Visions of a Freeman - September 19, 2013
Lawless thugs, stone age expropriation.

During many years Venezuela has been criticized for expropriating businesses that it simply sees not beneficial for the country. In Venezuela, like many other countries governments of other countries cannot own ANYTHING material. For example a building or a terrain. The only exception to this is that is is an embassy and even that can be revoked.

Foreign Investment companies invest to get more money than they invested and make a profit. Sometimes we have companies that take out far more than any benefits that they leave and when they do it, it effectively becomes a blood sucker parasite, a vampire and no one in any country likes that kind of businesses. Of course in Venezuela there should have been more transparency and Academic effort to explain what we gain and loose in every agreement, simply because the people have the right to know what is going on.

The press was filled with complaints and still is, when Venezuela simply kicks a bad deal that does not benefit it and yes, the information given to the people has been horrible due to the lack of a good web site to explain the reasons why someone is kicked out but remember, no country owns anything here, they just invest money and they can only claim that money. Capital enters and only capital leaves this place for there is no such thing as a land or a building that is out of reach for Venezuela's sovereignty, so no building or land can be property of other countries.

There was a case in Venezuela where the country frankly did not see any benefit at all on the ownership of land by people in Spain. It simply was not in our best interest so since nobody likes a bad deal the Government proceeded to get rid of the very bad deal and some argue that it proceeded in a very unfair and even brutal way and that too made headlines all around the world. Recently Venezuela expropriated a building that was bought with North American investment, for the Pepsi Corporation. They were told they were going to be paid and like I said, no one from any other country owns any building in Venezuela, all they have here is an investment, just capital.

I did not like the style of Hugo Chavez in the sense that many businesses did not have to be expropriated, it would have been as easy as making another business just like it that did the same thing and sold a lot cheaper, but he felt there was a great urgency and lacked the computer systems to plan the economic sector.

We did get attacked from NAmerican Media, ABC News and UniVision Corporate Unquestionable Boss Tyrannies were among the creepy people stinking their nose in another country's affairs. We got severely hit by International media for the expropriations, specially from the media in Spain and the United States.

Look at this news:
Venezuela announces takeover of U.S. glass-making plants
By the CNN Wire Staff

(CNN) -- Venezuela continues to nationalize private businesses, with President Hugo Chavez announcing late Monday that the government will take over two U.S.-owned Owens-Illinois glass-manufacturing plants.
Chavez also ordered an environmental investigation at the sites, the state-run Agencia Venezolana de Noticias reported.

Owens-Illinois did not know what will happen next, a spokeswoman said Tuesday.

"We haven't received official word from the government yet," said spokeswoman Stephanie Johnston.
Venezuelan military personnel were at the company's plant in Los Guayos, Johnston told CNN. No Venezuelan authorities were on the scene at the company's plant in Valera, Johnston said.

"Both plants continue to operate as usual," she said.

Owens-Illinois Inc. says it is the world's leading glass container maker with more than 22,000 employees in 21 countries. The $7.1 billion company has global headquarters in Perrysburg, Ohio.

Chavez, who has nationalized other industries and land holdings during his 11-year tenure, said he soon will announce the takeover of other foreign companies that have been "exploiting the country's working class."
U.S. officials said Tuesday they were monitoring developments.

"We've seen the announcement and are following the situation closely," the State Department said. "We would expect Venezuela to provide prompt, adequate and effective compensation for any expropriation of the investments of Owens-Illinois in accordance with international law."

Chavez nationalized a local unit of U.S. food giant Cargill last year. He previously has appropriated privately owned oil, telecommunications, power, cement and steel companies.

Must be countries are so dumb they can't even make glass bottles... *Laugh* According to the Wikipedia article on the History of glass at: "The history of glassmaking can be traced back to 3500 BCE in Mesopotamia"... But anyway...

It is extremely dangerous to have NAmerican Businesses in Venezuela because the United States is extremely aggressive and violent when it comes to protecting it's interests. That reminds me of what I said a few years ago when Venezuela had problems with Spain over the expropriations. I said that the best way the Venezuelan people could be friends of the people in Spain is by kicking out all the Spanish businesses out of Venezuela, then since there is nothing to fight about we don't fight at all and we can be friends... *Laughs*

I don't see why the State Department should be interfering with that issue... It just comes to prove my point that it is very dangerous to accept United States investments in Venezuela.

Now look at this:
US government seizes NY skyscraper allegedly secretly owned by Iran
Published September 19, 2013

The U.S. Attorney’s office has seized ownership of a skyscraper in New York City, alleging that it was secretly owned and operated by the Iranian Government.

The structure at 650 Fifth Avenue, a 36-story building near Rockefeller Center in midtown Manhattan formerly known as the Piaget Building, was seized after a judgment by the New York Southern District court on Tuesday. The government plans to use money from the seizure to compensate victims of Iranian–sponsored terrorism.
U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara claimed that the property owner, the Assa Corporation, was nothing more than a front for the state-run bank that financed the building.

“The Judge’s opinion upholds what was the contention of this Office from outset: ‘Assa was (and is) a front for Bank Melli, and thus a front for the Government of Iran,’” Bharara said in a statement.

The building was originally erected in the 1970s by the Phalavi Foundation, a non-profit that was operated at the time by the Shah of Iran and financed by Bank Melli, which is controlled by the Iranian Government.

After the Iranian revolution, the loan for the building was cancelled in the 1980s and ownership was transferred to Assa and the Alavi Corporation. The U.S. alleges that Assa and Alavi were shell companies set up by the Iranian regime, with the former based in the UK’s Channel Islands to launder money back to the government.

The U.S. has spent the past five years on seizing the building in what it calls “the largest-ever terrorism forfeiture.”
A statement from the Alavi Foundation posted on its website claims it intends to appeal the court’s decision.

“We are obviously disappointed with the district court’s decision granting partial summary judgment against the Alavi Foundation,” reads the posting. “We have reviewed the decision and disagree with the court’s analysis of the facts and the law. The Foundation was ready for trial and is disappointed that it did not have the opportunity to rebut the Government evidence before a jury.”

It is alleged that both companies had transferred income made from rental space to Bank Melli and in turn the Iranian Government.

Some of the corporations that have offices in the building include CitiBank, Starwood Hotels and Armani.
Reports say that the building will have a sale tag of between $500-700 million and recently had $11 million in improvements.

victims of Iranian–sponsored terrorism

Yea, their pockets are such victims of Iranian-sponsored terrorism... *Laugh* The truth is there will be absolutely NO ACCOUNTABILITY at all on what is done with that money, it will be stolen, not only from the Iranian Government but also from the NAmerican people and even be used for political purposes playing it unfair for example to the Republican Party since the "Democratic Party" is in power in New York.

So what is this crap?

The United States is not even legally at war with Iran...

Where is the "International Laws" that the United States Department of State was speaking about in the Owens-Illinois case?

The law only works if it is to defend THEIR INTERESTS, not those of other countries.

What do you think would happen if Chavez would have said: "I don't like you Owens-Illinois because you are from the Empire so I am going to take that building, I am going TO SELL IT and I am going to give all that money to the Anti-Imperialist Activists in Venezuela"...

Next day the United States Congress would order very strong economic sanctions against Venezuela and declare a media war, using all six media tyrannies plus News Agencies to sell the idea of a military strike on Venezuela under the pretext that Venezuela has violated the "International Law".

But when it comes to the United States obeying the International Law and returning the money others invested even if it is a hostile country but there is no war, it simply does not care and does what it wants, which is simply put: STEALING.

If the United States has not declared war on a country, it has no rights to steal capital investments just because it feels like it. That is a very dangerous message from the United States that makes it even riskier to invest in the United States that added to the fact that it is rising it's debt ceiling AGAIN should drop it's credit ratings at the International Credit Rating Agencies.

Just imagine tomorrow they might not like the Russians or the Chinese so they simply steal the buildings, without even filing for a conflict in international trade organizations, they just take it, they just STEAL IT. Then they say they will use the money to destabilize China or Russia... See what I mean? See the serious danger? I do not see how in the wake of what is happening to Iranian Capital Investments in the United States, how China or any other country for that matter would invest a dime in the United States given the risks that it involves in relation to it's ability to control it's debt, the long term social stability of that society, the media and political wars that make an environment of serious instability and now the fragrant STEALING of International Capital without any regards to any International Law.

If I were you I would not invest a dime in the United States and if you do have dimes in the United States, take them out of there if you plan to have a long term investment. The fact that there is a strong demand for gold proves that not even the people of the United States trust in their system and FoxNews does not even try to hide it:
--- Removed irrelevant text here. ---

Throughout human history, gold has shown a remarkable tendency to drive people crazy. As the "currency of last resort," they'll do anything to get it and once they have it, they'll do anything to protect it. Even today, gold is seen by people from all walks of life—who are often mocked with the label "goldbugs"—as the one safe haven for investing in troubled economic times. It's older than any bank or state currency, you can make it into other things, and you can take it almost anywhere in the world and trade it for something. (That's the marketing pitch, anyway, made by those commercials you see a lot on Fox News, not to mention all those "cash-for-gold" stores on every corner.)

--- Removed irrelevant text here. ---

I think the sudden ROBBERY of Iranian Capital by the United States Government is a very serious message as to what to expect in the future and that in turn should properly be reflected in the International Credit Ratings of the United States.

The case would turn up to be even worse if it turned out that the United States Government did follow appropriate International procedures and that FoxNews simply ignored everything about it to promote attacks on international investments... In that case FoxNews would be violating International Laws and promoting crime but for now all I have is evidence of a brutal ROBBERY by the United States in total disregard for International Law and that is all that I can see in FoxNews and also what most saw.

Listen this is not about if you like Iran or not, Capital Investments can't be taken just like that simply because a party feels like it. There has to be International Laws and if there is no law then there must be a serious warning in the International Credit System that warns investors in the United States that their investments can be taken at any time and for any reason by the United States Government without regards to International Law. That would seriously drop the credit rating of the United States but it is only getting a realistic, non corrupt assessment of the dangers of investing in the United States.

If there is no honesty respecting international law on investment money then there is no honesty in dealing with anybody else, meaning that we should also not accept any investments from the United States since they do not proceed in a way that we can trust and without trust there can be no deal, people can just go find a better, more trustful deal.

This is why I don't want to see those hypocrite double standard thugs complaining about Venezuela's right to boot investments that are no good for Venezuela and only parasite us, specially if we pay with worthless and at the same time over valued dollars. You can't just take investments from a country only under the argument that you don't like them... That is what International Law was made for, precisely to avoid that and give some security to the investments.

If you are going to play that dumb game, best to play it fairly. If Capital Investments with unlimited profits in time are going to be used then the rules must be respected even if at war with another country in which case you would still have to pay the other country for it's investments because one thing is a war and another the international market global rules. Investors must be protected in any circumstances under any geo-political circumstance simply because those are the global rules that all abide to. I say this even if hardcore "Capitalist" extremists would want to kiss and hug me for saying that... *Laugh*

I personally do not believe in "investments unlimited in time and scope". I believe in borrowing and paying back, not being a parasite to hard working people so I believe in an honest society of hard working people that deserve their status in a fair society, not a society of unaccountable robbers that steal people they don't like to split the profit secretly amongst their friends to further damage the society by increasing corruption and political conflicts.

Back to index.