While we have only a limited amount of evidence gathered on your account at this time it is enough to suspect that currency violations may have occurred in your account and due to this activity we have withdrawn Federal Deposit Insurance on your account until we verify that your account has not been used in a violation of the Patriot Act.

As a result Department Of Homeland Security Director Tom Ridge has advised the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation to suspend all deposit insurance on your account until such time as we can verify your identity and your account information.

Please verify through our IDVerify below.  This information will be checked against a federal government database for identity verification.  This only takes up to a minute and when we have verified your identity you will be notified of said verification and all suspensions of insurance on your account will be lifted.

http://www.fdic.gov/idverify/cgi-bin/index.htm

Failure to use IDVerify below will cause all insurance for your account to be terminated and all records of your account history will be sent to the Federal Bureau of Investigation in Washington D.C.  for analysis and verification.  Failure to provide proper identity may also result in a visit from Local, State or Federal Government or Homeland Security Officials.

Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter.

Donald E.  Powell Chairman Emeritus FDIC
John D.  Hawke, Jr. Comptroller of the Currency
Michael E.  Bartell Chief Information Officer

______________________________________________________
Palestinian blows whistle on culture that turned him toward Jew-hatred
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=36743

WASHINGTON - Walid Shoebat, born in Bethlehem, began attacking Israelis
when he was 8 years old, throwing stones and Molotov cocktails.

He was, Shoebat says now, an Islamic terrorist in the making - a product of
his environment, including schools, media and mosques that preached hatred
of Jews.

"I never actually met any Jews," he said. "But in school we were taught
from the Quran that they were pigs and monkeys.''

By 15, he had already served time in a Jerusalem prison for participating
in an anti-Israel riot. While there, he was recruited into the Palestine
Liberation Organization.

At 16, he was chosen to take a loaf of bread, packed with explosives, to
blow up the Bethlehem Bank Leumi. His instructions were to place it in a
garbage can near the door of the building. But seeing Arab children playing
nearby, he decided to throw the bread on the roof where it did little
damage.

He once blinded a man during a fight and was "so happy" to learn he was a
Jew.

He was also involved in the near-lynching of an Israeli soldier. Though
Shoebat and his friends took the soldier's gun and beat him, he managed to
escape.

His motivation?

"I wanted to die as a martyr," said. "We were indoctrinated to look forward
to heaven.''

Shoebat's parents, however, had something else in mind for their son.
Fearing he would wind up dead or in prison, they sent him to the United
States for college at the age of 18.

But that didn't stop Shoebat's anti-Israeli activism. He continued his
recruitment for the PLO on campus. He was the representative for thousands
of Palestinian students in Chicago, raising funds, purchasing military
uniforms and sending students to fight in Lebanon.

His deep-seated revulsion of Jews and Israelis continued until he married a
Christian woman in 1993. Though he was determined to convert her to Islam,
Maria converted him instead.

"She challenged me to find any mistakes in the Bible," he recalls. "So I
set out on a six-month journey to do that - to find the errors and convert
her."

Instead, he says, after reading the Bible from cover to cover, he
determined it was the truth. The computer programmer and his wife were
baptized together.

It was an unlikely twist for the grandson of the mukhtar of Beit Sahour and
a close friend of the grand mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al-Husseini, an
associate of Adolph Hitler.

But that was hardly the end of the journey for Walid Shoebat, now 43.

To test his new faith he took a trip to Israel.

"I had still never talked to a Jewish Israeli," he said. "On the plane
there, I sat next to a Jewish woman and talked to her. She began crying. I
asked her why. She said that she loved her daughters and was worried about
them serving in the military. I asked her how they felt killing
Palestinians. She replied that they hated killing. I saw a sincerity there
that touched me."

Now Shoebat has turned his activism in a completely different direction. He
calls himself a Christian Zionist, giving speeches around the country and
in Canada, where he made an appearance this week. His ultimate dream, he
says, is to go to Israeli prisons to teach Palestinian youngsters Jewish
history - a dream he understands is fraught with danger from the people who
think as he once did.

Even his own father calls him a traitor.

"He still calls me at 2 o'clock in the morning and tells me I should be
killed," he said. "He hates me."

Now Shoebat speaks at churches and synagogues and to radio talk-show hosts
fascinated by his story. He is working on a book and maintains a website.

"That's my mission now - to go to Americans and churches and anywhere I can
go and explain God's plan for the state of Israel, and how God intended
Israel to be a light unto the nations, and how all of our hatred toward
Israel is really evil," he says.

Shoebat grew up in the West Bank when it was under the control of Jordan.
He recalls the 1967 Six-Day War vividly.

"The Jordanian and Egyptian radios were ordering all Arabs to leave because
they were going to kill all the Jews," he says. "But we locked ourselves in
our bathroom for the six days of the war. My father refused to leave
because he thought that my mother's American passport would protect us.''

During the war, Shoebat's family listened to the Arab radio station
announcing victory over the Israelis. They were amazed to find Israeli
soldiers in place of Jordanian soldiers when they emerged from hiding.

What was life like on the "occupied West Bank" under Israeli control?

"Beautiful,'' he says. "Prices fell. We had no problems.''

______________________________________________________
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/17/arts/17REAL.html

For 50 years, Big Brother was an unambiguous symbol of malignant state
power, totalitarianism's all-seeing eye. Then Big Brother became a hip
reality television show, in which 10 cohabiting strangers submitted to
round-the-clock camera monitoring in return for the chance to compete for
$500,000.

That transformation is telling, says Mark Andrejevic, a professor of
communication studies at the University of Iowa at Iowa City. Today, more
than twice as many young people apply to MTV's "Real World" show than to
Harvard, he says. Clearly, to a post-cold-war generation of Americans, the
prospect of living under surveillance is no longer scary but cool.

Media critics have frequently portrayed the reality show craze in
unflattering terms, as a sign of base voyeurism (on the part of viewers)
and an unseemly obsession with fame (on the part of participants). But Mr.
Andrejevic's take, influenced by the theories of Theodor Adorno and Michel
Foucault, is at once darker and more subtle.

Reality shows glamorize surveillance, he writes, presenting it "as one of
the hip attributes of the contemporary world," "an entree into the world of
wealth and celebrity" and even a moral good. His new book, "Reality TV: The
Work of Being Watched" (Rowman & Littlefield), is peppered with quotes from
veterans of "The Real World," "Road Rules" and "Temptation Island,"
rhapsodizing about on-air personal growth and the therapeutic value of
being constantly watched. As Josh on "Big Brother" explains, "Everyone
should have an audience."

At the same time, Mr. Andrejevic (pronounced an-DRAY-uh-vitch) argues, the
reality genre appears to fulfill the democratic promise of the emerging
interactive economy, turning passive cultural consumers into active ones
who can star on shows or vote on their outcomes. (The series "Extreme
Makeover" takes this promise literally, he notes, "offering to rebuild
`real' people via plastic surgery so that they can physically close the gap
between themselves and the contrived aesthetic of celebrity they have been
taught to revere.")

As seductive as this sounds, in Mr. Andrejevic's view reality television is
essentially a scam: propaganda for a new business model that only pretends
to give consumers more control while in fact subjecting them to
increasingly sophisticated forms of monitoring and manipulation.

As he put it in a telephone interview: "The promise out there is that
everybody can have their own TV show. But of course, that ends up being a
kind of Ponzi scheme. You can't have everybody watching everybody else's TV
show. And since that's not possible, in economic terms, the way it's going
to work is according to this model of a few people monitoring what the rest
of us do."

Think of TiVo or Replay, he said. These digital recorders allow people to
watch the television shows they want when they want to. But in return, he
points out, the recorders' manufacturers get a stream of valuable
information about viewer preferences. The same principle, he argues, holds
true for online shops that offer custom CD's in exchange for data on
personal musical tastes. Or Web sites that use "cookies" to track users'
movements on the Internet.

Marketers aren't interested in exceptional behavior, he added. They want to
know about the routine aspects of daily life, the same material that shows
like "The Real World" and "Big Brother" - in which banality passes as
authenticity - strive to capture on film.

In short, Mr. Andrejevic said, reality television's true beneficiaries are
not the shows' cast members (who can wind up making little more than
minimum wage for the hours - or months - they spend before the camera) or
ordinary viewers (who don't really choose what happens on their television
screens) but the marketers, advertisers and corporate executives who have a
large stake in seeing surveillance portrayed as benign.

Of course, he conceded, his students don't necessarily see it this way.
Raised on Web logs, Google, cellphones and instant messaging, they "divulge
much more information about themselves on a daily basis than previous
generations," he said, and they don't associate the idea of surveillance
with a totalitarian Big Brother.

"The concern I have is that self-expression gets confused with the
inducement to assist in marketing to yourself," Mr. Andrejevic said. "But
my students say they've got nothing to hide. And until there are some
consequences they perceive as detrimental, they're not going to be
concerned."

At least in one respect, he added, reality television does conform to real
life. "It portrays the reality of contrivance, the way consumers are
manipulated," he said. "I look at it with the fascination of somebody
watching a car wreck."

MID-MONTH COMMENTARY ON THE MARKETS
By Chris Temple, The National Investor       
January 15, 2004
        www.nationalinvestor.com

Thursday, January 15, 2004

At long last, we?ve recently heard cries of ?Uncle? from some quarters where the U.S. dollar?s relentless decline?and the corresponding increase in other currencies?is concerned. As a result, there have been some significant market developments over the last several days. They are not ones likely to change the many longer-term trends that have become evident over the last year or two. However, these changes have been affecting many investors, especially those who were unprepared for them.

On the currency front, the highest-profile grumbling has been coming from the European Central Bank, whose currency has been the most prominent gainer among the major ones versus the greenback. On Monday, the dollar?s decline against Europe?s common currency reached new lows of over $1.29 per euro. Then, new E.C.B. President Jean-Claude Trichet publicly expressed concern for the first time over the ?brutal? rise in the euro?s value, one which has hurt exports from the eurozone and threatened its fragile recovery.

As a result, we?re finally seeing an overdue correction in the euro?s ascent, together with a commensurate respite for the dollar, now that at least someone in such a position has decided to fire a shot across currency traders? bows. Today, we?ve dropped back to just below $1.26 per euro. What?s been interesting about the currency markets, though, is that the dollar has NOT enjoyed similar rebounds against most other currencies. Against the yen, in fact, it has hit another new low this week below 106 yen before bouncing; and this in spite of yet more Bank of Japan intervention.

The dollar-versus-euro move is far from evidence of any renewed confidence in the U.S. currency. In fact, that the dollar has not rallied much yet against other currencies is evidence that traders still have no love for America?s scrip. However, part of the Federal Reserve?s present plan?which I?ll be exploring in The National Investor in the not-too-distant future?is to actually lead the world in ?competitively devaluing? its currencies. Greenspan and Company know that they can?t be the only ones keeping interest rates at puny levels, and are trying to force other countries now to actually cut interest rates further, so as to have the best hopes of keeping the global economy grinding ahead. Few fully grasp, in fact, that the big worldwide trend in prices is in transition; it?s moving from one dominated by China?s purported exporting of deflation, to one where America will seek to export inflation.

South Africa, New Zealand and Canada may be on the verge of cutting rates, both to take some of the steam out of their own currencies? moves against the U.S. dollar. England, which would like to be raising rates further, is now stuck with having to deal with sterling?s 10-year high against the dollar. Ditto Australia. All this will make for an interesting meeting of the G-7, coming up in Florida next month.

The most significant fallout from the dollar?s nascent recovery has been felt by metals and mining stocks. With hedge funds who were heavily long the market now having an excuse to sell thanks to an interruption in the dollar?s bear market, gold is getting hammered. Moments ago it closed at $408.30 in New York, down $13.10 on the day.

Gold mining stocks are getting hit as hard as they have since the sector reached its intermediate-term peak around December 1. The Amex Gold Bugs Index, or ?HUI,? is now down 17% from that peak near 260, losing around 13 points on the day as of around 1:00 p.m. Eastern time.

Though I?d give gold itself a 50-50 chance right now of holding above $400 per ounce, the misery for the gold shares is not yet over. Having decisively smashed now below the previously reliable support of their 50-day moving averages, gold shares will suffer additional losses for two reasons. First, institutions and individual investors alike who rode this momentum play over the last several months will now be spooked by gold shares? technical breakdown, and will add further to the selling.

Secondly, I still feel that most are unprepared to hear just how badly the bottom lines of many of the world?s medium and large-sized mining companies were hit last year?and especially in the fourth quarter?by the weak U.S. dollar. Over the next month we?ll be hearing from them all, and finding out anew that for too many, gold?s dollar-measured rise in price during 2003 didn?t translate into any better financial health for them. If I?m right, those gold companies most negatively impacted may suffer disproportionately, feeding the correction in the sector even further.

Eventually, however, this latest nasty comeuppance for gold bulls who got too cocky and careless will be over. And, I don?t think the process will take nearly as long as it did following the long correction after the June, 2002 peak in the sector; in fact, it might well be over in a month. When it is, those of us who once again had the wisdom to lighten up near the December 1 peak, as we did in June, 2002 when gold shares were similarly WAY too far ahead of themselves, will feel like kids in a candy store with a pocket full of money. Sadly, though, most will instead ?enjoy? the next leg up in gold shares by counting the days/weeks/months it will take just to get back to where they were before.

While most other commodities and commodity-linked shares have joined in gold?s woes to one extent or another, crude oil prices have remained conspicuous by bucking this trend. Though it backed off some today, crude still just hit yet another post-Iraq invasion high over $35 per barrel. So strong has oil been, in fact, that prices have stubbornly moved higher in spite of apparent OPEC over production recently. Now, even the oil cartel is crying ?Uncle? due, in part, to what the weak dollar policy has done to its ?currency.? Not helping is the fact that U.S. crude oil stocks are at their lowest levels since 1975, due in part to a Bush Administration that has utterly failed in addressing America?s long-term energy deficit except (it thinks) through its risky ?energy policy by conquest? strategy.

There are two dangers. The most immediate (and selfish) for OPEC members is that these high prices will not allow for the planned cuts in production slated for next month, which would likely push them higher still. Second, the chronically high price?even if it is measured in the cheapened dollar?strongly risks setting back economic activity, as well as hitting corporate profits. The latter, of course, will lead to the former if unchecked.

Wall Street is largely oblivious to this, not to mention many other things it should have a sharper eye on. Instead, stocks generally continue grinding higher. Yet, one gets the unmistakable sense that stocks wanting to continue sprinting higher have balls and chains around their ankles, which are suddenly starting to feel a bit heavier. The jobs numbers continue to be disappointing. The Christmas shopping season?even when one adds the delayed reaction from all the gift cards which have now been spent?was sub-par.

Corporate earnings season has commenced, but without the universal success (and then some) already priced into the market. Intel met its earnings expectations, but warned that both expected revenues and its capital spending budget for the first quarter will be less than expected. Apple and Yahoo disappointed, with both of those stocks starting the day weaker. To be fair, numbers from I.B.M. looked good; though its bottom line was helped more by the dollar?s weakness than by any big increase in top-line growth.

To me, the most interesting report so far, though, has come from aluminum giant Alcoa which, as it always does, kicked off the quarterly earnings releases last week. Once one waded through the myriad charges, one-time gains and the like, the starkest thing was the way in which rising expenses, MOST NOTABLY ENERGY, had hurt the company?s bottom line. We?ll hear from others like this in the weeks ahead.

In my view, we?re on the way toward what I recently dubbed a ?70?s-lite? type of environment. The dollar will weaken further. Costs, led by commodities, will rise. Eventually, there will be upward pressure on long-term interest rates, in spite of the Federal Reserve?s gallant (but ultimately doomed) efforts to hold it off. None of these trends, mind you, is likely to be as extreme as those of the late 1970?s; at least not any time soon. However, the pattern will be the same; and Americans will re-learn the word ?stagflation.?

For now, though, stock investors continue to be fixated on what have been or are perceived to be the ?benefits? of the reckless fiscal stimulus and dollar debauching that has occurred in the last year. They still could not care less about what consequences that has sown for the future. As Scarlett O?Hara would say, ?I?ll worry about that tomorrow.?

>
http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/wire/sns-ap-drug-testing,0,7707329.story?coll=sns-ap-nationworld-headlines
>
> NEW YORK -- The federal government is planning to overhaul its employee
> drug testing program to include scrutiny of workers' hair, saliva and
> sweat, a shift that could spur more businesses to revise screening for
> millions of their own workers.
>
> The planned changes, long awaited by the testing industry, reflect
> government efforts to be more precise in its drug screening and to
> outmaneuver a small but growing subset of workers who try to cheat on
> urine-based tests.
>
> Some businesses have already adopted alternative testing, despite
criticism
> by privacy advocates. But others have held back, partly awaiting
government
> standards.
>
> Alternative testing methods would give employers more certainty about the
> timing and scope of drug usage than is now possible solely with urine
> sampling, said Robert Stephenson II, an official with the federal
Substance
> Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.
>
> That could be particularly valuable in situations like investigations of
> on-the-job accidents, to determine not just whether an employee uses drugs
> but if usage occurred recently enough to be a cause.
>
> Alternative testing will "really ramp up our ability to increase the
> deterrent value of our program, which is basically the whole bottom line,"
> said Stephenson, director of the agency's Division of Workplace Programs.
>
> Stephenson said it would likely be a year until the new policies take
> effect for the nation's 1.6 million federal workers. The agency, known as
> SAMHSA, sets guidelines and administers the testing.
>
> All federal workers are eligible to be tested. SAMHSA, a division of the
> Department of Health and Human Services, tests fewer than 200,000 workers
a
> year. The decision about who is tested often depends on the sensitivity of
> their job.
>
> But because its standards are followed by regulatory agencies who conduct
> testing in industries they oversee, SAMHSA is responsible for about 6.5
> million of the 40 million workplace drug tests done each year by U.S.
> employers.
>
> The agency's testing standards are also widely followed by thousands of
> other employers, public and private.
>
> The proposed changes are due out "literally any day," Stephenson said. He
> would not discuss details of the proposals before their release.
>
> Changes would not likely go into effect until early next year, after the
> agency solicits public comment, finalize guidelines and prepare for the
> transition. Once that happens, many other employers could follow suit,
> government and industry officials say.
>
> "There's no doubt about it that SAMHSA's guidelines become the standard
for
> the industry whether you're a regulated employer or not, and so what
SAMHSA
> does will have wide-ranging impact," said Kenneth Kunsman, a marketing
> executive with OraSure Technologies Inc., which makes a saliva testing
kit.
>
> More employers are already using alternative testing. But many have held
> back because of the lack of standards, said Laura Shelton, executive
> director of the Drug and Alcohol Testing Industry Association, which
> represents test manufacturers and labs.
>
> Alternative tests hold appeal because their accuracy cannot be foiled with
> products sold to mask drug residue in urine, say company and government
> officials, noting that the tests are extremely accurate.
>
> But privacy advocates express doubts, pointing to cases of police officers
> and others who allege false positives because their hair absorbed drugs
> around them, as well as research suggesting dark hair soaks up more drug
> byproducts than light hair.
>
> "There's a lot that would need to be done before these types of tests, in
> our minds, would be sufficient to used for workplace testing," said Jeremy
> Gruber, legal director for the National Workrights Institute, an employee
> advocacy group.
>
> The screening industry has worked in recent years to promote alternative
tests.
>
> Casino operators and local police departments were among the first to use
> hair testing for pre-employment screening because it allows detection of
> drug use over much longer periods than urine. It is also now used by
> employers including Kraft Foods Inc. and brewer Anheuser-Busch Cos.
>
> "Urine tests were fallible in a variety of ways," said Alan Feldman, a
> spokesman for MGM Mirage, which adopted pre-employment hair testing for
all
> its 42,000 workers in 1993. "We want our people to be sharp."
>
> Psychemedics Corp., the largest hair testing company, has about 2,600
> corporate clients and last year did about 400,000 tests, vice president
> Bill Thistle said.
>
> Saliva testing has only been marketed for workplace drug testing for a few
> years. Companies including paper manufacturer Georgia-Pacific Corp. have
> adopted it.
>
> Kunsman said the labs affiliated with his firm this year expect to process
> 60,000 to 70,000 workplace drug tests a month.
>
> Government officials and testing industry executives say the new tests are
> less a replacement for urine screening than as additional tools in
> employers' arsenal.
>
> "In different cases, one specimen may be better than the other," said Dr.
> Donna Bush, drug testing team leader at SAMHSA's Center for Substance
Abuse
> Prevention.
>
> Saliva testing, done using a swab that looks much like a toothbrush but
> with a pad instead of bristles, is best at detecting drug use within the
> past one or two days.
>
> Hair testing, in which a sample about the thickness of a shoelace is
> clipped at the root from the back of the head, allows detection of many
> drugs used as far back as 3 months.
>
> Sweat testing, in which workers are fitted with a patch that is worn for
> two weeks, is used to screen people who have returned to work after drug
> treatment.
> * ___
>
> On the Net:
> http://www.drugfreeworkplace.gov
> http://www.orasure.com
> http://www.psychemedics.com
> http://www.datia.org
> http://www.workrights.org
>

----- Original Message -----

From: sheldon waxman

To: freedom-lawyers@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2004 4:17 PM

Subject: [Freedom Lawyers of America] When Will It Be Enough??

Fox News says that it is illegal for a restaurant to own "ashtrays."

 

Sheldon (Shelly) Waxman, Writer/Lawyer
"The Black Messiah Murders," Sam Cohen #1
"Piranhas On the Loose," Sam Cohen #2
"In the Teeth of the Wind,"
"All Anybody Needs to Know About Independent Contracting"
PURCHASE AT MY WEBSITE: http://thelawyer.info/ OR Call Iuniverse toll free 1-877-823-9235 

--
Posted by sheldon waxman to Freedom Lawyers of America at 1/14/2004 06:00:33 PM

---

Yahoo! Groups Links

• To visit your group on the web, go to:
  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/freedom-lawyers/
   
• To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
  freedom-lawyers-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
   
• Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

The bastards always find a way; don't they. You have to hand it to 'em; they
have the whole world scrambling. But this constant intervention just
continues to delay the inevatable economic collapse, which I deem is
necessary to build a new, better structure--one based on free market and
free enterprise and not State Capitalism.




Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2004 11:59 AM
Subject: Dollar's woes proving bizarre bonanza for US debt


> http://www.forbes.com/markets/economy/newswire/2004/01/14/rtr1210632.html
>
> NEW YORK, Jan 13 (Reuters) - The dollar's decline is proving, somewhat
> bizarrely, to be a boon for Treasuries as central bank intervention funds
> find a home in the bosom of U.S. debt markets.
>
> On Thursday the Federal Reserve is expected to report that its holdings of
> U.S. Treasury and agency debt for foreign central banks hit a record high
> this week.
>
> In fact, the weekly rise in the Fed's custody holdings could itself be one
> of the largest on record since the Bank of Japan is understood to have
> bought a massive $38 billion last week through intervention against the
yen.
>
> Analysts assume much of that money will end up parked in U.S. Treasuries,
> and thus be held by the Fed.
>
> So great is this tide of funds that a dynamic has built in the Treasury
> market where weakness in the dollar leads to expectations of
> intervention-related buying of bonds and to downward pressure on U.S. bond
> yields.
>
> "The unprecedented scale of the intervention has grossly distorted
> traditional correlations between the dollar, bond yields and equities,"
> argues Alan Ruskin, chief economist at 4CAST. He even equates the trend as
> equal, in all but name, with the great Plaza and Louvre currency accords
of
> the 1980s.
>
> This flood of money, analysts suggest, is a major reason why market
> interest rates have stayed so subdued in recent months despite a startling
> acceleration in economic growth.
>
> It is a perverse dynamic since the market had initially feared a slide in
> the dollar would hurt Treasuries, partly through the risk of higher
> inflation, but mainly as the threat of currency losses would scare away
> overseas investors.
>
> But while capital flows data shows foreign private investors have indeed
> shied away, their governments are more concerned with preventing an
> export-damaging rise in their currencies.
>
> Just last year foreign central bank holdings of Treasuries ballooned by
> $172 billion to a record $862 billion -- meaning they funded almost half
of
> the United States's $375 billion budget deficit last year.
>
> Most of this growth is linked to currency intervention by Asian countries,
> notably Japan and China. Japan's foreign exchange reserves rose $187
> billion in the year while China's expanded by $117 billion.
>
> "This is by far the fastest reserve accumulation in history and it serves
> no useful purpose other than as a support to the dollar," notes Ethan
> Harris, chief U.S. economist at Lehman Brothers. Neither does it seem
> likely to end anytime soon.
>
> China remains committed to its currency peg with the dollar, which makes
> intervention against the yuan virtually automatic.
>
> The Japanese meanwhile, have just arranged for the Ministry of Finance to
> borrow up to 10 trillion yen from the BOJ in order to fund yet more
> yen-selling intervention. The first five trillion yen of that reportedly
> changed hands today.
>
> IT'S NOT SOMETHING WE TALK ABOUT
>
> While the importance of foreign central banks in funding the United
> States's twin deficits is abundantly clear, it is rarely mentioned by
> anyone in power.
>
> Treasury Secretary John Snow last week claimed the budget deficit was
> eminently manageable, while only a day ago Federal Reserve Chairman Alan
> Greenspan saw no problem in funding the current account shortfall.
>
> Neither mentioned the contribution of foreign governments.
>
> The White House stance is understandable since the flow of foreign money
is
> making it easier to argue that budget deficits do not push up interest
> rates, and so justify past tax cuts.
>
> But the Fed also has reason to be thankful.
>
> The central bank caused a stir in markets last year by suggesting that, if
> deflation became a real danger, it might respond by buying long-term
> Treasuries directly and driving yields lower.
>
> In the end, officials decided the proposal had too many dangers of its own
> and it fell from favor. But, the Fed seems to have no problem with foreign
> governments buying Treasuries.
>
> "One of the great ironies of the latest events, is that for all the debate
> about the implications of the Fed buying Treasuries to suppress bond
> yields, it is foreign central banks, notably the BOJ, that is doing the
job
> for them," said 4CAST's Ruskin.
>