I'm totally unqualified to comment on the validity or urgency of that article, although I haven't the slightest doubt in my mind that economic warfare does occur.

I'm just happy that at least someone is paid to look these things over and try to present an evaluation of what is going on. Or at least, it appears that in summer of 2009 someone was actually doing that. In the laissez-faire environment of the Bush administration, it's unlikely that this sort of activity would have received much interest.

The Obama administration‘s recent
call for greater financial regulation stipulates to the facts that hedge fund activity has been virtually unregulated and that dark-pool trading, Credit Default Swaps, and naked short selling provide tremendous vulnerabilities in the system. This report concurs with these concerns as recently outlined by the heads of the SEC, US Treasury, and Federal Reserve and provides supporting data. Beyond that, this report exposes the fact that these vulnerabilities are subject to exploitation not only by greedy capitalists seeking profit but also by financial terrorists, intent on destroying the American financial system.

...

It should be noted that the Obama administration has very recently acknowledged the serious gaps in the regulatory framework that have left the American financial system vulnerable. These gaps include virtually no oversight of dark trading pools, credit default swaps, hedge funds, and naked short selling. There should be no doubt that these gaps were exploited and this, at a minimum hindered financial system stability (and possibly triggered the entire crisis). While calls to address these gaps are essential, without knowing who exploited them and why, the system will remain vulnerable through currently unidentified mechanisms.

Let's hope that someone with enough expertise to critically evaluate this monograph effectively either dismissed it as irrelevant, or made sure it made it to the President's desk if it was indeed relevant.

The question still remains, is this report genuine? That is, is it a real report written by a real contractor? In other words, was this ever actually read by someone in the White House, or is it document prepared for other purposes, and for a different audience, and for totally different motives. I'm not qualified to determine that myself, but I must confess it reads like a certain type of science-fiction story classified as being in the "report-to-the Commission" sub-genre.