Michael Krieger

My name is Michael Krieger, and I am the creator and editor of Liberty Blitzkrieg. I'm originally from New York City.

As far as my academic and professional background, I attended college at Duke University where I earned a double major in Economics and Spanish. After completing my studies in 2000, I took a job at Lehman Brothers where I worked with the Oil analyst in the Equity Research Department.  In 2005, I joined Sanford C. Bernstein where I served as the Commodities Analyst on the trading floor. About halfway through my time there, I started to branch out and write opinions on bigger picture "macro" topics that no one else at the firm was covering. These opinion pieces were extremely popular throughout the global investment community, and I traveled around providing advice to some of the largest mutual funds, pension funds and hedge funds in the world.

I loved my job, but as time passed I started to educate myself about how the monetary and financial system functions and what I discovered disgusted me. I no longer felt satisfied working within the industry, and I resigned in January 2010.  At that point, I started a family investment office and continued to write macro pieces on economic, social and geopolitical topics. That summer, I drove cross country for six weeks and ultimately decided to leave the crowded streets of Manhattan for the open spaces of Boulder, Colorado, where I currently reside.

In the years that followed, I gradually recognized that my true passion centers upon writing on issues of significant societal importance given the extremely challenging times we live in. This realization culminated with me losing interest in financial markets and eventually launching this website in early 2012.

If you are interested in a more detailed description, replete with colorful anecdotes, of how I ended up making this bizarre professional transition, take the time to watch the video below.

https//www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/DcqMN-FXCIE?rel=0

In Liberty,
Michael Krieger

Military Times Survey: 75% of Troops Oppose Strikes on Syria

by

It’s always a good sign for an empire’s fortunes when the commander in chief of the armed forces completely loses the confidence and trust of the troops. While we have all seen various polls demonstrating the general public’s complete opposition to unprovoked military aggression against Syria, I hadn’t seen a survey focused on military members until now. The results are not good for the establishment. From the Military Times:

To the list of skeptics who question the need for air strikes against Syria, add an another unlikely group — many U.S. troops.

“I haven’t heard one single person be supportive of it,” said an Army staff sergeant at Fort Hood who asked not to be identified by name.

A Military Times survey of more than 750 active-duty troops this week found service members oppose military action in Syria by a margin of about three to one.

The survey conducted online Monday and Tuesday found that about 75 percent of troops are not in favor of air strikes in response to reports that the Syrian government used chemical weapons to kill civilians in that country.

Screen Shot 2013-09-13 at 11.54.39 AM

A higher percentage of troops, about 80 percent, say they do not believe getting involved in the two-year-old civil war is in the U.S. national interest.

Read more

Like this post?
Donate bitcoins: 35DBUbbAQHTqbDaAc5mAaN6BqwA2AxuE7G


Follow me on Twitter.

Harry Reid on the Senate Floor Proclaims: “The Anarchists Have Taken Over”

by

We’re diverted totally from what this bill is about. Why? Because the anarchists have taken over. They’ve taken over the House and now they’ve taken over the Senate.  People who don’t believe in government — and that’s what the Tea Party is all about — are winning, and that’s a shame. – Harry Reid on … Read more

Anti-Euro Party in Germany Makes Significant Headway into Parliamentary Elections

by

I haven’t been paying all that much attention to Germany as of late considering the incredible amount of scandals that have been emanating from the Obama administration, in addition to its ridiculous and dangerous attempts to catalyze World War III. However, with parliamentary elections set for September 22, it appears there are some interesting things afoot.

In case you haven’t heard of it, a new party was formed in Germany on February 6, 2013. The party is known as the AfD, or the “Alternative for Germany.” It is strongly anti-Euro and has gained surprising strength in the polls despite its very brief history.

On a related note, reading this article made me think of a comment made by Angela Merkel the other day when she said:

This is my approach and you can say that I’m doing all these things because I’m really a European at heart.

I found this odd, because while I do not live on the continent, I have spent some time there and in all my travels I never once met a European. I’m wondering, does this species actually exist outside of the catering halls of Brussels? Where do they live?

Now for more on the Afd from Business Week:

German parliamentary elections are coming up on Sept. 22, and Chancellor Angela Merkel has a problem on her hands. A euro-skeptical political party known as AfD is rising in the polls and could deny her Christian Democratic Union and its coalition partners the majority they need to continue governing.

AfD, or Alternative for Germany, currently holds no seats in the Bundestag, and until recently it barely registered in public-opinion polls. But a survey released on Sept. 4 by the Forsa polling group showed it with 4 per cent support—just shy of the 5 per cent needed to win Bundestag representation. Peter Matuschek, Forsa’s chief political analyst, says the poll may have underestimated the party’s strength. Many supporters, he told Spiegel, “are too embarrassed to admit that they are planning to vote for the AfD,” which wants Greece, Spain, and other crisis-hit countries to leave the euro zone, and possibly break up the existing monetary union itself.

Read more

Like this post?
Donate bitcoins: 35DBUbbAQHTqbDaAc5mAaN6BqwA2AxuE7G


Follow me on Twitter.

NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg Spends $350,000 in a Failed Attempt to Sway Colorado Politics

by

Most of my readers have probably already heard of the story below, but the reason I have chosen to highlight it today is because it represents something far more significant than simply the ouster of two local politicians. It is actually a manifestation of a much larger and more significant trend in these United States. A potent and far reaching political awakening that is sweeping the nation.

In the past, many people would simply shrug their shoulders in response to the insanity of legislators both at the local and national level. Not anymore. Enough people have finally received the much needed “kick in the butt” to get motivated and we are starting to see changes. Not only did some Colorado activists recall two politicians that voted against gun rights, but much more importantly, the American people as a whole just prevented (for now) a war in Syria by making their collective voices heard in mass and by pressuring their representatives. The sleeping giant is awake and politicians had better take notice.

The action in Colorado is particularly pleasing to me considering it is my adopted home state, as well as the fact that control freak, nanny state NYC Mayor Mike Bloomberg spent $350,000 of his own money in a failed effort to prop up the recalled politicians. Going forward, nothing would please me more than if Bloomie wastes his entire fortune in failed attempts to ban large sodas, guns, salt and e-cigarrettes. Of course, he will never see, let alone criticize, all of the crimes committed by crony finance pals. From the New York Times:

COLORADO SPRINGS — Two Colorado Democrats who provided crucial support for a package of state gun laws were voted out of office on Tuesday in special elections seen as a test of whether swing-state voters would accept gun restrictions after mass shootings at a Colorado movie theater and a Connecticut elementary school.

The vote, which came five months after the United States Senate defeated several gun restrictions, handed another loss to gun-control supporters and gave moderate lawmakers across the country a warning about the political risks of voting for tougher gun laws.

Although the election was confined to two small districts in Southern Colorado and does not repeal Colorado’s gun laws or change partisan control of the General Assembly, both sides spent heavily and campaigned fiercely, fighting to prevail in what analysts called a proxy battle between gun-control advocates and the National Rifle Association.

For advocates on both sides, the stakes in Tuesday’s elections were far bigger than the fates of two state politicians. As money and national attention poured into Colorado, a state of hunters that has been stained by two mass shootings, the races became a symbol of the nation’s bitter fight over gun control, with one side bolstered by Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg of New York and the other by the National Rifle Association.

While both sides campaigned vigorously, knocking on doors, holding rallies and driving voters to the polls, gun-control advocates far outspent their opponents. A range of philanthropists, liberal political groups, unions and activists raised a total of $3 million to defend Mr. Morse and Ms. Giron. Mr. Bloomberg personally gave $350,000.

Read more

Like this post?
Donate bitcoins: 35DBUbbAQHTqbDaAc5mAaN6BqwA2AxuE7G


Follow me on Twitter.

Rethinking 9/11: Building 7 Was the First Known Instance of a Tall Building Collapse from Fires

by

I’ve said for many years that I have no idea what actually happened on 9/11, but I am highly confident the government’s official story is complete and total bullshit. A third building fell on that fateful day, WTC7. No planes hit the building and yet it came down at free fall speed. Even the government … Read more

How I Remember September 11, 2001

by

I remember 9/11 like it was yesterday. I was one year into my Wall Street career. I got up that morning just like every other morning and headed toward Union Square station to get on the subway down to 3 World Financial Center, the headquarters of Lehman Brothers. I had just purchased breakfast in the … Read more

So Who Really Pays Television Pundits?

by

It is the job of the Fourth Estate to act as a check and a restraint on the others, to illumine the dark corners of Ministries, to debunk the bureaucrat, to throw often unwelcome light on the measures and motives of our rulers. ‘News’, as Hearst once remarked, ‘is something which somebody wants suppressed: all the rest is advertising’. That job is an essential one and it is bound to be unpopular; indeed, in a democracy, it may be argued that the more unpopular the newspapers are with the politicians the better they are performing their most vital task.

– Brian R. Roberts from a October 29, 1955 article in the London periodical “Time & Tide”

I’ve used the above quote before, and it is one that many others have paraphrased in various ways over the past century. The key point is that news is supposed to be delivered by people who do not have direct financial conflicts of interests that will cause their news or opinions to be biased based on receiving a fat paycheck from an outside entity. If such conflicts exist, they should at the very least be disclosed. It’s hilarious that so many pundits call Glenn Greenwald an “activist” and not a “journalist,” when it is clear he is delivering information based on a genuine passion for civil liberties. Many of these same people that accuse Glenn of “activism” are paid shills for public relations (PR) firms that represent large corporate clients and special interests. Even worse, it is almost never admitted on air. I’d much rather a person report the news biased with a genuine passion for a cause than based on a bias that revolves around his or her bank account size.

I’ve been waiting for someone to put together a more comprehensive article on this topic, because while many people recognize that television news is nothing more than tabloid garbage or statist/corporate propaganda, most people don’t understand the inner workings of it all. One of the primary reasons television news is so bad is because the so-called “experts” or pundits are actually quite often highly paid spokespeople for special interests, something which is disgracefully almost never disclosed by the anchors.

Read more

Like this post?
Donate bitcoins: 35DBUbbAQHTqbDaAc5mAaN6BqwA2AxuE7G


Follow me on Twitter.

Censored in the USA: John Hopkins Cryptography Professor Told to Take Down Blog Post

by

There’s nothing like waking up to the smell of censorship in the morning…and that’s exactly what happened to John Hopkins cryptography professor Matthew Green on September 9th. I’ve seen Matthew’s tweets come across my stream from time to time so I knew that he was highly regarded. ArsTechnica reports that: Matthew Green is a well-known cryptography professor, … Read more

Video of the Day: Help Obama Kickstart World War III

by

This is a really funny, short video making fun of that segment of the population referred to as Obamabots, the seemingly lobotomized drones who support everything Obama does simply because, well he’s Obama. In it, the actors plead with you to help raise funds for World War III and one of them passionately states: There … Read more

JP Morgan Targets Twitter Activist and Subsequently Takes His Handle

by

In one of the more bizarre stories I have seen in a while, Dallas-based graphic designer Chase Giunta was forced to give up a Twitter handle he had been using for years after JP Morgan complained. He had been using the handle to retweet criticisms of the TBTF bank, and after he refused to sell the … Read more