Saturday, March 31, 2012

What's with Rick Warren?

*******
*******
Rick Warren Once Again Caught Up in Controversy
Part 1
By Marsha West
March 31, 2012
NewsWithViews.com
http://www.newswithviews.com/West/marsha228.htm
In January 2011 mega church pastor Rick Warren enlisted the help of three doctors to come up with a health plan for Saddleback Church (SBC). The doctors he chose were Daniel Amen, a professing Christian, Mark Hyman, a Jew, and Mehmet Oz, a Muslim (and Oprah’s “favorite doctor”). The foursome put their heads together and came up with The Daniel Plan (TDP). In a piece I wrote titled Rick Warren Introduces “The Devil Plan” I demonstrated that doctors Amen, Hyman and Oz are steeped in Eastern mysticism and the occult. So - why did Rick Warren knowingly choose occultists? Why not play it safe and choose doctors who are “in the faith”? It seems “America’s Pastor” is always stirring up controversy, even when it’s unnecessary.
Honestly, I don’t really care why he chose the doctors he did. What gives me pause is that Rick Warren is a heavy hitter in Christendom, so it only makes sense that a shepherd of the flock should have more concern for the spiritual health of the sheep than for their waistlines.
When I wrote on TDP my primary concern was that Christians who trust Rick Warren would purchase the doctors’ books, CDs, DVDs and nutritional supplements simply on his recommendation. My concern was well founded as many believers have been, and will continue to be, influenced by a worldview that’s incompatible with Christianity.
Ignoring critics, Warren decided to take his weight loss program nationwide. TDP is now available to churches that are looking to offer a weight loss program. As of this writing 15,000 people have signed up.
Pastor Warren’s willingness to unite with occultists isn’t the only thing that has people on edge. Other criticisms are that he:
…embraces pragmatism -- in the Church, the pragmatist will look to the world’s marketing methods such as surveying the community when determining how to grow their church rather than looking to biblical examples.
…discounts the value of doctrine because he believes that doctrine can be a hindrance to unity.
…misapplies Scripture and uses it as a tool to cover his own ideas with a pretense of divine authority.
…has redefined Christian ministry in terms of social activism or what is termed social justice. (As an aside one of the leaders of Social Justice Christianity, as it is called, is Marxist sympathizer Jim Wallis, founder and editor of Sojourners magazine. “Social justice Christians,” says Eric Rush, “are those who profess Christianity, but who adhere to politically entrenched concepts of equality and redistribution of wealth. These ideas are ostensibly rooted in their faith, but in truth, they have been incrementally and insidiously insinuated into many American churches by Marxists, progressive politicians and pastors….”)
In his best-selling book, The Purpose-Driven Life, Rick Warren says this:
Jesus modeled a purpose-driven life, and he taught others how to live it, too. That was the “work” that brought glory to God. Today God calls each of us to the same work.
Really? Then why did Jesus answer the way He did in John 6:28-29? :
Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God? Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.
In his article, Michael Horton on Rick Warren, Modern Reformation, and Desiring God, Horton observed:
His best-selling book, The Purpose-Driven Life, begins by announcing that it’s not about you, but about God, and then the rest of the book is about you.
Later Horton says:
Pastor Warren tailors his appeals to his audience. To Calvinists, he stresses his support for the “solas” of the Reformation. Yet he tells prosperity evangelist David Yonggi Cho, “I’ve read your books on Vision and Dreams – speak to pastors about how you hear the voice of the Holy Spirit?…What advice would you give to a brand new minister?…Do you think American churches should be more open to the prayer for miracles?” … In a June 2006 article in JewishJournal.com, editor-in-chief Rob Eshman reported on a speech that Warren gave for Synagogue 3000, after Rabbi Ron Wolfson became involved in the Purpose-Driven pastoral training seminars. “Warren managed to speak for the entire evening without once mentioning Jesus — a testament to his savvy message-tailoring.” When USA Today asked him why Mormon and Jewish leaders are involved in his pastoral training programs, Rick Warren reportedly said, “I’m not going to get into a debate over the non-essentials. I won’t try to change other denominations. Why be divisive?”… Rick Warren endorses a host of books, from New Age authors to Emergent writers to conservative evangelicals. So why not include Calvinists?
And why not include doctors who dabble in the occult? It seems obvious that part of Rick Warren’s agenda is to be all things to all people, not to “earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints” (Jude 1: 3).
The Bridge to Islam
One would think the issues commented on previously would cause SBC’s pastor to be more mindful of matters affecting his church. Not so. Once again Rick Warren is caught up in controversy. On February 23 the Orange County Register published an article titled Rick Warren builds bridge to Muslims. Jim Hinch reported that in December 2011 Rick Warren began “an effort to heal divisions between evangelical Christians and Muslims” by “partnering with Southern California mosques and proposing a set of theological principles that includes acknowledging that Christians and Muslims worship the same God.”
In his column Hinch shared that the effort, labeled the “King’s Way” document, “caps years of outreach between Warren and Muslims.” Hinch claimed that the King’s Way document (KWD) was co-authored by Abraham Meulenberg, SBC pastor in charge of interfaith outreach and Jihad Turk, director of religious affairs of the Islamic Center of Southern California and unveiled at a December 2011 dinner at SBC attended by 300 Christians and Muslims. Hinch included part of the document in his article.
Warren quickly blasted the veteran reporter, accusing him of putting out an article with “multiple errors” in it. Warren’s response to Hinch’s report briefly appeared in the comments section:
I deeply love my Muslim neighbors,” he wrote, “but this article contains multiple errors - factually and theologically that neither our dear friends in the Muslim Community nor the Christians at Saddleback Church would agree with.
Soon thereafter Hinch replied to Warren’s comment:
I 'm sorry Rev. Warren feels the story contains errors but the story was based on interviews and documents and it was thoroughly fact-checked. I discussed all of its major points with Tom Holladay, an associate senior pastor at Saddle back (sic). I checked with other sources quoted in the story this morning and they said they did not see any errors. While reporting this story I asked to speak to Rev. Warren directly but was told he was too busy for an interview. If any facts need to be corrected I hope representatives from Saddle back (sic) will get in touch with me. …
Warren later removed his comment.
When the blogosphere got wind of the article they were on it like morning dew on a rose petal. Who was telling the truth, bloggers wanted to know -- the media or “America’s Pastor”? They wondered how a veteran reporter could get his facts so wrong. Being Bereans, as the Bible commands, Christian bloggers started digging for the truth. They discovered what appeared to be a carefully crafted cover-up by SBC. But why would they want to cover their tracks? Here’s where it gets interesting:
At first glance, writes Ken Silva of Apprising Ministries, this would all seem simple enough; a report of a dinner at Saddleback Church where Turk and Meulenberg present their joint effort involving a document they’d written called the King’s Way.
Warren denied the conclusions Jim Hinch drew. To clear up the matter he stated:
Christians have a fundamentally different view of God than Muslims. We worship Jesus as God. Muslims don’t. Our God is Jesus, not Allah.
So far so good.
Silva continues:
The confusion really began to grow when I brought you a small section from what I was told is the King’s Way document in Apprising Ministries Exclusive On Rick Warren, Jim Hinch, And Islam:
I. WHO: we believe in ONE GOD
1. God is one (Mark 12:29; Muhammed 47:19)
2. God is the Creator (Genesis 1:1; Al Shura 42:11)
This is indeed confusing – and there’s so much more to add to the confusion! (The points of theological agreement are here)
According to Hinch the KWD “outlines several areas of theological agreement between Christians and Muslims and commits members of both faiths to three goals: becoming friends; making peace; and sharing “the blessings of God with others.”
But which God? The God of Christianity or the god of Islam?
Silva goes on to say that journalist Terry Mattingly wrote a piece titled Religion: God, Allah and Rick Warren:
In his piece Mattingly quotes what he says is an email from Rick Warren who absolutely insists that: “Neither I, nor my staff, had ever seen such a document UNTIL the article mentioned it. It wasn’t created or even seen by us. … Saddleback church as a church was not involved.”… (emphasis added)
There seems to be a lack of communication between Pastor Warren and his staff and this is confirmed in an article by Jihad Turk. Turk explains that two years ago Abraham Meulenberg approached him and expressed an interest in exploring ways “that we can bring our communities together in friendship.” Turk admits he welcomed the initiative. Later in the article he states:
…over the past couple of years, Saddleback Church through King’s Way has participated in a number of events with several local Muslim communities. I was invited to give a presentation at Saddleback Church alongside pastor Meulenberg.”
From the article it becomes obvious that some of what Turk said contradicts Rick Warren and corroborates what Jim Hinch said.
As stated above, Hinch stated that he and SBC pastor Tom Holladay had fact-checked the major points in his original article. Hinch also revealed that Holladay was among those who attended the dinner when King’s Way was presented.
King’s Way, Kingdom Circles and Saddleback
While gathering info for her radio show, Stand Up For The Truth, co-host Amy Spreeman came across an intriguing bit of news. She wrote:
Yesterday we broke the news that one of Saddleback Church’s senior pastors, Abraham Meulenberg, taught about Kingdom Circles – a controversial interfaith teaching tool – this past summer at a Catholic church near Nice, France.
We wanted to give the benefit of the doubt and asked the question: Was Pastor Meulenberg actually teaching, or were these diagrams left over from a prior lesson, perhaps taught by someone else and left on the white board?
The photos in the gallery below don’t show the pastor putting pen to the wall, but there is a clear progression of diagrams in each of these photos as he is speaking to attendees. (See the photos here)
Chris Rosebrough of Pirate Christian Radio’s Fighting for the Faith program picked this up yesterday and incorporated it into a stunning and all-encompassing summary of what has happened with the King’s Way, the Kingdom Circles and Saddleback’s Muslim outreach in the past few weeks. If you need to catch up, click on his podcast…and strap on your seat belt.
With seat belt tight I listened while Chris gave the details of all that has transpired since Jim Hinch’s original article appeared. When you put the puzzle pieces together, as Chris did, it becomes obvious that, for reasons known only to him, Rick Warren thought it best to deny, verbally and in writing, that SBC pastors knew about the KWD.
But they did know. There’s photographic evidence of Abraham Meulenberg and Jihad Turk on stage together at the Saddleback Peace Center with the KWD displayed on a large screen behind them.
Clearly, the KWD has much more significance than something that came from an SBC Bible study where Muslims were invited to attend.
There’s more. On March 13 we learned that Pastor Warren elicited the help of a paid public relations firm to present his version of the “truth” in an article titled “Setting the Record Straight.”
Just so you’ll know…
Rick Warren has been pushing interfaith dialogue for years. So it’s no surprise that he’s attempting to build a bridge between Christians and Muslims. There’s nothing wrong with doing that as long as the primary purpose is to share the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Mark 16:15-16 However, Jim Hinch stated that he was told by Pastor Tom Holladay “King’s Way was an effort to build bridges of friendship and cooperation, not an attempt to evangelize.” (Online source)
Rick Warren once said, “I see absolutely zero reason in separating my fellowship from anybody.” In his ecumenical outreach, Southern Baptist Pastor Rick Warren has associated with the apostate Roman Catholic Church, the United Nations, the Council on Foreign Relations, and the Tony Blair Faith Foundation. These last two organizations have as primary goals setting up a global government and bringing all religions of the world together, respectively. Pastor Warren awarded the former Prime Minister of Britain, who is a recent convert to Catholicism, the annual International Medal of PEACE.
Recommended Reading:
1- Rick Warren: The art of ‘politically-correct’ praying
2- Invocation at the Inauguration of President Barack Obama, 20th January 2009—By Cecil Andrews
3- Evangelicals’ Collapsing Cultural Influence--By David French
Marsha West is the Founder and Editor of Email Brigade News Report, an online news service for conservative people of faith. Marsha is a freelance writer whose main focus is on religious and cultural issues. She is a regular contributor to NewsWithViews.com; TheConservativevoice; RenewAmerica; Christianworldviewnetwork; Webcommentary and other popular websites. Her writings have also appeared on WorldnetDaily; Canadafreepress; AmericanDaily and several Christian periodicals.
Marsha loves to write fiction for the younger generation. She is currently writing a series of books about an average Christian family and the cultural issues they face. Her books equip kids to defend their faith and live for Christ.
Marsha can be reached through her website, Email Brigade News Report
*******

Wednesday, March 21, 2012

Control the Food, Control the People (Part 5)

*******
Obama seizes control over all food, farms, livestock, farm equipment, fertilizer and food production across America
by Mike Adams
Tuesday, March 20, 2012
http://www.naturalnews.com/035301_Obama_executive_orders_food_supply.html
(NaturalNews) "We told ya so" just doesn't quite cut it anymore. As the American sheeple slept, selfishly refusing to take a stand against tyranny, the Obama administration has been plotting what can only be called a total government takeover of America.
On March 16, 2012, President Obama issued an executive order entitled, "NATIONAL DEFENSE RESOURCES PREPAREDNESS." (http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/03/16/executive-order...)
This executive order states that the President alone has the authority to take over all resources in the nation (labor, food, industry, etc.) as long as it is done "to promote the national defense" -- a phrase so vague that it could mean practically anything.
The power to seize control and take over these resources is delegated to the following government authorities:
(1) the Secretary of Agriculture with respect to food resources, food resource facilities, livestock resources, veterinary resources, plant health resources, and the domestic distribution of farm equipment and commercial fertilizer;
(2) the Secretary of Energy with respect to all forms of energy;
(3) the Secretary of Health and Human Services with respect to health resources;
(4) the Secretary of Transportation with respect to all forms of civil transportation;
(5) the Secretary of Defense with respect to water resources; and
(6) the Secretary of Commerce with respect to all other materials, services, and facilities, including construction materials.
This takeover is designed, in part, to "stockpile supplies" for the U.S. military. Authority for this total takeover of all national resources is granted with nothing more than the writing of a single statement that claims these actions are necessary to "promote the national defense." As stated in the order:
the authority delegated by section 201 of this order may be used only to support programs that have been determined in writing as necessary or appropriate to promote the national defense:
(a) by the Secretary of Defense with respect to military production and construction, military assistance to foreign nations, military use of civil transportation, stockpiles managed by the Department of Defense, space, and directly related activities;
What all this means is that the U.S. government now claims the power to simply march onto your farm with guns drawn and demand all your crops, seeds, livestock and farm equipment.
Think I'm exaggerating? Read it yourself!
And for those living in denial who refuse to accept the reality of what's happening in America, remember the following:
• When NaturalNews reported on the existence of the NDAA, we were told our reporting was misleading because Obama opposed it and wouldn't sign it.
• When Obama betrayed America and signed the bill, we were told our reporting was misleading because "it didn't apply to Americans."
• When Obama admitted it did apply to Americans, he announced that he would choose "not to use it on Americans" but only by the grace of his restraint. Nobody who previously accused us of misleading the public had the integrity to offer us an apology and say, "Gee, you were right, it DOES apply to Americans!"
• Now Obama has seized control over all food, farms, livestock, water and transportation across America. How many brain-dead Americans will continue to live in denial and try to convince themselves this is not happening? Sticking your head in the sand does not make this go away...
What California did to Rawesome Foods, the Obama administration can do to everyone
*******
*******
Remember the armed raids on Rawesome Foods? With guns drawn, California authorities assaulted the food distribution center, arrested the farmers, then proceeded to destroy $50,000 worth of food including milk, eggs, cheese and watermelons. (http://www.naturalnews.com/033220_Rawesome_Foods_armed_raids.html)
As outrageous as that raid was, it's only the beginning. Now, thanks to Obama's executive order, the federal government can conduct Rawesome-style raids on all farms, all grocery stores, all food co-ops and even individual home gardens.
It's written in plain English. This is no longer debatable and it's not a conspiracy theory. It's Obama administration policy. For what other purpose would this be issued in an executive order if it was not seen as actionable by the government? This piece of paper, you see, gives them the (false) authority to do whatever they want and then have the front-line soldiers who carry it out claim "we're only following orders."
Sound familiar? Heil Hitler!
Understanding the fraud
This executive order starts out by stating that the U.S. President is the "Commander in Chief" of the U.S. military. This is false. He is not the commander in chief unless and until Congress declares an Act of War. No acts of war have been declared in recent memory, and certainly not under Obama who doesn't even seek congressional approval for war.
So Obama is in no way a "Commander in Chief." In fact, it is questionable whether he is even a U.S. citizen.
The phrase "national defense" can be twisted to mean almost anything. It could be invoked from something as harmless as a barge sinking in the harbor. It could even be invoked based on fabricated intelligence such as a fake website post from someone alleged to be "Bin Laden's second in command" who appears to shout some sort of threat against the United States of America. So the claim that this seizing of national resources will only be done under some sort of national defense emergency is pure bunk -- both Obama and Bush before him have already declared we are living under a national defense emergency! Thus, the conditions described in this executive order have already been triggered. It is already in effect!
Notice how nothing in this document talks about protecting the People? Serving the People? Supporting the People? It's all about protecting the government! The government needs stockpiles of weapons, food and resources -- but YOU don't! Such is the philosophy of current government which sees itself as all powerful and the People as helpless, mindless slaves of the state.
Tyrannical governments concern themselves with important concepts such as continuity of government but never the continuity of liberty for the People. At the first drop of a hat, liberty gets thrown out the window to keep government in power.
Other signs of the takeover
• Last year, I interviewed Farmer Brad in central Texas, who openly stated, on camera, that FEMA has already started calling farms across Texas and demanding an inventory list of all their crops and seeds. Watch this interview yourself at: http://tv.naturalnews.com/v.asp?v=72620642EB2DE54931674ED4857C08EC
• Yesterday in Chicago, the police arrested NBC reporters outside a hospital, screaming that their First Amendment rights could be taken away from them at any time:
http://www.prisonplanet.com/cop-arrests-nbc-reporters-says-your-first...
• Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta recently revealed in U.S. Senate testimony that the Obama administration takes its orders from the UN and that the U.S. Congress is now null and void. (http://wethepeoplefree.com/constitution/senator-sessions-leon-panetta...) and (http://www.infowars.com/coup-detat-pentagon-obama-declare-congress-ce...)
• When MF Global head Jon Corzine stole billions of dollars from investors (many were farmers), there were absolutely no investigations, no indictments and no criminal arrests! Massive financial theft is now openly tolerated in America as long as those doing the stealing are politically connected to the Obama administration. (http://www.prisonplanet.com/the-cojones-defense-of-jon-corzine.html)
Of course, it's not an Obama thing. Bush was much the same. It's not the name of the person in the Oval Office who matters, it's the fundamental lack of principles and ethics reflected across government today. Instead of protecting the rights of the People, today's corrupt governments are little more than criminal gangs who steal power and resources for themselves (and their connected buddies) while destroying the economy and stealing everything in sight from the real workers upon whose sweat-drenched backs America was built.
*******
Police State USA: New Obama Executive Order Seizes U.S. Infrastructure and Citizens for Military Preparedness
By Brandon Turbeville
Global Research, March 18, 2012
In a stunning move, on March 16, 2012, Barack Obama signed an Executive Order stating that the President and his specifically designated Secretaries now have the authority to commandeer all domestic U.S. resources including food and water. The EO also states that the President and his Secretaries have the authority to seize all transportation, energy, and infrastructure inside the United States as well as forcibly induct/draft American citizens into the military. The EO also contains a vague reference in regards to harnessing American citizens to fulfill “labor requirements” for the purposes of national defense.
Not only that, but the authority claimed inside the EO does not only apply to National Emergencies and times of war. It also applies in peacetime.
The National Defense Resources Preparedness Executive Order exploits the “authority” granted to the President in the Defense Production Act of 1950 in order to assert that virtually every means of human survival is now available for confiscation and control by the President via his and his Secretaries’ whim.
The unconstitutionality of the overwhelming majority of Executive Orders is well established, as well as the illegality of denying citizens their basic Constitutional and human rights, even in the event of a legitimate national emergency. Likewise, it should also be pointed out that, like Obama’s recent Libyan adventure and the foregone conclusion of a Syrian intervention, there is no mention of Congress beyond a minor role of keeping the allegedly co-equal branch of government informed on contextually meaningless developments.
As was mentioned above, the scope of the EO is virtually all-encompassing. For instance, in “Section 201 – Priorities and Allocations Authorities,” the EO explains that the authority for the actions described in the opening paragraph rests with the President but is now delegated to the various Secretaries of the U.S. Federal Government. The list of delegations and the responsibility of the Secretaries as provided in this section are as follows:
(1) the Secretary of Agriculture with respect to food resources, food resource facilities, livestock resources, veterinary resources, plant health resources, and the domestic distribution of farm equipment and commercial fertilizer;
(2) the Secretary of Energy with respect to all forms of energy;
(3) the Secretary of Health and Human Services with respect to health resources;
(4) the Secretary of Transportation with respect to all forms of civil transportation;
(5) the Secretary of Defense with respect to water resources; and
(6) the Secretary of Commerce with respect to all other materials, services, and facilities, including construction materials.
One need only to read the “Definitions” section of the EO in order to clearly see that terms such as “food resources” is an umbrella that includes literally every form of food and food-related product that could in any way be beneficial to human survival.
That being said, “Section 601 – Secretary of Labor” delegates special responsibilities to the Secretary of Labor as it involves not just materials citizens will need for survival, but the actual citizens themselves.
Obviously, the ability of the U.S. government to induct and draft citizens into the military against their will is, although a clear violation of their rights, not an issue considered shocking by its nature of having been invoked so many times in the past. Logically, this “authority” is provided for in this section.
However, what may be shocking is the fact that Section 601 also provides for the mobilization of “labor” for purposes of the national defense. Although some subsections read that evaluations are to be made regarding the “effect and demand of labor utilization,” the implication is that “labor” (meaning American workers) will be considered yet one more resource to be seized for the purposes of “national defense.” The EO reads,
Sec. 601. Secretary of Labor. (a) The Secretary of Labor, in coordination with the Secretary of Defense and the heads of other agencies, as deemed appropriate by the Secretary of Labor, shall:
(1) collect and maintain data necessary to make a continuing appraisal of the Nation's workforce needs for purposes of national defense;
(2) upon request by the Director of Selective Service, and in coordination with the Secretary of Defense, assist the Director of Selective Service in development of policies regulating the induction and deferment of persons for duty in the armed services;
(3) upon request from the head of an agency with authority under this order, consult with that agency with respect to: (i) the effect of contemplated actions on labor demand and utilization; (ii) the relation of labor demand to materials and facilities requirements; and (iii) such other matters as will assist in making the exercise of priority and allocations functions consistent with effective utilization and distribution of labor;
Notice that the language of the EO does not state “in the event of a national emergency.” Instead, we are given the term “purposes of national defense.” This is because the “authorities” assumed by the President have been assumed not just for arbitrary declarations of “national emergency” but for peacetime as well. Indeed, the EO states this much directly when it says,
The head of each agency engaged in procurement for the national defense is delegated the authority of the President under section 107(b)(1) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2077(b)(1), to take appropriate action to ensure that critical components, critical technology items, essential materials, and industrial resources are available from reliable sources when needed to meet defense requirements during peacetime, graduated mobilization, and national emergency.
Presidential Executive Orders have long been used illegally by Presidents of every political shade and have often been used destroy the rights of American citizens. Although history has often come to judge these orders as both immoral and unconstitutional, the fact is that the victims of the orders suffered no less because of the retroactive judgment of their progeny. It is for this reason that we must immediately condemn and resist such obvious usurpation as is currently being attempted by the U.S. government.
Nevertheless, some have no doubt begun to wonder why the President has signed such an order. Not only that, but why did he sign the order now? Is it because of the looming war with Iran or the Third World War that will likely result from such a conflict? Is it because of the ticking time bomb called the economy that is only one jittery move or trade deal away from total disintegration? Is it because of a growing sense of hatred of their government amongst the general public? Is there a coming natural disaster of which we are unaware? Are there plans for martial law?
Whatever the reason for the recent announcement of Obama’s new Executive Order, there is one thing we do know for sure - “It wouldn’t happen here” has been the swan song of almost every victim of democide in modern human history.
Brandon Turbeville is an author out of Mullins, South Carolina. He has a Bachelor's Degree from Francis Marion University and is the author of three books, Codex Alimentarius -- The End of Health Freedom, 7 Real Conspiracies, and Five Sense Solutions. Turbeville has published over one hundred articles dealing with a wide variety of subjects including health, economics, government corruption, and civil liberties. Brandon Turbeville is available for podcast, radio, and TV interviews. Please contact us at activistpost (at) gmail.com.
*******
ANNEX: Complete text of the Executive order.
Source: the White House, March 16, 2012
EXECUTIVE ORDER
NATIONAL DEFENSE RESOURCES PREPAREDNESS
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the Defense Production Act of 1950, as amended (50 U.S.C. App. 2061 et seq.), and section 301 of title 3, United States Code, and as Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces of the United States, it is hereby ordered as follows:
PART I - PURPOSE, POLICY, AND IMPLEMENTATION
Section 101. Purpose. This order delegates authorities and addresses national defense resource policies and programs under the Defense Production Act of 1950, as amended (the "Act").
Sec. 102. Policy. The United States must have an industrial and technological base capable of meeting national defense requirements and capable of contributing to the technological superiority of its national defense equipment in peacetime and in times of national emergency. The domestic industrial and technological base is the foundation for national defense preparedness. The authorities provided in the Act shall be used to strengthen this base and to ensure it is capable of responding to the national defense needs of the United States.
Sec. 103. General Functions. Executive departments and agencies (agencies) responsible for plans and programs relating to national defense (as defined in section 801(j) of this order), or for resources and services needed to support such plans and programs, shall:
(a) identify requirements for the full spectrum of emergencies, including essential military and civilian demand;
(b) assess on an ongoing basis the capability of the domestic industrial and technological base to satisfy requirements in peacetime and times of national emergency, specifically evaluating the availability of the most critical resource and production sources, including subcontractors and suppliers, materials, skilled labor, and professional and technical personnel;
(c) be prepared, in the event of a potential threat to the security of the United States, to take actions necessary to ensure the availability of adequate resources and production capability, including services and critical technology, for national defense requirements;
(d) improve the efficiency and responsiveness of the domestic industrial base to support national defense requirements; and
(e) foster cooperation between the defense and commercial sectors for research and development and for acquisition of materials, services, components, and equipment to enhance industrial base efficiency and responsiveness.
Sec. 104. Implementation. (a) The National Security Council and Homeland Security Council, in conjunction with the National Economic Council, shall serve as the integrated policymaking forum for consideration and formulation of national defense resource preparedness policy and shall make recommendations to the President on the use of authorities under the Act.
(b) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall:
(1) advise the President on issues of national defense resource preparedness and on the use of the authorities and functions delegated by this order;
(2) provide for the central coordination of the plans and programs incident to authorities and functions delegated under this order, and provide guidance to agencies assigned functions under this order, developed in consultation with such agencies; and
(3) report to the President periodically concerning all program activities conducted pursuant to this order.
(c) The Defense Production Act Committee, described in section 701 of this order, shall:
(1) in a manner consistent with section 2(b) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2062(b), advise the President through the Assistant to the President and National Security Advisor, the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism, and the Assistant to the President for Economic Policy on the effective use of the authorities under the Act; and
(2) prepare and coordinate an annual report to the Congress pursuant to section 722(d) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2171(d).
(d) The Secretary of Commerce, in cooperation with the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and other agencies, shall:
(1) analyze potential effects of national emergencies on actual production capability, taking into account the entire production system, including shortages of resources, and develop recommended preparedness measures to strengthen capabilities for production increases in national emergencies; and
(2) perform industry analyses to assess capabilities of the industrial base to support the national defense, and develop policy recommendations to improve the international competitiveness of specific domestic industries and their abilities to meet national defense program needs.
PART II - PRIORITIES AND ALLOCATIONS
Sec. 201. Priorities and Allocations Authorities. (a) The authority of the President conferred by section 101 of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2071, to require acceptance and priority performance of contracts or orders (other than contracts of employment) to promote the national defense over performance of any other contracts or orders, and to allocate materials, services, and facilities as deemed necessary or appropriate to promote the national defense, is delegated to the following agency heads:
(1) the Secretary of Agriculture with respect to food resources, food resource facilities, livestock resources, veterinary resources, plant health resources, and the domestic distribution of farm equipment and commercial fertilizer;
(2) the Secretary of Energy with respect to all forms of energy;
(3) the Secretary of Health and Human Services with respect to health resources;
(4) the Secretary of Transportation with respect to all forms of civil transportation;
(5) the Secretary of Defense with respect to water resources; and
(6) the Secretary of Commerce with respect to all other materials, services, and facilities, including construction materials.
(b) The Secretary of each agency delegated authority under subsection (a) of this section (resource departments) shall plan for and issue regulations to prioritize and allocate resources and establish standards and procedures by which the authority shall be used to promote the national defense, under both emergency and non-emergency conditions. Each Secretary shall authorize the heads of other agencies, as appropriate, to place priority ratings on contracts and orders for materials, services, and facilities needed in support of programs approved under section 202 of this order.
(c) Each resource department shall act, as necessary and appropriate, upon requests for special priorities assistance, as defined by section 801(l) of this order, in a time frame consistent with the urgency of the need at hand. In situations where there are competing program requirements for limited resources, the resource department shall consult with the Secretary who made the required determination under section 202 of this order. Such Secretary shall coordinate with and identify for the resource department which program requirements to prioritize on the basis of operational urgency. In situations involving more than one Secretary making such a required determination under section 202 of this order, the Secretaries shall coordinate with and identify for the resource department which program requirements should receive priority on the basis of operational urgency.
(d) If agreement cannot be reached between two such Secretaries, then the issue shall be referred to the President through the Assistant to the President and National Security Advisor and the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism.
(e) The Secretary of each resource department, when necessary, shall make the finding required under section 101(b) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2071(b). This finding shall be submitted for the President's approval through the Assistant to the President and National Security Advisor and the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism. Upon such approval, the Secretary of the resource department that made the finding may use the authority of section 101(a) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2071(a), to control the general distribution of any material (including applicable services) in the civilian market.
Sec. 202. Determinations. Except as provided in section 201(e) of this order, the authority delegated by section 201 of this order may be used only to support programs that have been determined in writing as necessary or appropriate to promote the national defense:
(a) by the Secretary of Defense with respect to military production and construction, military assistance to foreign nations, military use of civil transportation, stockpiles managed by the Department of Defense, space, and directly related activities;
(b) by the Secretary of Energy with respect to energy production and construction, distribution and use, and directly related activities; and
(c) by the Secretary of Homeland Security with respect to all other national defense programs, including civil defense and continuity of Government.
Sec. 203. Maximizing Domestic Energy Supplies. The authorities of the President under section 101(c)(1) (2) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2071(c)(1) (2), are delegated to the Secretary of Commerce, with the exception that the authority to make findings that materials (including equipment), services, and facilities are critical and essential, as described in section 101(c)(2)(A) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2071(c)(2)(A), is delegated to the Secretary of Energy.
Sec. 204. Chemical and Biological Warfare. The authority of the President conferred by section 104(b) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2074(b), is delegated to the Secretary of Defense. This authority may not be further delegated by the Secretary.
PART III - EXPANSION OF PRODUCTIVE CAPACITY AND SUPPLY
Sec. 301. Loan Guarantees. (a) To reduce current or projected shortfalls of resources, critical technology items, or materials essential for the national defense, the head of each agency engaged in procurement for the national defense, as defined in section 801(h) of this order, is authorized pursuant to section 301 of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2091, to guarantee loans by private institutions.
(b) Each guaranteeing agency is designated and authorized to: (1) act as fiscal agent in the making of its own guarantee contracts and in otherwise carrying out the purposes of section 301 of the Act; and (2) contract with any Federal Reserve Bank to assist the agency in serving as fiscal agent.
(c) Terms and conditions of guarantees under this authority shall be determined in consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The guaranteeing agency is authorized, following such consultation, to prescribe: (1) either specifically or by maximum limits or otherwise, rates of interest, guarantee and commitment fees, and other charges which may be made in connection with such guarantee contracts; and (2) regulations governing the forms and procedures (which shall be uniform to the extent practicable) to be utilized in connection therewith.
Sec. 302. Loans. To reduce current or projected shortfalls of resources, critical technology items, or materials essential for the national defense, the head of each agency engaged in procurement for the national defense is delegated the authority of the President under section 302 of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2092, to make loans thereunder. Terms and conditions of loans under this authority shall be determined in consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury and the Director of OMB.
Sec. 303. Additional Authorities. (a) To create, maintain, protect, expand, or restore domestic industrial base capabilities essential for the national defense, the head of each agency engaged in procurement for the national defense is delegated the authority of the President under section 303 of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2093, to make provision for purchases of, or commitments to purchase, an industrial resource or a critical technology item for Government use or resale, and to make provision for the development of production capabilities, and for the increased use of emerging technologies in security program applications, and to enable rapid transition of emerging technologies.
(b) Materials acquired under section 303 of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2093, that exceed the needs of the programs under the Act may be transferred to the National Defense Stockpile, if, in the judgment of the Secretary of Defense as the National Defense Stockpile Manager, such transfers are in the public interest.
Sec. 304. Subsidy Payments. To ensure the supply of raw or nonprocessed materials from high cost sources, or to ensure maximum production or supply in any area at stable prices of any materials in light of a temporary increase in transportation cost, the head of each agency engaged in procurement for the national defense is delegated the authority of the President under section 303(c) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2093(c), to make subsidy payments, after consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury and the Director of OMB.
Sec. 305. Determinations and Findings. (a) Pursuant to budget authority provided by an appropriations act in advance for credit assistance under section 301 or 302 of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2091, 2092, and consistent with the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990, as amended (FCRA), 2 U.S.C. 661 et seq., the head of each agency engaged in procurement for the national defense is delegated the authority to make the determinations set forth in sections 301(a)(2) and 302(b)(2) of the Act, in consultation with the Secretary making the required determination under section 202 of this order; provided, that such determinations shall be made after due consideration of the provisions of OMB Circular A 129 and the credit subsidy score for the relevant loan or loan guarantee as approved by OMB pursuant to FCRA.
(b) Other than any determination by the President under section 303(a)(7)(b) of the Act, the head of each agency engaged in procurement for the national defense is delegated the authority to make the required determinations, judgments, certifications, findings, and notifications defined under section 303 of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2093, in consultation with the Secretary making the required determination under section 202 of this order.
Sec. 306. Strategic and Critical Materials. The Secretary of Defense, and the Secretary of the Interior in consultation with the Secretary of Defense as the National Defense Stockpile Manager, are each delegated the authority of the President under section 303(a)(1)(B) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2093(a)(1)(B), to encourage the exploration, development, and mining of strategic and critical materials and other materials.
Sec. 307. Substitutes. The head of each agency engaged in procurement for the national defense is delegated the authority of the President under section 303(g) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2093(g), to make provision for the development of substitutes for strategic and critical materials, critical components, critical technology items, and other resources to aid the national defense.
Sec. 308. Government-Owned Equipment. The head of each agency engaged in procurement for the national defense is delegated the authority of the President under section 303(e) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2093(e), to:
(a) procure and install additional equipment, facilities, processes, or improvements to plants, factories, and other industrial facilities owned by the Federal Government and to procure and install Government owned equipment in plants, factories, or other industrial facilities owned by private persons;
(b) provide for the modification or expansion of privately owned facilities, including the modification or improvement of production processes, when taking actions under sections 301, 302, or 303 of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2091, 2092, 2093; and
(c) sell or otherwise transfer equipment owned by the Federal Government and installed under section 303(e) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2093(e), to the owners of such plants, factories, or other industrial facilities.
Sec. 309. Defense Production Act Fund. The Secretary of Defense is designated the Defense Production Act Fund Manager, in accordance with section 304(f) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2094(f), and shall carry out the duties specified in section 304 of the Act, in consultation with the agency heads having approved, and appropriated funds for, projects under title III of the Act.
Sec. 310. Critical Items. The head of each agency engaged in procurement for the national defense is delegated the authority of the President under section 107(b)(1) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2077(b)(1), to take appropriate action to ensure that critical components, critical technology items, essential materials, and industrial resources are available from reliable sources when needed to meet defense requirements during peacetime, graduated mobilization, and national emergency. Appropriate action may include restricting contract solicitations to reliable sources, restricting contract solicitations to domestic sources (pursuant to statutory authority), stockpiling critical components, and developing substitutes for critical components or critical technology items.
Sec. 311. Strengthening Domestic Capability. The head of each agency engaged in procurement for the national defense is delegated the authority of the President under section 107(a) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2077(a), to utilize the authority of title III of the Act or any other provision of law to provide appropriate incentives to develop, maintain, modernize, restore, and expand the productive capacities of domestic sources for critical components, critical technology items, materials, and industrial resources essential for the execution of the national security strategy of the United States.
Sec. 312. Modernization of Equipment. The head of each agency engaged in procurement for the national defense, in accordance with section 108(b) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2078(b), may utilize the authority of title III of the Act to guarantee the purchase or lease of advance manufacturing equipment, and any related services with respect to any such equipment for purposes of the Act. In considering title III projects, the head of each agency engaged in procurement for the national defense shall provide a strong preference for proposals submitted by a small business supplier or subcontractor in accordance with section 108(b)(2) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2078(b)(2).
PART IV - VOLUNTARY AGREEMENTS AND ADVISORY COMMITTEES
Sec. 401. Delegations. The authority of the President under sections 708(c) and (d) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2158(c), (d), is delegated to the heads of agencies otherwise delegated authority under this order. The status of the use of such delegations shall be furnished to the Secretary of Homeland Security.
Sec. 402. Advisory Committees. The authority of the President under section 708(d) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2158(d), and delegated in section 401 of this order (relating to establishment of advisory committees) shall be exercised only after consultation with, and in accordance with, guidelines and procedures established by the Administrator of General Services.
Sec. 403. Regulations. The Secretary of Homeland Security, after approval of the Attorney General, and after consultation by the Attorney General with the Chairman of the Federal Trade Commission, shall promulgate rules pursuant to section 708(e) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2158(e), incorporating standards and procedures by which voluntary agreements and plans of action may be developed and carried out. Such rules may be adopted by other agencies to fulfill the rulemaking requirement of section 708(e) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2158(e).
PART V - EMPLOYMENT OF PERSONNEL
Sec. 501. National Defense Executive Reserve. (a) In accordance with section 710(e) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2160(e), there is established in the executive branch a National Defense Executive Reserve (NDER) composed of persons of recognized expertise from various segments of the private sector and from Government (except full time Federal employees) for training for employment in executive positions in the Federal Government in the event of a national defense emergency.
(b) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall issue necessary guidance for the NDER program, including appropriate guidance for establishment, recruitment, training, monitoring, and activation of NDER units and shall be responsible for the overall coordination of the NDER program. The authority of the President under section 710(e) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2160(e), to determine periods of national defense emergency is delegated to the Secretary of Homeland Security.
(c) The head of any agency may implement section 501(a) of this order with respect to NDER operations in such agency.
(d) The head of each agency with an NDER unit may exercise the authority under section 703 of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2153, to employ civilian personnel when activating all or a part of its NDER unit. The exercise of this authority shall be subject to the provisions of sections 501(e) and (f) of this order and shall not be redelegated.
(e) The head of an agency may activate an NDER unit, in whole or in part, upon the written determination of the Secretary of Homeland Security that an emergency affecting the national defense exists and that the activation of the unit is necessary to carry out the emergency program functions of the agency.
(f) Prior to activating the NDER unit, the head of the agency shall notify, in writing, the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism of the impending activation.
Sec. 502. Consultants. The head of each agency otherwise delegated functions under this order is delegated the authority of the President under sections 710(b) and (c) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2160(b), (c), to employ persons of outstanding experience and ability without compensation and to employ experts, consultants, or organizations. The authority delegated by this section may not be redelegated.
PART VI - LABOR REQUIREMENTS
Sec. 601. Secretary of Labor. (a) The Secretary of Labor, in coordination with the Secretary of Defense and the heads of other agencies, as deemed appropriate by the Secretary of Labor, shall:
(1) collect and maintain data necessary to make a continuing appraisal of the Nation's workforce needs for purposes of national defense;
(2) upon request by the Director of Selective Service, and in coordination with the Secretary of Defense, assist the Director of Selective Service in development of policies regulating the induction and deferment of persons for duty in the armed services;
(3) upon request from the head of an agency with authority under this order, consult with that agency with respect to: (i) the effect of contemplated actions on labor demand and utilization; (ii) the relation of labor demand to materials and facilities requirements; and (iii) such other matters as will assist in making the exercise of priority and allocations functions consistent with effective utilization and distribution of labor;
(4) upon request from the head of an agency with authority under this order: (i) formulate plans, programs, and policies for meeting the labor requirements of actions to be taken for national defense purposes; and (ii) estimate training needs to help address national defense requirements and promote necessary and appropriate training programs; and
(5) develop and implement an effective labor management relations policy to support the activities and programs under this order, with the cooperation of other agencies as deemed appropriate by the Secretary of Labor, including the National Labor Relations Board, the Federal Labor Relations Authority, the National Mediation Board, and the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service.
(b) All agencies shall cooperate with the Secretary of Labor, upon request, for the purposes of this section, to the extent permitted by law.
PART VII - DEFENSE PRODUCTION ACT COMMITTEE
Sec. 701. The Defense Production Act Committee. (a) The Defense Production Act Committee (Committee) shall be composed of the following members, in accordance with section 722(b) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2171(b):
(1) The Secretary of State;
(2) The Secretary of the Treasury;
(3) The Secretary of Defense;
(4) The Attorney General;
(5) The Secretary of the Interior;
(6) The Secretary of Agriculture
(7) The Secretary of Commerce;
(8) The Secretary of Labor;
(9) The Secretary of Health and Human Services;
(10) The Secretary of Transportation;
(11) The Secretary of Energy;
(12) The Secretary of Homeland Security;
(13) The Director of National Intelligence;
(14) The Director of the Central Intelligence Agency;
(15) The Chair of the Council of Economic Advisers;
(16) The Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration; and
(17) The Administrator of General Services.
(b) The Director of OMB and the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy shall be invited to participate in all Committee meetings and activities in an advisory role. The Chairperson, as designated by the President pursuant to section 722 of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2171, may invite the heads of other agencies or offices to participate in Committee meetings and activities in an advisory role, as appropriate.
Sec. 702. Offsets. The Secretary of Commerce shall prepare and submit to the Congress the annual report required by section 723 of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2172, in consultation with the Secretaries of State, the Treasury, Defense, and Labor, the United States Trade Representative, the Director of National Intelligence, and the heads of other agencies as appropriate. The heads of agencies shall provide the Secretary of Commerce with such information as may be necessary for the effective performance of this function.
PART VIII - GENERAL PROVISIONS
Sec. 801. Definitions. In addition to the definitions in section 702 of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2152, the following definitions apply throughout this order:
(a) "Civil transportation" includes movement of persons and property by all modes of transportation in interstate, intrastate, or foreign commerce within the United States, its territories and possessions, and the District of Columbia, and related public storage and warehousing, ports, services, equipment and facilities, such as transportation carrier shop and repair facilities. "Civil transportation" also shall include direction, control, and coordination of civil transportation capacity regardless of ownership. "Civil transportation" shall not include transportation owned or controlled by the Department of Defense, use of petroleum and gas pipelines, and coal slurry pipelines used only to supply energy production facilities directly.
(b) "Energy" means all forms of energy including petroleum, gas (both natural and manufactured), electricity, solid fuels (including all forms of coal, coke, coal chemicals, coal liquification, and coal gasification), solar, wind, other types of renewable energy, atomic energy, and the production, conservation, use, control, and distribution (including pipelines) of all of these forms of energy.
(c) "Farm equipment" means equipment, machinery, and repair parts manufactured for use on farms in connection with the production or preparation for market use of food resources.
(d) "Fertilizer" means any product or combination of products that contain one or more of the elements nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium for use as a plant nutrient.
(e) "Food resources" means all commodities and products, (simple, mixed, or compound), or complements to such commodities or products, that are capable of being ingested by either human beings or animals, irrespective of other uses to which such commodities or products may be put, at all stages of processing from the raw commodity to the products thereof in vendible form for human or animal consumption. "Food resources" also means potable water packaged in commercially marketable containers, all starches, sugars, vegetable and animal or marine fats and oils, seed, cotton, hemp, and flax fiber, but does not mean any such material after it loses its identity as an agricultural commodity or agricultural product.
(f) "Food resource facilities" means plants, machinery, vehicles (including on farm), and other facilities required for the production, processing, distribution, and storage (including cold storage) of food resources, and for the domestic distribution of farm equipment and fertilizer (excluding transportation thereof).
(g) "Functions" include powers, duties, authority, responsibilities, and discretion.
(h) "Head of each agency engaged in procurement for the national defense" means the heads of the Departments of State, Justice, the Interior, and Homeland Security, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, the Central Intelligence Agency, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the General Services Administration, and all other agencies with authority delegated under section 201 of this order.
(i) "Health resources" means drugs, biological products, medical devices, materials, facilities, health supplies, services and equipment required to diagnose, mitigate or prevent the impairment of, improve, treat, cure, or restore the physical or mental health conditions of the population.
(j) "National defense" means programs for military and energy production or construction, military or critical infrastructure assistance to any foreign nation, homeland security, stockpiling, space, and any directly related activity. Such term includes emergency preparedness activities conducted pursuant to title VI of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5195 et seq., and critical infrastructure protection and restoration.
(k) "Offsets" means compensation practices required as a condition of purchase in either government to government or commercial sales of defense articles and/or defense services as defined by the Arms Export Control Act, 22 U.S.C. 2751 et seq., and the International Traffic in Arms Regulations, 22 C.F.R. 120.1 130.17.
(l) "Special priorities assistance" means action by resource departments to assist with expediting deliveries, placing rated orders, locating suppliers, resolving production or delivery conflicts between various rated orders, addressing problems that arise in the fulfillment of a rated order or other action authorized by a delegated agency, and determining the validity of rated orders.
(m) "Strategic and critical materials" means materials (including energy) that (1) would be needed to supply the military, industrial, and essential civilian needs of the United States during a national emergency, and (2) are not found or produced in the United States in sufficient quantities to meet such need and are vulnerable to the termination or reduction of the availability of the material.
(n) "Water resources" means all usable water, from all sources, within the jurisdiction of the United States, that can be managed, controlled, and allocated to meet emergency requirements, except "water resources" does not include usable water that qualifies as "food resources."
Sec. 802. General. (a) Except as otherwise provided in section 802(c) of this order, the authorities vested in the President by title VII of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2151 et seq., are delegated to the head of each agency in carrying out the delegated authorities under the Act and this order, by the Secretary of Labor in carrying out part VI of this order, and by the Secretary of the Treasury in exercising the functions assigned in Executive Order 11858, as amended.
(b) The authorities that may be exercised and performed pursuant to section 802(a) of this order shall include:
(1) the power to redelegate authorities, and to authorize the successive redelegation of authorities to agencies, officers, and employees of the Government; and
(2) the power of subpoena under section 705 of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2155, with respect to (i) authorities delegated in parts II, III, and section 702 of this order, and (ii) the functions assigned to the Secretary of the Treasury in Executive Order 11858, as amended, provided that the subpoena power referenced in subsections (i) and (ii) shall be utilized only after the scope and purpose of the investigation, inspection, or inquiry to which the subpoena relates have been defined either by the appropriate officer identified in section 802(a) of this order or by such other person or persons as the officer shall designate.
(c) Excluded from the authorities delegated by section 802(a) of this order are authorities delegated by parts IV and V of this order, authorities in section 721 and 722 of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2170 2171, and the authority with respect to fixing compensation under section 703 of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2153.
Sec. 803. Authority. (a) Executive Order 12919 of June 3, 1994, and sections 401(3) (4) of Executive Order 12656 of November 18, 1988, are revoked. All other previously issued orders, regulations, rulings, certificates, directives, and other actions relating to any function affected by this order shall remain in effect except as they are inconsistent with this order or are subsequently amended or revoked under proper authority. Nothing in this order shall affect the validity or force of anything done under previous delegations or other assignment of authority under the Act.
(b) Nothing in this order shall affect the authorities assigned under Executive Order 11858 of May 7, 1975, as amended, except as provided in section 802 of this order.
(c) Nothing in this order shall affect the authorities assigned under Executive Order 12472 of April 3, 1984, as amended.
Sec. 804. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect functions of the Director of OMB relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.
(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.
(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.
BARACK OBAMA
THE WHITE HOUSE,
March 16, 2012.
*******
Also See:
Control the Food, Control the People!
(Part 1)
17 March 2009
http://arcticcompass.blogspot.com/2009/03/control-food-control-people.html
and
(Part 2)
09 April 2010
http://arcticcompass.blogspot.com/2010/04/control-food-control-people-part-2.html
and
(Part 3)
20 July 2011
http://arcticcompass.blogspot.com/2011/07/control-food-control-people-part-3.html
and
(Part 4)
04 November 2011
http://arcticcompass.blogspot.ca/2011/11/control-food-control-people-part-4.html
*******

Friday, March 16, 2012

Behind Closed Doors at Goldman Sachs!

*******
*******
Revealed: Toxic bank Goldman Sachs' web of global pals
The investment bank was rocked by the scathing resignation letter of executive Greg Smith, who accused colleagues of revelling in ripping off clients
By James Lyons
16 Mar 2012
The astonishing power, insidious influence and extensive reach of shamed Goldman Sachs is today revealed by the Mirror.
The toxic investment bank was this week rocked by the scathing resignation letter of executive Greg Smith, published in the New York Times, who accused colleagues of revelling in ripping off clients they deride as “Muppets”.
It wiped more than $2billion – almost £1.3billion – off the Wall Street giant’s share value yesterday.
But that didn’t stop David Cameron lunching with Goldman’s chief executive and chairman Lloyd Blankfein at a gathering of billionaire financiers and bank chiefs in New York yesterday.
Neither did the massive loss panic the self-styled Masters of the Universe at the firm – once likened to a “vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity”, which has tentacles everywhere.
They have been here before. Greg Smith’s letter is just the latest in a series of scandals to engulf the bank – none of which has halted the rise of its impeccably connected serving and former executives.
The eurozone crisis has seen Goldman “old boys” and their allies drafted in to head governments and the European Central Bank, after they judged elected politicians wanting in the battle to save the single currency.
Goldman Sachs has even been accused of helping create the debt crisis by helping Greece mask its shaky finances so that it could join the euro in the first place.
European Central Bank boss Mario Draghi, the man heading efforts to save the single currency, is a former high-ranking Goldman Sachs executive.
Fellow “technocrat” Mario Monti was a senior adviser to Goldman Sachs before taking over as Italian PM from Silvio Berlusconi.
And Greece’s debt chief Petros Christodoulou also worked for the bank in the UK and Canada from 1987.
Meanwhile Lucas Papademos, who was head of the Central Bank of Greece as it joined the euro, was installed as the country’s new Prime Minister in November.
Such appointments are the high water mark in the firm’s campaign to conquer Europe that began in 1986 when it opened an office in London after Margaret Thatcher deregulated the UK banking industry.
Now former Goldman executive Michael Hintze is a key backer of the Conservative Party.
The millionaire hedge fund baron has given at least £1.2million to the Tories, plus a further £2.5million in loans, since 2005.
He has also made personal donations and gifts to senior Cabinet ministers.
Former Goldman partner Sebastian Gregg is a confidant of the Prime Minister – they have known each other since their Eton schooldays and joined Oxford University’s infamous Bullingdon Club together.
Ex-Goldman chairman Richard Sharp was one of four City figures recruited by Chancellor George Osborne to “question the unquestionable” as part of the Treasury’s brutal austerity drive.
Even Samantha Cameron has links. She worked with executive Mike Sherwood after he led a consortium that bought stationers Smythson for £16million in 2005.
The tycoon, worth an estimated £225million, was at Westminster private school with Deputy Premier Nick Clegg and is seen as close to London Mayor Boris Johnson.
On the Labour side, donor Gavyn Davies was chief economist at the bank before quitting both the party and Goldman to work for the BBC.
His wife Sue Nye was Gordon Brown’s “gatekeeper” at the Treasury and No 10.
Goldman has rejected Greg Smith’s accusations – but his resignation letter has sparked fresh demands for

Mr Osborne to end the Government’s “cosy” relationship with the firm.
Goldman Sachs has a ‘licence to print money’ as one of an exclusive group of City firms granted privileged access to the Government bond market, worth £178.9billion this year.
Now Labour and Lib Dem MPs are demanding Goldman be stripped of its status as one of the Treasury’s hand-picked Gilt-Edged Market Makers.
Labour MP John Mann, of the Treasury select committee, said they should be “absolutely” thrown out of the
GEMMs circle.
Mr Mann said: “These cosy relationships are part of the problem with the banks. Goldman Sachs are making money out of the taxpayer through the profits they make on the bond sales.
They are feathering their nest and making Muppets of the Government.
“If they are ripping off customers why are they being given this special privilege? There is no good reason for it.”
Ex-Lib Dem Treasury spokesman Lord Oakeshott said: “We must sack Goldman from their insider track to £170billion a year in Government bond sales.”
A Downing Street spokesman said: “It would be inappropriate for me to comment on an individual business.”
The Brit lined up as next Goldman Sachs chief
*******
*******
Goldman Sachs could have its first British chief if Lloyd Blankfein leaves in the wake of the current crisis.
Bank “lifer” Michael Sherwood, 46, joined after graduating in economics from Manchester University in 1986.
Before that he attended the £9,000-a- year Westminister School. By the age of 28, he was said to have pulled in a bonus of around £3million.
Known by his nickname “Woody”, Mr Sherwood now heads up the bank’s UK arm.
He is said to have a formidable contacts book and helped Sir Philip Green when the Topshop tycoon bid for Marks & Spencer.
The stockily built, married dad of two – who enjoys playing table tennis – has a personal wealth estimated several years ago at £225million, making him one of Goldman’s “have and have yachts”.
He is a Spurs fan but, according to reports, was a director of Watford at the same time as Elton John.
In a rare interview which he gave in 2008, he said: “When I was a young guy it was like a game.
"Now I’m older I feel very responsible for our people, their families and their livelihoods.
In another, he said: “I never thought we were swashbuckling. Goldman Sachs trades in a measured way.”
Who's who of the global pals
*******
Lucas Papademos, 65
Took over as Greek PM last year. He previously had a top job at the European Central Bank and helped get Greece into the euro
*******
Michael Hintze, 58
Billionaire hedge fund boss and big Tory donor. He worked at Goldman Sachs between 1984 and 1996 in a number of senior roles.
*******
Mario Monti , 68
Now Prime Minister of Italy, 68-year-old Mario Monti was an international adviser to Goldman Sachs from 2005 until 2011.
*******
Mario Draghi, 64
President of the European Central Bank. He was the vice chairman for Europe at Goldman Sachs International from 2002 to 2005.
*******
Samantha Cameron, 40
PM David Cameron’s wife worked for Goldman Sachs executive Mike Sherwood after he led a buyout consortium in 2005.
*******
Gavyn Davies, 61
He was head of global economics at Goldman Sachs from 1986 to 2001. The former chief UK economist is now in the City.
*******
Goldman’s response to employee rant ‘too little too late’: clients
By Sinead Cruise, Reuters
Mar 16, 2012
LONDON — Joining a growing chorus of criticism, one of Europe’s largest asset managers lashed out at Goldman Sachs Group Inc for not communicating quickly enough with clients after ex-banker Greg Smith publicly condemned the way the bank treats clients.
APG, a Dutch investment advisor that runs 300 billion euros of assets for more than 4.5 million people in the Netherlands, said it was surprised it took the Wall Street bank more than a day to offer APG any reassurance on points raised in Greg Smith’s resignation letter.
“We would have expected that a company that faces such a big media backlash over something so core to their business such as client trust would have instantly reached out to those clients to say something,” APG spokesman Harmen Geers told Reuters.
Smith’s scathing remarks, published in the New York Times on Wednesday, have prompted an outpouring of criticism, ridicule – and defence – of Goldman, the storied Wall Street firm that has become a lightning rod for anti-bank sentiment.
After the piece appeared, Goldman Chief Executive Lloyd Blankfein and Chief Operating Officer Gary Cohn issued a memo to staff describing the views and observations of the former vice president as “foreign” to most of his 12,000 peers.
Blankfein also sent Goldman Sachs employees a voicemail on Wednesday urging them to reach out to clients and saying they had support from CEOs all over the world, a person familiar with the situation said.
On the voicemail, Blankfein read out two examples of support from clients, the source added.
Geers said the bank contacted APG late on Thursday offering a copy of the staff memo and telephone explanation of its message, a gesture he described as “too little, too late.”
Goldman Sachs made no immediate comment when asked how it was communicating with clients.
Support for Goldman
While the criticism has sparked numerous “me too” responses, at least one client using Goldman’s investment banking advisory services said it respected the firm’s knowledge and experience.
“We’ve had a love-hate relationship with Goldman for a number of years,” United Technologies Corp Chief Financial Officer Greg Hayes told reporters in New York on Thursday.
“For us it’s about what these banks bring to the table. I think Goldman has the intellectual capital, they’ve got the know-how to do these transactions. There’s other banks out there, but Goldman is still the preeminent investment bank and they give solid advice.”
The diversified U.S. manufacturer has hired Goldman to sell some of the industrial units of its Hamilton Sundstrand arm.
Hayes said Smith’s resignation letter would not change his opinion of the firm.
“There’s bad apples and there’s bad actors at every one of these companies. Banks have a bad reputation anyway,” Hayes said. “But I think Goldman can add value.”
Yet, Goldman recently drew criticism from a prominent Delaware judge for serving as both an advisor to and beneficiary of El Paso Corp’s $23 billion sale to Kinder Morgan.
And among investment managers, faith in Goldman’s reputation appeared more tattered.
“One of the more important messages (Smith) gave was the need for the bank to refocus attention on clients and attend more closely to their needs … but even now, Goldman, as well as some media, seem to be overlooking that,” Geers of APG said.
The lack of quick, direct communication with APG underlined how much work Goldman needs to do to prove it puts its customers first, the Dutch group said.
“I have seen the internal memo from Goldman to its employees which says ‘we all know this isn’t true,’ but perception is reality and a service provider lives or dies by whether they have happy clients,” Geers said.
“What about trying to re-win trust?” he said. “Goldman’s clients are now being forced to explain to their clients why they are doing business with Goldman. We are now obliged to answer questions because of their company culture. From the bank’s point of view, that is very bad.”
Goldman has bounced back from several dents to its image in recent years, but industry insiders say the unprecedented attack from a former employee could start to push much larger volumes of prospective business to rivals. And it stirred a wide range of reactions.
Jamie Dimon, CEO of rival bank JPMorgan Chase & Co, cautioned employees against trying to “seek advantage from a competitor’s alleged issues.”
Impact on Bank Reforms?
At least one wasted no time in saying it put clients first. “In my experience … client success and firm success can peacefully coexist; in fact thrive,” Harris Private Bank Chief Investment Officer Jack Ablin said in an open letter. He oversees $60 billion of investments for individuals and families.
Congressman Barney Frank, an architect of the 2010 Dodd-Frank financial reform law, said Smith’s piece would have “a big impact” on the banking industry’s efforts to push back against financial reform.
“It puts the burden on Goldman Sachs and others to show us how what they do benefits the clients and therefore the broader economy,” he told Reuters.
One London-based former hedge fund client of the bank, who declined to be named, said some asset managers and family offices were thinking twice about doing business with the bank before Greg Smith’s remarks.
“We took them off our system some months back … I used to know a few guys there, there were a few good ones in that bunch and I have noticed that just about all of them have left in the last year,” the manager said.
“They used to tell me that they loved the firm; that it looked after its people and that it had a really good ‘code.’ And now those people are leaving, so it reflects what (Smith) is saying.”
Goldman shares ended 2.2% higher on Thursday amid gains for the broader banking sector.
*******
In Visit, Bloomberg Defends Goldman Sachs
By Michael M. Grynbaum
March 16, 2012
Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg thinks Goldman Sachs could use a friend.
The billionaire mayor, who earned his fortune on Wall Street and has a reputation as a staunch defender of corporate culture, dropped by the investment bank’s Manhattan headquarters on Thursday in an unannounced show of solidarity that included handshakes on the trading floor and burgers with the chief executive.
Mr. Bloomberg’s visit, first disclosed on Thursday by the mayor’s eponymous news agency, came as Goldman struggled to cope with an onslaught of negative publicity after a former executive’s scathing Op-Ed article in The New York Times that accused the firm of wanton greed and excess.
Executives at Goldman issued a fierce rejoinder to the Op-Ed on Thursday, circulating a memorandum that defended the company’s devotion to its clients and corporate ethics. The author of the Op-Ed, a 33-year-old executive named Greg Smith, resigned on Wednesday from his post in the firm’s London office and has not commented beyond his piece.
During his weekly radio interview on Friday morning, Mr. Bloomberg castigated the news media for “piling on” the global bank, saying “ridiculous isn’t even the right word” to describe the coverage. And the mayor said he initiated the visit as a way to stand by a company that he considers a critical contributor to the city’s economy.
“It’s my job to stand up and support companies that are here in this city that bring us a tax base and that employ our people, and I’m going to do that,” Mr. Bloomberg told John Gambling, his regular interlocutor.
“I’ve never worked at Goldman, but there’s an awful lot of people there that work very hard,” the mayor said. “Goldman Sachs is a firm that’s been around for well over a hundred years, and it’s a great firm, and the people that work there are happy.”
Not every New York politician, however, shares Mr. Bloomberg’s sympathetic impulse. Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo, asked about the Goldman fracas in an interview on Thursday, conceded he had not yet read Mr. Smith’s Op-Ed. But, he said, “If you accept at face value everything he said, it’s clearly disturbing on many levels, to the extent it’s personal to Goldman Sachs, but then just as a commentary on the industry.”
“Any employee can write a letter, so I just don’t know enough,” Mr. Cuomo added.
Mr. Bloomberg moved to New York in the 1960s to work at Salomon Brothers, the now-defunct investment firm, and his Bloomberg financial terminals are now required hardware for professional financiers. (Goldman, for instance, leases thousands of the machines.)
On his Friday radio show, Mr. Bloomberg appeared particularly aggrieved by the idea of a former employee lashing out at a former firm, behavior that is considered sacrilege in the financial industry.
“You know, you go to work for a company, it seems to me, they have an obligation to never diss you,” the mayor said. “They can part company with you, but they should never do that, nor should an employee ever walk away after being there for so long.”
Mr. Bloomberg has little sympathy for employees who leave a corporation, even if they keep their grievances to themselves. In his 1997 autobiography, “Bloomberg by Bloomberg,” he wrote of his distaste for “going away” parties for departing colleagues.
“When someone departs, those of us who stay are hurt,” Mr. Bloomberg wrote. “They’ve become bad people. Period. We have a loyalty to us. Leave, and you’re them.”
*******
Goldman Insider Exposes Struggle for Jewish Soul
by Henry Makow
March 15, 2012
http://www.henrymakow.com/goldman_sachs.html
Greg Smith, an Executive Director of Goldman Sachs in London, quit publicly Thursday due to the firm's culture of "ripping off" their own clients.
"Today, if you make enough money for the firm (and are not currently an ax murderer) you will be promoted into a position of influence."
Goldman Sachs, a part-owner of the Federal Reserve, played a key role in the 2008 credit crunch. This letter shows nothing has changed. In fact, things are worse. The bank is still marketing questionable products no matter the consequences to clients or society.
The letter also illustrates that there are two kinds of Jews: those who have a strong moral sense and those who have none. Put another way, some Jews believe in serving the world, and others believe in exploiting it.
Greg Smith, 33, is a Jew who demands the bank " Weed out the morally bankrupt people, no matter how much money they make for the firm." He blames CEO, Lloyd C. Blankfein, and the President, Gary D. Cohn, for despoiling the firm's culture.
We need more people like Smith who are willing to stand up for what's right despite career consequences. Here is a slightly abridged version of Smith's letter:
By Greg Smith
New York Times
TODAY is my last day at Goldman Sachs. After almost 12 years at the firm -- first as a summer intern while at Stanford, then in New York for 10 years, and now in London -- I believe I have worked here long enough to understand the trajectory of its culture, its people and its identity. And I can honestly say that the environment now is as toxic and destructive as I have ever seen it.
To put the problem in the simplest terms, the interests of the client continue to be sidelined in the way the firm operates and thinks about making money. Goldman Sachs is one of the world's largest and most important investment banks and it is too integral to global finance to continue to act this way. The firm has veered so far from the place I joined right out of college that I can no longer in good conscience say that I identify with what it stands for.
It might sound surprising to a skeptical public, but culture was always a vital part of Goldman Sachs's success. It revolved around teamwork, integrity, a spirit of humility, and always doing right by our clients. The culture was the secret sauce that made this place great and allowed us to earn our clients' trust for 143 years. It wasn't just about making money; this alone will not sustain a firm for so long. It had something to do with pride and belief in the organization. I am sad to say that I look around today and see virtually no trace of the culture that made me love working for this firm for many years. I no longer have the pride, or the belief.... When the history books are written about Goldman Sachs, they may reflect that the current chief executive officer, Lloyd C. Blankfein, (right) and the president, Gary D. Cohn, lost hold of the firm's culture on their watch. I truly believe that this decline in the firm's moral fiber represents the single most serious threat to its long-run survival.
Over the course of my career I have had the privilege of advising two of the largest hedge funds on the planet, five of the largest asset managers in the United States, and three of the most prominent sovereign wealth funds in the Middle East and Asia. My clients have a total asset base of more than a trillion dollars. I have always taken a lot of pride in advising my clients to do what I believe is right for them, even if it means less money for the firm. This view is becoming increasingly unpopular at Goldman Sachs. Another sign that it was time to leave.
"Ripping Off Clients"
How did we get here? The firm changed the way it thought about leadership. Leadership used to be about ideas, setting an example and doing the right thing. Today, if you make enough money for the firm (and are not currently an ax murderer) you will be promoted into a position of influence.
(Left. Gary Cohn, President. These guys all look alike!)
What are three quick ways to become a leader?
a) Execute on the firm's "axes," which is Goldman-speak for persuading your clients to invest in the stocks or other products that we are trying to get rid of because they are not seen as having a lot of potential profit.
b) "Hunt Elephants." In English: get your clients -- some of whom are sophisticated, and some of whom aren't -- to trade whatever will bring the biggest profit to Goldman. Call me old-fashioned, but I don't like selling my clients a product that is wrong for them.
c) Find yourself sitting in a seat where your job is to trade any illiquid, opaque product with a three-letter acronym.
Today, many of these leaders display a Goldman Sachs culture quotient of exactly zero percent. I attend derivatives sales meetings where not one single minute is spent asking questions about how we can help clients. It's purely about how we can make the most possible money off of them...
It makes me ill how callously people talk about ripping their clients off. Over the last 12 months I have seen five different managing directors refer to their own clients as "muppets," sometimes over internal e-mail.
Even after the S.E.C., Fabulous Fab, Abacus, God's work, Carl Levin, Vampire Squids?[References to criticism of GS's role in credit crisis. -hm] No humility? I mean, come on. Integrity? It is eroding. I don't know of any illegal behavior, but will people push the envelope and pitch lucrative and complicated products to clients even if they are not the simplest investments or the ones most directly aligned with the client's goals? Absolutely. Every day, in fact.
It astounds me how little senior management gets a basic truth: If clients don't trust you they will eventually stop doing business with you. It doesn't matter how smart you are.
Derivatives
These days, the most common question I get from junior analysts about derivatives is, "How much money did we make off the client?" It bothers me every time I hear it, because it is a clear reflection of what they are observing from their leaders about the way they should behave. Now project 10 years into the future: You don't have to be a rocket scientist to figure out that the junior analyst sitting quietly in the corner of the room hearing about "muppets," "ripping eyeballs out" and "getting paid" doesn't exactly turn into a model citizen.
When I was a first-year analyst I didn't know where the bathroom was, or how to tie my shoelaces. I was taught to be concerned with learning the ropes, finding out what a derivative was, understanding finance, getting to know our clients and what motivated them, learning how they defined success and what we could do to help them get there.
My proudest moments in life -- getting a full scholarship to go from South Africa to Stanford University, being selected as a Rhodes Scholar national finalist, winning a bronze medal for table tennis at the Maccabiah Games in Israel, known as the Jewish Olympics -- have all come through hard work, with no shortcuts. Goldman Sachs today has become too much about shortcuts and not enough about achievement. It just doesn't feel right to me anymore.
I hope this can be a wake-up call to the board of directors. Make the client the focal point of your business again. Without clients you will not make money. In fact, you will not exist.
Weed out the morally bankrupt people, no matter how much money they make for the firm. And get the culture right again, so people want to work here for the right reasons. People who care only about making money will not sustain this firm -- or the trust of its clients -- for very much longer.
Greg Smith is resigning today as a Goldman Sachs executive director and head of the firm's United States equity derivatives business in Europe, the Middle East and Africa.
*******
Greg Smith had 'high principles,' ex-teacher says
By Reuters
JOHANNESBURG, South Africa -- Greg Smith was a principled and competitive student, the kind of person whose strong sense of right and wrong probably pushed him to resign from Goldman Sachs in a scathing letter to an international newspaper, his former teacher and coach said.
A quiet, unassuming child, the South African first attended the private Jewish King David's High School in suburban Johannesburg before winning a scholarship to Stanford University in the United States.
Smith then joined Goldman Sachs, a workplace he once loved but described in his resignation letter in The New York Times on Wednesday as having developed an environment "as toxic and destructive as I have ever seen it".
"He was a remarkable young man, exceptionally intelligent with an integrity that is probably unequalled," Elliot Wolf, the school's retired headmaster, told Reuters in an interview.
"An absolutely remarkable man with high principles. He was an asset to the school in every possible way."
Wolf, who is now retired after 34 years at the school including 28 as headmaster, said he remembered Smith well from teaching him Latin and that he was loved by all because he was polite, unassuming and decent.
The Goldman Sachs banker sat a total of eight exams in his final year of secondary school in 1996, winning a distinction in every subject, Wolf said. According to school records, Smith's subjects included math, advanced math, Hebrew, English, Afrikaans and accounting.
"He was a wonderful young man with the highest principles. That was already part of his character when he was very, very young," Wolf said.
Goldman Sachs resignation letter an Internet sensation
He said he was amazed Smith would take such a stand, suggesting others would probably bend their ethics to suit a company that was rewarding them handsomely.
Smith, who worked in equity derivatives, said it had made him ill at Goldman to hear his colleagues joke about cheating clients.
"Over the last 12 months I have seen five different managing directors refer to their own clients as 'muppets'," Smith said.
In Britain, "muppet" is slang for a stupid person.
'Always did what was right'
Wolf also recalled Smith as a skilled table tennis player. Smith, in his 30s, said in his letter one of the
proudest moments of his life was winning the bronze medal at the Maccabiah Games in Israel for table tennis.
Rainer Sztab, chair of the Gauteng Maccabi Table Tennis Club, where Smith played in South Africa regularly in the 1990s when he was a teenager, remembered him as an "outstanding kid".
"He was a stand-up kid, he always did what was right," Sztab told Reuters, saying Smith twice played for the South African Maccabi team at the Maccabiah Games in Israel, as a junior in 1993 and as a senior in 1997.
But he said Smith was never a member of the South African national table tennis team, contrary to what was stated in his Goldman Sachs biography.
Sztab said Smith was "very bright and really well-liked and behaved".
Wall Street's toxic culture is alive and well, observers say
"He was very competitive. He was just starting to get the edge on the top players in Gauteng province," he added.
Sztab said he was not surprised by the manner of Smith's dramatic public resignation from Goldman Sachs. "He did well to come from South Africa to become a Wall Street banker."
He said Smith had called him two years ago to say hello while on a visit to South Africa.
"He said it was going great."
*******