samix wrote:
Earl wrote:
No, it doesn't taste like chicken,
Earl

Yes Earl, it tastes exactly like a cockroach should. Slimy and crisp. LOL



Well, it's at least somewhat comforting to know we don't have to worry about being fed "cockroach steaks"...

There is still certainly a place for discussing the changes which should be made to our economies/governments/societies. At the very least, such discussions make newer readers aware that there ARE positive options instead of the cycle of self-destruction initiated by our Traitor Governments.

At the same time, (IMO) it's essential for us to separate such discussions from the more practically-oriented dialogues on which changes MUST come first. And returning to a gold standard is an excellent example of how/where we must "draw the line" here.

Among the many points I've gotten out of the "Money Masters" clip posted by Debsyl (and I'm still not 1/3rd through - lol) is that in a thoroughly corrupt system even a gold standard is no panacea against financial crime and a predatory monetary system.

The English government used a gold standard to cripple the American Colonies, which ultimately precipitated Revolution. So clearly our top priority (ahead of financial reform specifically) is to "clean up the system."

But (as I also recently pointed out); it's literally impossible to even reduce the level of corruption in our System as long as you have a world full of mega-corporations who can "buy" all of our politicians...out of their "petty cash" drawer.

So this is why in almost any discussion, at some point you will hear my familiar refrain:

Smash all the monopolies and oligopolies into little pieces.

Think of it as a 21st century replacement for "Amen."

agau121 wrote:
Jeff Nielson wrote:
More complete insanity from Bloomberg, and we're still in the same day here. What's the latest news? Because of all the terrible U.S. economic news; the Fed may begin its long-promised "exit strategy."





Hmmm...black is white, up is down, hot is cold, war is peace, freedom is slavery. What used to be the disease (not enough money printing) is now the cure--at least this week. Possibly next week, or shortly thereafter, history will be rewritten, and money printing will once again be the cure. Quoting the party from 1984: "We've always been at war with Eastasia."


Of course we've already devolved below that cliche. We're past the point of examples like...

We've always been at war with Eastasia.

Today, with our super-charged propaganda machine, it's even more generic:

We've always been at war with ________________.

...and the Oligarchs (and their propaganda machine) simply insert new names into the "blank" with complete impunity. Put another way, most of our "new, mortal enemies" were usually previous "close friends."

When I posted my thoughts on evil Bankster, Jeffrey Sachs; naturally I was borrowing the phrase "economic hit-man" from his own lexicon. However, ironically, I've never read the book myself.

I was considering remedying that deficiency (lol), but at the least I'll make sure I squeeze in time over the weekend to listen to the interview. More detail is usually helpful in increasing clarity.

agau121 wrote:
Jeff Nielson wrote:
Still (throwing out yet more cliches - lol), Rome wasn't built in a day, and you have to crawl before you can walk (let alone run). Hopefully one day it won't be a shocking headline to read "Banker Arrested"...



To this I will add my own cliche: A journey of 1,000 miles begins with a single step.

Fortunately for Mr. Blesa, the former chairman of the bank in question, he had the 2.5 million euros needed to post bail and was able to return to a more desirable housing situation than the gated community where he spent last night. Had his crime been something less serious such as small-time pot dealing, he most likely would still be living in that gated community and wearing far less desirable clothing.



Sadly, this comes in the context of a different news item I saw a couple of months back (not sure if I posted it). In that article, a South American government was being sued for daring to even arrest a banker -- successfully sued by the banker they tried to arrest.

In much of the world there is no such thing as "financial crime"; but it is a 'crime' to attempt to stop the Criminals from committing more crimes.

You could sense even the smug Liars at Bloomberg shaking in their boots ever so slightly while reporting this: a (criminal) banker actually arrested for committing crimes.



Images such as pigs flying, blue Moons, or Hell freezing-over immediately come to mind. Of course it's one thing to merely arrest one of these predators, and quite another to actually lock one up (and throw away the key) as these Career Criminals so richly deserve.

Still (throwing out yet more cliches - lol), Rome wasn't built in a day, and you have to crawl before you can walk (let alone run). Hopefully one day it won't be a shocking headline to read "Banker Arrested"...




Banker in Jail Suggests Spain Is Calling Lenders to Account

www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-05-17/first-...ders-to-account.html

The sight of Miguel Blesa, the former chairman of Caja Madrid, being driven to jail in a police van suggests Spain may be calling bankers to account after the nation needed European Union funds to bail out lenders.

Judge Elpidio-Jose Silva jailed Blesa yesterday while he investigates the circumstances around a U.S. bank purchase in 2008. Television images last night showed Blesa, 65, being driven into the 1,008-cell Soto del Real jail outside Madrid. He was released today after posting bail of 2.5 million euros ($3.2 million), a court spokesman said by telephone...

agau121 wrote:
...Mr. Stan Jonas of Axiom Management Partners in New York, seemed to me to be engaging in the time-tested propaganda method of name calling as a way to manipulate the sheep into helping further reinflate the real estate bubble already in progress. www.propagandacritic.com/articles/ct.wg.name.html


D'oh!



I wish you had ended your reply just a couple of sentences sooner (lol). Obviously in "nominating" Mr. Jonas for Idiot of the Year I was doing exactly the same thing. At this point I have only one refuge: pointing out that when I did exactly the same thing that I was being "intentionally ironic." Hopefully that line holds up...

agau121 wrote:
Just over a week ago (before I headed off for a backpacking trip), I encouraged other BBC members to consider reading The Complete Sherlock Holmes (or at least reading a few of the short stories as a way of "sticking your toe in the water"). I have found the activity to be somewhat addictive, although benignly so, and certainly instructive.

Just before I left for my recent backpacking trip, I ordered a used copy of the software program Chessmaster 9000 (from an Amazon seller) which allows you to play chess against your computer (originally designed for Windows XP but also compatible with Windows 7). Since returning I have installed it and have been working through the tutorials. I have found these tutorials to be both instructive and enjoyable, more enjoyable in fact that I had expected. Soon I will start playing full games against the computer. Already, however, just by doing the tutorials and exercises, I can see that the activity of playing chess will very likely be, at least for me, just the sort of brain training activity that Jeff presented it to be because it involves pure strategy and requires you to both consider all options before you make a move and to think several steps ahead. In other words, it requires dynamic analysis as opposed to static analysis.

Often the practice of meditation (Buddhist or otherwise) is spoken of as a laboratory for handling the real life challenges of constant change and impermanence. So far my experience of playing chess (even against a computer) seems to be like a laboratory for developing the ability to engage in dynamic analysis. Granted, I'm just in the beginning stages, but I can already see the potential this activity offers. I would strongly encourage other BBC members to consider playing chess as a way to develop these skills as Jeff has suggested. If necessary, you can begin as I have done, by playing against your computer.


Ironically, my own "discovery process" which led me to (finally) understand how the mind functioned as a muscle was when I returned to the gym in my late thirties for training/rehabilitation.

I had entertained the casual hypothesis of "mind as a muscle" for many years. But it was while working out (and with not a lot to occupy one's thoughts - lol); that I began exploring the concept more rigorously.

Part of the understanding came with understanding the totally bifurcated manner in which our minds operate.

Our conscious minds are little more than sensory "interfaces". The "skill" of our conscious minds lies in the ability to rapidly process sensory input...and that's pretty much it.



In no way am I denigrating the conscious, human mind. The capacity to rapidly process sensory input from (at least) five "senses" is no small feat! But virtually all of our skill/expertise (in all mental or physical activities) is possessed by our sub-conscious mind -- the real "mental muscle".

How do you train the subconsious? Lots and lots of REPETITION. How do we train our bodies physically? Lots and lots of repetition. Irrespective of whether you want to get stronger or physically better in performing an activity; it's all about repetition.

Once that parallel was firmly established; in my mind any debate ended. Our minds are muscles.

samix wrote:
Michael Sheehan, assistant secretary of Defense in charge of special operations, said America's battle with terrorist groups spanned the globe "from Boston to the FATA," meaning Pakistan's tribal areas.

...

Sheehan and the Pentagon's top lawyers told the Senate Armed Services Committee that the military was authorized to target Al Qaeda operatives in countries where drone strikes don't now occur, including Mali, Syria and anywhere a host government is "unwilling or unable" to prevent Al Qaeda-linked terrorists from operating on its territory.

Which means that the US has effectively declared war against any country that is "unwilling or unable" to prevent Al Qaeda-linked terrorists from operating on its territory., which means that the rebels fighting and trying to topple Bashar Al Assad are going to be targeted sooner or later.

www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/l...0517,0,1474090.story


Obviously U.S. Neo-cons are eager for the U.S. to displace Israel as the world's most murderous regime. Israel's assassins only operate regionally. With most of those U.S. Neo-cons of Jewish descent; clearly Israel has DELEGATED the rest of its "hit list"...

Earl wrote:
Funny, how certain things hit you when your reading something.
Thank You
Earl

Jeff stated,

And someone else also noted that Syria is the only Russi-friendly nation giving it port access in the Mediterranean. I'm not enough of a military specialist to know whether this is really seen as having much significance.

Russian Pacific Fleet Warships Enter Mediterranean

en.rian.ru/military_news/20130516/181177...r-Mediterranean.html

VLADIVOSTOK, May 16 (RIA Novosti) - A group of warships from Russia’s Pacific Fleet entered the Mediterranean waters for the first time in decades, a fleet spokesman said on Thursday

“The task force has successfully passed through the Suez Channel and entered the Mediterranean. It is the first time in decades that Pacific Fleet warships enter this region,” Capt. First Rank Roman Martov said.

The vessels are now en route to Cyprus and are scheduled to make a port call in Limassol...




Indeed Earl, we very clearly have a "clue" as to how geopolitically important the Russians view their presence/access in Syria.

...the task force has successfully passed through the [Western-controlled] Suez Canal...

Would that Russian fleet have even attempted to pass through the Suez Canal "for the first time in DECADES" if they didn't have a friendly port nearby? If they had made such an attempt, would it have been "successful"?

Certainly reading this piece it would have been very easy to either believe that the Cold War never ended...or that we had stumbled upon an old article from a generation ago. This does not sound like a Russian government eager to simply HAND (what's left of) Syria to the West.

samix wrote:
debsyl wrote:
Your and my sin is a great injustice against God. He has the right to demand perfection from us, and none of us have lived perfectly. Everyone of us have sinned against God and our neighbors. And so, this leaves us in a position far more like the murderers than we would naturally like to admit. Like them, we need God to have mercy on us because He has punished Jesus for our sins. The offer of the gospel is the only way of escape from the wrath of God. If you will not have Jesus Christ's payment for your sins, you will pay everlastingly.

And those who disbelieve say to those who believe, "Follow our way, and we will carry your sins." But they will not carry anything of their sins. Indeed, they are liars.
- Quran 29:12


Yes Samix, at the risk of provoking a Religious War myself (lol); I would suggest that the world's religions have much, much more in common than they have differences. It seems to be only (some of) the LEADERS of these religions who are permanently obsessed with highlighting only the differences.

Even as a generally agnostic individual; I would hazard the opinion that the world would be a much better place if we had a lot more RELIGION...but far fewer PRIESTS.

It's Friday May 17th, and an early edition of The Grind today. The price-action is very choppy today, so with the price of gold currently around $1360/oz and the price of silver around $22.25; those numbers could still change by a percent or two between now and the close of markets.

As with what we saw yesterday, there is more-or-less open trading taking place at the moment: paper-holders dumping their worthless paper-gold as fast as they can, while longs step-up to clean-out Comex inventories.

However, with the paper-liquidation exceeding that long-buying by roughly a 5:1 margin; obviously the trend in prices will remain steadily lower as long as this pattern remains. Indeed, with no sign at all of this (paper) selling-pressure easing; there is a distinct possibility that any/all "rallies" we have seen in the prices since the Gold Smash took place were the Banksters themselves propping-up prices.

At the same time, the propaganda has now become so tortuous as to be literally schizophrenic. Observe the mind-numbing insanity contained in this single paragraph from Bloomberg:

...Demand in India and China, the two biggest gold consumers, surged after prices slumped. The U.S. Mint, which said April 23 it ran out of its smallest gold coins, sold 42,000 ounces of American Eagle bullion coins so far in May, compared with 209,500 ounces in April, its website shows. Prices may fall to $1,100 in a year as the metal “is going to get crushed,” Ric Deverell, head of commodities research at Credit Suisse Group AG, told reporters in London yesterday.

Gold-demand is surging all over the world...and so "the metal is going to get crushed." There was not even the slightest attempt made to disguise this oxymoron: rabid demand is going to "cause" prices to plummet. This is like claiming that turning on the heat in summer will "cause" one's house to cool.



But note what the real issue is here. If Bloomberg (and the rest of the propaganda machine) can't even be bothered to try to make their propaganda sound like it makes sense; what does that tell us about how BRAIN-DEAD the Sheep are right now...?

When a propaganda machine simply starts telling people that "black is white", "up is down", and "hot is cold" without any effort to actually conceal the propaganda; this indicates a population with ZERO brain-wave activity: totally passive Drones who accept whatever they are told.

For those who think I'm over-dramatizing here; observe this post from earlier this morning:

U.S. economy: Bloomberg in Wonderland

After several consecutive days of reporting TERRIBLE economic data; what do we get today from Bloomberg today? A "prediction" of two years of "even better growth". This like a parody of "1984".



People wonder how the German people could have been led (by a few) to do such horrible things, in such large numbers. After all, there is nothing "inherently evil" about the German people.

We no longer have to wonder how that occurred. We can see it for ourselves: Drones believe whatever they are told to believe, do whatever they are told to do...and never, ever think.

Understand that mass, cultural insanity can occur even without some malevolent force directing it via propaganda. Five hundred years ago we had "Tulipmania" in Holland; where (at the peak of insanity) one could literally buy a home with a single, prized tulip-bulb.

The flowers themselves no longer traded -- because flowers wilt and the tulips had become too valuable (LOL). So the same culture which elevated tulips to "money" because they loved the flowers so much, stopped using the flowers as money -- and exclusively traded the ugly BULBS.

Today, we have our own "Tulipmania":

U.S. Dollar is the new 'Tulip'

With the U.S. obviously/hopelessly bankrupt, we have buyers (supposedly) paying the highest prices in history for the "privilege" of loaning to a bankrupt debtor.

With the U.S. printing money at the most-radical rate in history, and with that money-printing continuing to increase exponentially; we continue to see oxymoron headlines like this:

Gold Prices Fall as Dollar Climbs

Gold prices were dropping for a seventh-consecutive session as strength in the U.S. dollar added downward pressure on the yellow metal...

"Strength" in the U.S. dollar...from massive dilution. Yes, and I can make my Kool-aid "stronger" by adding more water.



Black is white. Up is down. Cultural insanity. One more very good reason why we want to protect ourselves individually by holding the world's oldest/surest "safe haven" as our principal financial asset.




Gold Bears Revived as Rout Resumes After Coin Rush: Commodities

www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-05-16/gold-b...ush-commodities.html

Gold bears are dominant again after prices resumed their slump and billionaire George Soros joined investors selling holdings in exchange-traded products that have retreated to a two-year low.

Seventeen analysts surveyed by Bloomberg expect prices to fall next week, with eight bullish and three neutral, the highest proportion of bears in two weeks. The analysts were divided a week ago after gold rebounded as much as 13 percent from the two-year low of $1,321.95 an ounce on April 16. ETP holdings slid 16 percent to 2,207.1 metric tons this year, the lowest since July 2011, data compiled by Bloomberg show.

Prices that rallied as much as sevenfold in the past 12 years entered a bear market last month after some investors lost faith in gold as a store of value and equities rallied on mounting confidence the U.S. economy is improving. The slump spurred a surge in demand around the world, with coin purchases from the U.S. Mint rising to a three-year high in April. This month’s sales are on course to be 65 percent lower and global ETP holdings increased on just one day in the past six weeks.

“The momentum has slowed significantly,” said Jeremy Baker, a senior commodities strategist who oversees about $800 million of assets at Harcourt Investment Consulting AG in Zurich and who forecasts prices may drop as low as $1,200 in six months. “The safe haven has definitely lost its gleam. We are in a declining phase here.”...

I no longer ask myself "what are they smoking?" over at Bloomberg. Now the question becomes: what are they snorting/dropping/shooting???



They've gone from being merely "delusional" to wild hallucinations. Let me point this out by first showing what Bloomberg itself has reported in recent days:

Jobless Claims in U.S. Jump to Highest Level in Six Weeks
www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-05-16/jobles...el-in-six-weeks.html (yesterday)

Production Falls as U.S. Feels Global Weakness: Economy
www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-05-15/indust...in-eight-months.html (two days ago)

Industrial production declined in April by the most in eight months...

...and then I already reported on(in a recent commentary) the terrible number for April retail sales, which followed a DISASTROUS number the month before.

Now see what the "trippers" at Bloomberg are writing today:

Velocity Achieved in U.S. as Growth for Two Years Seen in Poll



So, with almost all economic indicators currently pointing STRAIGHT DOWN, we have Bloomberg promising two years of pie-in-the-sky "growth" ahead. How is this possible? Bloomberg's (clinically blind) "experts" voted for two years of growth.

The U.S. government couldn't create an actual recovery. It couldn't lie one into existence. So now it's going to vote a recovery into existence.



Who cares if you've lost your job, lost your home, and are about to be cut-off of unemployment insurance and food stamps? If the Experts all vote for a Recovery; then you should just stop your whining and enjoy all of this "prosperity"...




Velocity Achieved in U.S. as Growth for Two Years Seen in Poll

www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-05-17/veloci...rs-seen-in-poll.html

The U.S. economy will continue to recover until at least 2015 without tumbling into a recession, achieving the sustained growth that has eluded it since the last slump ended four years ago, according to a Bloomberg poll...

[and my nominee for 2013 Idiot of the Year]

...“Anyone who isn’t long real estate housing is a moron,” says Stan Jonas, 64, managing partner of Axiom Management Partners in New York, speaking before the April figures were released.

robinsld wrote:


...So, Jeff, if you believe it's highly unlikely or almost impossible for Western politicians and financiers to ever go back to a PM based monetary system, what do you say to those who propose owning gold and silver just for that eventuality (and being able to then sell it to the Government when the time comes...)?


Here is the problem when it comes to "fixing" or "reforming" anything in our governments/societies/economies. All change originates in government, but all of our governments are ABSOLUTELY (and likely permanently) corrupt. Why?

Because they are bought-and-paid for by the Oligarchs. Exxon has a market-cap in excess of $400 BILLION ($400,000,000,000). How many governments could Exxon buy-off (by itself) with that kind of capital? All of them?

There are MANY reasons why oligopolies/monopolies should never be allowed to exist, but at the top of the list is CORRUPTION. We have (for the first time in history) a global economy totally saturated with monopolies/oligopolies.

And (surprise! surprise!) we coincidentally have Fascist plutocracies in nearly every Western nation.

Understand that even on the rare occasions when the people manage to elect an Honest Government in spite of the money/corruption of the Oligarchs that "Plan B" immediately goes into action: all-out sabotage of that government.

This was demonstrated (BRUTALLY) in Europe. Not all of the regimes recently elected in Europe were always Traitor Governments. They RESISTED the suicidal Austerity (i.e. Friedman Fascism). What happened?

First the Banksters destroyed Greece: to create an "example". Then any time any other European government showed any annoying tendency to serve their people instead of the Banksters, they were given a "taste of Greece."

They got the message.

...and so I've said it before and I'll say it again, NOTHING positive can happen in our societies until the monopolies and oligopolies are smashed into little pieces. Almost certainly the first political leader who tries to do this will be "JFK'd".

We will never be allowed to have an honest/legitimate monetary system until we're allowed to have honest/legitimate governments. This is why (sadly) such eras in History almost always result in Revolution, not (mere) "reform."



While I can't speak for other bullion-holders; I hold my bullion to protect myself from my own government, not with the idea of surrendering it/selling it back to them.

Arguably ALL of this traces back to Nixon assassinating the gold standard (shortly after Kennedy was assassinated). That made the creation of infinite "money" possible, and the Oligarchs then used that paper to BUY all of our governments (not to mention stealing half of our individual wealth, and bankrupting all public Treasuries).

Think the Oligarchs will ever willingly allow a gold standard again? Here's another "prediction": several (prominent) Oligarchs would have to be shortened by about a foot before we would see that day.

Earl wrote:
DayOwl and Jeff,

Thank You, for your info and thoughts.

I'd like to watch how this bill goes. I feel it's a "building block" of what is to come. The numbers are staggering.


Grandstanding diversion tactics. They won't be cut. Big Ag and Big Food need those billions to stay afloat. Not to mention how JP Morgan makes millions every year off SNAP cards. They're not about to put up with any curtailment.


www.washingtonpost.com/national/in-flori...2ff305f35_print.html

www.communityfoodadvocates.org/blog/food-stamp-programs/


Think of this as the agricultural equivalent of "bail-ins". The public Treasuries are empty, the money-printing is already cranked-up to the max. If the Oligarchs want to do even more stealing (before the System collapses completely), then they must now TAKE that wealth directly from individual Victims -- one way or the other.

All very good input, again "Thank You",
Earl



Another way of putting it Earl is to say that articles like these represent "barometer" subjects. Seeing which way this particular debate goes will reveal a great deal about how far the U.S. has gone down its Path.

Meanwhile, we Canadians know that Stephen "Mussolini" Harper is busily "taking notes" so he can COPY all of this in a few years, himself.

DayOwl wrote:
Grandstanding diversion tactics. They won't be cut. Big Ag and Big Food need those billions to stay afloat. Not to mention how JP Morgan makes millions every year off SNAP cards. They're not about to put up with any curtailment.

Cuts to SNAP are in direct opposition to the current regime's agenda:

www.washingtonpost.com/national/in-flori...2ff305f35_print.html
Excerpt:

In Florida, a food-stamp recruiter deals with wrenching choices
By Eli Saslow, Published: April 23

FORT PIERCE, Fla. — A good recruiter needs to be liked, so Dillie Nerios filled gift bags with dog toys for the dog people and cat food for the cat people. She packed crates of cookies, croissants, vegetables and fresh fruit. She curled her hair and painted her nails fluorescent pink. “A happy, it’s-all-good look,” she said, checking her reflection in the rearview mirror. Then she drove along the Florida coast to sign people up for food stamps.

Her destination on a recent morning was a 55-and-over community in central Florida, where single-wide trailers surround a parched golf course. On the drive, Nerios, 56, reviewed techniques she had learned for connecting with some of Florida’s most desperate senior citizens during two years on the job. Touch a shoulder. Hold eye contact. Listen for as long as it takes. “Some seniors haven’t had anyone to talk to in some time,” one of the state-issued training manuals reads. “Make each person feel like the only one who matters.”

In fact, it is Nerios’s job to enroll at least 150 seniors for food stamps each month, a quota she usually exceeds. Alleviate hunger, lessen poverty: These are the primary goals of her work. But the job also has a second and more controversial purpose for cash-strapped Florida, where increasing food-stamp enrollment has become a means of economic growth, bringing almost $6 billion each year into the state. The money helps to sustain communities, grocery stores and food producers. It also adds to rising federal entitlement spending and the U.S. debt.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
They really, really want people on food stamps:

www.communityfoodadvocates.org/blog/food-stamp-programs/


DayOwl, your observations precisely describe one of my two trains of thought when it comes to such "news."

Indeed, since the U.S. government simply INSTITUTIONALIZED supposed "unemployment insurance" for a large number of permanently unemployed workers; I've often suggested myself that they simply "wouldn't dare" to cut off such assistance in any significant way.

The same argument/logic applies at least as much to food stamps; since as DayOwl points out, the (insanely subsidized) Agriculture Oligarchs (like Monsanto) require a large herd of grazing cattle (i.e. us) in order to keep their coffers full.

But note what we are seeing with this proposed Farm Bill. Taking money (and food) directly out of the mouths of the poor, and handing it DIRECTLY to Monsanto (et al) in the form of larger subsidies. "Cut out the Middlemen" (i.e. the cattle) and simply STEAL DIRECTLY.

Think of this as the agricultural equivalent of "bail-ins". The public Treasuries are empty, the money-printing is already cranked-up to the max. If the Oligarchs want to do even more stealing (before the System collapses completely), then they must now TAKE that wealth directly from individual Victims -- one way or the other.

I've said all along that our regimes are in no way "nanny governments" (as has been regularly portrayed by the right-wing ideologues). Rather, these are brutal, Fascist regimes -- which (as we see) make less and less effort each day to conceal the Iron Fist inside the Velvet Glove.

At some point; the Glove will come off and we will get nothing but FIST. This is inevitable with all Fascist systems. Once they have plundered and hollowed-out an economy to the point of collapse; all they can "afford" to allow them to maintain POWER (but not "order") are their Nazi thugs.

It's clear there is now a sizable majority within the Republican Party proposing a Fist-only agenda from now on. As the U.S. Fascist Dictatorship continues regressing; I would suggest it's now unwise to automatically assume that these people "wouldn't dare" to use the Fist.

The U.S. has been building their "detention centers" for a decade, and who knows how many MILLIONS can now be warehoused? At some point, those detention centers will be used. The path is pretty simple:

1) Cut off food for the poor.

2) At the same time that you make protesting a crime (and protesters are now "terrorists"). You do that by staging false-flag attacks; and blaming/framing the "protesters" for those crimes. OR you start staging false-flag "terrorist attacks" against protesters -- to make people afraid to assemble.

3) Both/either way; you suddenly have the pretext to go around "rounding up terrorists"; and undoubtedly most of those rounded-up will be non-white.

4) Once POVERTY becomes a crime; you now have a full slave-population to run your Prison Economy at full power.

robinsld wrote:


...I have also myself thought that this statute would be very useful for the Australian Government if they came to realise what a stupid thing it was to sell a large portion of their gold at ridiculously low prices, and that they want that gold back. They might just try to get it back at that same ridiculously low price they sold it for... I don't know what sort of uproar that might bring, or how well it would work. Not very is my guess.


Robinsld, I would have to qualify such thoughts as "wishful thinking."



I find myself occasionally dabbling in such naivety too -- and when I do catch myself, it results in an immediate (metaphorical) slap in the face, to bring me back to reality (lol). Living in Canada, which has no gold at all (lol!!); we Canadians are arguably the "experts" when it comes to understanding how thoroughly the Traitor Politicians have blinded themselves to the realities of monetary systems in general -- and the value/necessity of gold, in particular.

I "predict" that our (Western) politicians will embrace gold as the premier financial asset for our monetary system on the same day they collectively adopt the mantra that "honesty is the best policy."

[Caution: readers are [b]STRONGLY[/b] advised not to hold their breath]

It's Thursday May 16th, and we have some more "atypical" price-action in the phony, futures market for gold -- but which is starting to become a little more common:



What we see is the price of gold falling rather than exhibiting the usual, absolutely vertical moves which prove manipulation. What this price action looks like are Asian and European paper-gold holders continuing the massive liquidation of paper gold; BUT (at the moment at least) by the time trading crosses the Pond, net-buying (of physical bullion) is overwhelming the paper-liquidation.

Note that we very easily could have seen one or more vertical drops in price. As I continue to point out; as long as this paper liquidation continues, driving down the (paper) price is somewhat easier than shooting fish in a barrel.

So the Banksters have chosen not to grease-the-skids on all of this paper-selling. This clearly reinforces what I've suggested recently that the Banksters are simply AFRAID to drive-down prices too far, too fast.

They are trying not to duplicate the Great Rally from 2009 through early 2011; which was a direct result of their 2008 Market Smash. They will fail.

Data released today by the World Gold Council (and included in today's commentary) proves this:

The World Paper Council

Even before the Gold Smash officially began (but the paper-liquidation had already started); we already see a massive surge in physical buying. Indeed, we now see the likely reason for DELAYING the Gold Smash until the beginning of April (when the paper-liquidation began at the end of January).

The Banksters wanted to DELAY the release of data showing (likely) the greatest spike in physical gold-buying during this entire bull market. They did not want such data coming out when there was already rabid gold-buying in India -- for its spring Festival. And so we won't see the REAL explosion in physical demand until July -- which makes some of the massive demand-increases reported in today's commentary all the more impressive.

Day after day, we see exactly the same trends:

- more and more paper-liquidation
- more and more physical buying

...and in response to that:

- ever larger and more-obvious lies
- radically increased signals of open "desperation" on the part of the banksters - such as the recent effort to try to curtail Indian gold imports

Such signals are precisely the sort of indicators which should be stimulating buying by this Community. We are investors, meaning we "buy low and sell high."

Currently, we have been presented with massive quantities of unequivocal evidence that gold is drastically undervalued (and we already knew "the story" with the silver market). At the same time; we are presented with equally unequivocal evidence that we are somewhere close to the next Great Rally.

"Investors" don't try to "time" absolute bottoms in any market. They don't try to time their buying to the day before they expect that Rally to start. Investors position themselves in markets well in advance of such rallies -- based on the sound thinking that it's always best to be too early to a Party than too late.

Live "long", and prosper.

It's Wednesday May 15th, and another interesting day in metals markets. Obviously readers will not be particularly thrilled to see the price of gold back below $1400/oz and the price of silver under $23/oz...unless they were just about to place their next order for more bullion.



However, having just covered this possible "step-down" scenario yesterday; there's not much left to add. If the Banksters dare to push prices any lower it just means setting off even more physical demand AND eating into supply (in particular "scrap" supply) even more. We can't prevent the Banksters from shooting themselves in the foot -- again -- we can only predict what must result from it.

Today, I've got something much different to talk about: an "explanation" from the good folks at Basher Central as to what has been killing the miners:

The mining sector has been in a sharp downturn and Hoffman said that the decline actually began with the advent of exchange-traded funds. More than $300 billion in investment capital has been put into gold ETFs alone, which would have otherwise gone to small, mid or large cap miners, he said...

There is definite validity to this statement...to a degree. Yes, IF there had been no bullion-ETF's much of that ETF capital would have flowed into the miners. But the bigger issue here (by far) is that the average investor is only holding about 1% as much in precious metals assets in their portfolios as they have in historical terms.

However, conceding that there is some validity to the argument that the paper-ETF's have been killing the miners -- previously -- where does that lead us? To TODAY.

In an earlier post today in our "Decoupling" thread I posted an article from Bloomberg detailing how much paper gold has been liquidated in just the last quarter:

...investors pulled a record $20.8 billion from bullion funds this year...

Now we have the very same mainstream media TELLING US that we should expect most or of this money to end up in the miners. Obviously we know that not all of this $20 billion will go into the miners.

But while paper-holders have dumped the equivalent of 14 million ounces of gold, they have bought only about 2.5 million ounces (out of Comes warehouses). We can assume these (former) paper-holders would have also done a lot of bullion-buying from other dealers.

Nonetheless, it's very reasonable to assume that at least half of this money will go into the market cap's of the miners, with even the mainstream media acknowledging that this is what should happen. So why haven't we already seen some sign of this money entering the mining sector?

Too soon. In any year, we're not going to see a lot of investor dollars flooding into equities with the proverb "sell in May and go away" ringing in everyone's ears. Lol! However, this year we also have the Traitor Geologists (working for the large-cap miners) "predicting" that most of the junior miners are about to go bankrupt.

Talk about a sleazy bash-and-buy!!



However, the bottom line is that (apparently) at least $10 BILLION or so in cash of the paper-holders is waiting to be deployed in the miners...and in the near future. "Gold" investors are not going to sit with large amounts of cash for any length of time.

What impact would such a quantity of capital have on the precious metals mining sector? By itself, it could blow through much of the shorting, and likely be the catalyst for an even BIGGER rally in the mining sector than after the Crash of '08.

The most likely time for this money to begin to enter the miners would be late July. But this presupposes that there is not a scheduled "crash" planned for some time this year. If such an event has already been scheduled (which is certainly possible), then this $10+ billion should enter the sector immediately AFTER that meltdown.

It's unclear (to me at least) whether the miners will lead bullion higher in the next rally, or vice versa. However, what is possible is that any time after the beginning of July where we see "buoyancy" in the price-action of either the miners or bullion; this would be highly suggestive that the next rally is here.

With all of the numerous price-pressures operating to push bullion prices higher, this is entirely separate: paper pressure on the legitimate "paper" in the precious metals sector -- the miners.

This is yet another example of how the propaganda machine continually talks itself into corners. When we got a flurry of mainstream pieces that India was going to "solve" its gold-deficit problem by selling Indians paper-gold, what did that directly imply? That paper-gold isn't real gold.

The only way you can increase the gold supply simply be selling "paper gold" is if it's all paper -- and no gold.



Similarly, in creating these paper-gold products; obviously another of their nefarious motives was to starve the miners for capital. But where does that lead? First the miners wither-on-the-vine, choking off supply. Then the paper-gold market suddenly starts to disintegrate, with $10's of billions (so far) looking for a new home. And there is no sign yet that the paper-liquidation is even slowing down.

All roads lead to higher prices.




Mining Industry In A Downward Cycle: Hoffman

www.kitco.com/reports/KitcoNews20130513SB_mining_hoffman.html

The mining sector looks bleak; however, the end could be near according to Bloomberg’s Head of Global Mining Analysis Kenneth Hoffman.

Hoffman was one of the speakers at the Metals & Minerals Investment Conference, held Monday and Tuesday in New York; he talked with Kitco News’ Daniela Cambone about the condition of the mining sector.

Hoffman said that the lack of capital has been the biggest problem for the mining sector and those problems have grown in the last few years.

The mining sector has been in a sharp downturn and Hoffman said that the decline actually began with the advent of exchange-traded funds. More than $300 billion in investment capital has been put into gold ETFs alone, which would have otherwise gone to small, mid or large cap miners, he said.

“All of a sudden what you saw was this money rushing out the door and that caused poor performance for these companies,” he said. “Then all of a sudden the people who are left, these long-term holders saw worse and worse performance. At the same time the S&P and Dow hit all-time records and so they started to leave this industry.”

“What we always say is bad returns beget bad returns,” he added. “And we’ve been in a really bad cycle.”

Hoffman went on to say that not only did major investment firms find new venues but due to the high risk now associated with the industry, lending rates have jumped to more than 600 basis points above average BBB rates.

“More than 40% of the small cap mining companies have less than 3 months of cash on hand,” he said. “I’ve heard that as much as 50 to 70% of all junior miners will not make it through this downturn.”

The industry has no real buyers, “even the Chinese have stepped away from buying these assets,” said Hoffman. Similarly, large cap miners are selling off their assets instead of investing as usual in the junior companies.

However, despite the grim outlook, Hoffman said that private equity funds could be the “saviors” of the industry as they look for new investments...

I've just discovered our friends over at GATA were on top of this even faster than myself (lol):

www.gata.org/node/12569

Why am I doing a post on an article written 5 years ago (lol)? I think the title of the post (and article itself) answers that question well enough. What is the ONLY thing which are criminal governments can do once they are officially out of bullion?

Steal ours.



What this commentary illustrates is how THIN the protection is between our rapacious governments and (illusory?) "property rights". In more general terms; it also illustrates a STRUCTURAL difference between the political structure of the United States and most other Western regimes (certainly the other Anglo regimes).

Specifically, this article points out that all it would take for "bullion confiscation" to come to Australia is for the government to dot some "i"'s and cross some "t"'s on legislation which is already on the books. In more general terms, this illustrates a rather stark contrast between the U.S. and other Anglo regimes.

On paper, the U.S. is much more "libertarian" (i.e. a higher ranking for individual rights versus the rights of the State). Of course, with the onset of the phony "War on Terror"; we've discovered that all of the U.S.'s precious "Constitutional Rights" were nothing but mere words.

They've virtually ALL been subsumed (ILLEGALLY) by subordinate legislation which usurps those rights.

Conversely, other Anglo regimes are much more authoritarian on paper. When we saw the Bush and Obama regimes dramatically (and unilaterally) expanding Executive authority in the U.S. system; they were doing little more than EQUALLING the power wielded by the Prime Ministers of our supposed Commonwealth "democracies."

The difference between the U.S. and other Anglo regimes is that while the U.S. executive branch AGGRESSIVELY wields its power like a club -- advertising that concentrtion of authority -- the other Anglo regimes use their dictatorial powers much more sparingly. The intent is obvious: to delude the residents of these nations into believing they have more "rights" (and protections) than the now (consitutionally) stripped-and-bare residents of the U.S.

Does the Canadian government already have similar legislative provisions to what we see reported in Australia (and perhaps the UK as well)? Very possibly. I can't be bothered to invest the time necessary to verify this -- for two reasons.

First of all, if other Western governments don't already possess the statutory authority of Australia's government; all they have to do is draft a new law -- which can be done while we're sleeping, as with the U.S.'s "Patriot Act". So to me the primary significance of this Australian legislation is it highlights that confiscation is NOT merely a "U.S. issue."

But the second reason I consider it irrelevant to know if Canada already has confiscation provisions on the books is that should our governments try to confiscate bullion; few people will respect such an obviouly illegitimate law.

When the U.S. engaged in bullion confiscation, it was successful for two reasons:

1) Americans had good reason to believe this was only a TEMPORARY measure, and they could buy back their bullion at some undetermined, but near-term date.

2) Our governments did not (yet) have reputations as rapacious Thieves.



So when the U.S. government made its bullion confiscation permanent, and immediately "revalued" the bullion -- proving they had grossly underpaid their own citizens for their bullion -- the American people were genuinely surprised.

Today, if our governments announced bullion confiscation we would instantly know we would NEVER be able to get that bullion back, and we would immediately suspect they were stealing from us (i.e. not paying fair-market value). And the people holding most of the bullion would be those who are most-suspicious.

I predict that if (when) our governments announce bullion confiscation that this is what they will discover:

That all of us bullion-holders had previously (and legally) disposed of our bullion, and we no longer have any.



Among the many reasons why our Fascist governments hate the idea of the people having gold/silver money is that when used in a transaction there is no "paper trail" -- meaning (today) no electronic trail.

And assuming that people are still innocent until proven guilty at the time our governments attempt to perpetrate bullion confiscation; the onus would be on our governments to prove that we had not legally disposed of our bullion in undocumented transactions.

In that respect, bullion-holders would be well-advised to be on the lookout for a particular form of new law which would likely PRECEDE bullion confiscation: a legal requirement to (permanently) document all transactions involving physical bullion -- to create the paper-trail. And such a draconian law would likely be accompanied by equally draconian penalties.

Note that the Canadian government has already imposed greater reporting requirements on bullion dealers. They have a very clear picture of who has been SUPPLIED with bullion (and how much). But as of today they have no adequate means of monitoring how people dispose of our bullion.

Perhaps we used it to pay tradesmen/contractors "under the table" for maintenance and/or renovations to our homes? The penalties for not reporting (and paying taxes on) such transactions would be relatively trivial amounts...of paper.

For male bullion-holders (lol); perhaps we squandered all our bullion on the services of prostitutes/escorts. Politicians, judges, and corporate executives spend $10's of BILLIONS every year across the West purchasing the services of such "working girls". Why not us? Lol!!!

I'm sure that other readers in the audience can remember the different ways in which they disposed of their own bullion...should the need arise.

Bullion confiscation is very likely coming, to some or all Western nations. However, by the time that day actually arrives, we may have already had so much "practice" in evading the theft of our wealth by our criminal governments that the announcement will be met with merely a yawn...



P.S. The writer of this article notes a different way in which an attempt to confiscate bullion may blow-up in the faces of our government(s): secession.





Australian Gold Confiscation

goldchat.blogspot.ca/2008/11/australian-gold-confiscation.html

Gold confiscation is an important issue that strategic investors need to have a view on – the circumstances in which you are most likely to need your wealth safe haven is also when the risk of a Government wanting to take it away from you may be the highest. All of the discussion on this matter is US-centric and I do not recall ever seeing any commentary on the possibility of confiscation in other countries. It is a pertinent question because a fair number of Americans store their gold offshore on the simple basis that if the US Government did it once, they will do it again.

Having said that, it would be my contention that all countries have a confiscation risk on the basis that we are dealing with politicians after all – QED. The confiscation issue is therefore one of relative risk: which country is less likely to resort to gold confiscation. Being Australian, I can only focus on the likelihood of the Australian (Federal) Government confiscating gold. I would welcome discussion of this issue by locals in other countries, particularly the UK and Switzerland, given the large amounts of gold held in those countries.

The confiscation question was often raised by the clients I spoke to while working in the Perth Mint’s Depository. I should note that most of the USD 1.5 billion worth of precious metals stored by the Depository is held by foreigners. In fact, 45% of the Mint’s Depository clients are American. While some of this analysis will be specific to Australia, there will also be a fair amount that is generic to any country so hopefully this will be of use to those without gold in Australia as well.

Economic Strength

Governments confiscate gold because they need to strengthen their reserves, which is a nice way of saying no one will accept their currency and they need something of value to trade for the things the country needs. This statement raises two factors to consider. Firstly, how strong is the economy of the country, how resilient is it likely to be in the face of a deteriorating and hostile world economic environment? Secondly, how self sufficient is the country?

My simple answer to these two questions is to note that Australia is a commodity currency. We export a lot of raw material commodity stuff and food that other countries want. Sure, like many western countries, we have a reduced manufacturing capability but we can always build up that capability, whereas some countries cannot just make iron ore appear out of their ground. I therefore consider Australia relatively lower risk on this factor. We can be self sufficient. Sure we might have to do without plasma wide screen TVs, but at least we can feed ourselves.

A related issue is what gold holdings will the Government look to control when it decides it needs the asset of last resort. My view is that they are not going to bother with knocking on people’s doors to confiscate private holdings when Australia’s mines can churn out between 200 to 300 tonnes per year. The real threat is the control of mine output (i.e. buying gold at the “official price”) or nationalisation of mines as this is where the real dollars are.

Legal Mechanism

At lot of the commentary on US confiscation speculates on the likely legal form the confiscation will take, such as will numismatic coins be exempt and so on. If laws have to be passed, then opposition may be possible or at least there would be some delay within which you can prepare.

In this respect Australia has a relatively higher risk because Australian law already has a mechanism in place to require delivery of gold to the Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) - Part IV of the Banking Act 1959. There is no need for the Government of the day to have to rush new legislation through that may attract public comment or opposition. All that is required is the Governor General to proclaim that Part IV shall come into operation. The ease with which this can occur is a negative mark for Australia. A small consolation is that we have certainty as to the legal form this confiscation will take.

As a side note for those not versed in Australian constitutional law, the Governor General is a figurehead role and is not elected. They are appointed by the Government of the day and, by convention, act on the instruction of the Government and Parliament. Most Australians would be aware, however, that the words “by convention” are crucial, as on 11 November 1975 the Governor General dismissed the Government of the day. It is therefore theoretically possible that the Governor General could bring Part IV into force against the wishes of the Government if he/she thought that it was “expedient so to do, for the protection of the currency or of the public credit of the Commonwealth” (Section 40(2)). Having said that, I would consider such a scenario unlikely on the basis that doing so would require the cooperation of the public service and result in radical changes in the operation of the gold industry. As the Governor General does not have any control over the public service or any public mandate, they would need the cooperation of the Government of the day if the proclamation was to have any practical effect.

Before you rush to deliver your gold to the RBA, note that Part IV is currently “suspended”. My blog of 04 August details the suspension by way of a transcription of a press release by the Treasurer on 30 January 1976.

It is worth noting that the Act only refers to gold, not silver. I guess this is because gold is more compact, in value per weight/volume terms, and thus is easier to transport between countries in settlement of transactions. For example, one tonne of gold is equivalent to 75 tonnes of silver (at least at today’s prices). This is positive for silver, and one can imagine that in a gold confiscation scenario that people will flock to silver for wealth/inflation protection if they cannot achieve it with gold. It is therefore likely that the silver price will move rapidly upward relative to gold.

So let’s look at our enemy in detail:

Section 41 – you will not be allowed to export or take gold out of the country.

Section 42 – you have to deliver gold you hold at the time of the proclamation or any that subsequently comes into your possession within one month. Only exemptions are gold used as part of your profession or trade or coins less than $50 in total value. The section mentions “prescribed amount” but $50 is mentioned in the attachment to the press release. Note that the section refers to the “gold content”, not “face value”. In practice this means legal tender coins or numismatic coins offer no protection and given the small value, is effectively full confiscation. The US 1933 confiscation had an exemption for gold holdings below $100 (see this article by Roland Watson for more details. Mr Watson notes that the 1933 confiscation was not confiscation as such, but a prohibition against hoarding. He also speculates that the exemption was a way of getting the average wage earner on board, as it did not confiscate their small holdings, only the "evil hoarders".

Section 43 – gold so delivered is the RBA’s, period. Any interest that someone has in it is extinguished. RBA must pay for it and will pay the deliverer. If you had an interest in that gold, you have to get your money off the deliverer. What this means is that a custodian must deliver gold held on behalf of others, and it will only get money in return, which is all it can return to you.

Section 44 – this has very interesting wording. First off it says the price is the price as fixed by the RBA. This doesn’t sound too good, as it allows for the RBA to set a really crappy price. However it says “... or, at the option of the person delivering the gold, such amount as is determined in an action for compensation ...” In practice this means that you will get the market value, as if the RBA’s price is too low there is a case for compensation.

If you think that getting market price doesn’t sound too bad, it is worth remembering that in the US after confiscation the official price of gold was increased, thereby denying the previous holders the benefit of that increase in value. While there is no official fixed price anymore, some posit that the same will be achieved by central banks first manipulating the price lower then confiscating it at this “free market” price.

In any case this is a bit irrelevant because you only end up with paper money and if you wanted that you would not have bought gold in the first place.

Section 45 – this says that you are not allowed to buy or sell gold, unless authorised by the RBA. The interesting thing about unallocated is that the gold has already been bought and thus it may be legal for the Mint to allow clients to collect their unallocated gold on the assumption that as good citizens they are requesting it so they can dutifully hand it over to the RBA, of course. This will depend upon the interpretation of “or otherwise obtain gold” within the context of the section, which is titled “limitation of sale and purchase of gold”.

Section 46 – essentially restatement of s42(1)(b), OK to have gold you are working on if that is your job. I take this to mean jewellers and other manufacturers are exempt by default.

Section 47 – OK to hold wrought gold. As “wrought” means “made in a skilful or decorative way” I take this section to mean jewellery is exempt. I think this is potentially a significant loophole as those denied bars and coins would create demand for other forms of jewellery that could also be “tradable” that creative jewellers (or a creative Mint) would undoubtedly meet.

Section 48 – the RBA can exempt anyone from any or all of these sections.

In summary, Part IV is very extensive. You can’t buy, hold or sell gold unless it is a legitimate part of your trade or in the form of jewellery. However, the phrasing of the law is all around physical as it mentions “delivery” of gold in your “possession” Combining this with section 46 raises an interesting speculation on interpretation of the law and its consequences for metal held with the Perth Mint.

Under section 46, given the Mint’s role in refining gold that the Government wants and also supplying industry with industrial forms of gold, I think it can be assumed that it would get an exemption from having to deliver its working stocks of gold. Note that this metal is what backs the unallocated precious metal liabilities of Depository clients, so the conclusion is that unallocated metal would not be confiscated. In support of this, unallocated metal liabilities are not “physical” so would fall outside the law as they cannot be “delivered” to the RBA. Certainly the Government may close this loophole, but in the extreme environment we are considering this oversight may be missed by the bureaucrats as they scramble to negotiate with an antagonistic mining industry on how the new system will work and getting real physical gold into the hands of the RBA.

My experience with the implementation of the Goods and Services Tax (GST) some years ago supports my position that unallocated will be left alone, at least initially. In discussions with tax officials the whole concept of unallocated, location swaps and such was considered suspiciously, as some bogus “construct” to hide the real transaction going on. As such they focused on physical metal movements and when title passed. I am confident that the bureaucrats responsible for implementing Part IV will similarly see industry “jargon” as a cover up and instead prefer to take what they will see as a clear-cut approach: do you have a legitimate business reason to hold gold, if not hand it over.

For this reason, and of some irony considering that a number of client’s consider allocated “safer” than unallocated, there is no potential for ambiguity with allocated metal. It is physical and has to be delivered, no matter that it is someone else’s metal as section 43 points out.

As a counterpoint, if people are not allowed to hold gold then the Perth Mint’s operations will be radically reduced as there will be no need for coins or bars (except 400oz bars) and it may be hard to justify holding as much physical backing the unallocated as they currently do. While the Mint may be able to branch out into 24ct jewellery or other product lines to take up the slack, it is doubtful this could be on the same scale as the coin and bar operations.

In summary, the best that can be said is that there is no doubt that allocated/custodial holdings are confiscatable but that unallocated is a grey area.

Management

By “management” I mean how will the senior management of your custodian (which for most people means the Perth Mint) react to the confiscation. For example, in respect of the unallocated question, will the Mint roll over and voluntarily hand over unallocated metal (or the “paper” claims), or will they not bring it to the attention of the bureaucrats.

This is a difficult question to answer and one can only look to the material published by your custodian to infer what their “philosophy” is or how strongly they feel about gold’s role and protecting your rights.

Secessionism

One factor unique to West Australia that needs to be considered in respect of gold held in that state is the highly probable emergence of the idea of self governance or secession from the Commonwealth should the Federal Government confiscate gold. One thing that struck me when I moved from Sydney to Perth was the “them and us” attitude of West Australians, evidenced in their use of “the Eastern States” to refer to the rest of Australia. I have no doubt that enacting Part IV will be seen by many West Australians as confiscation of “their” gold by the Federal Government and not in the interests of the state.

If you consider this farfetched, read the following Wikipedia page en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secessionism_in_Western_Australia. This 2005 TV interview, with veteran state MP Norman Moore, a former Court Government minister, is a neat summary of the feelings of some West Australians:

REBECCA CARMODY: As this issue has cropped up, I’ve heard politicians of both persuasions talking about secession. Would Western Australia be better off just to simply break apart?

NORMAN MOORE: Absolutely. I have no doubt that Western Australia would be one of the most successful countries in the world if it was a separate country.

REBECCA CARMODY: Is this something we should be seriously contemplating?

NORMAN MOORE: Yes, we should be talking about it. We should be talking about it very thoroughly and in a very mature way. Let’s look at what the consequences are for Western Australia if it was a separate country. We have enormous resources. We’ve got a tremendous potential future as separate country if we were to secede. To achieve that would be very difficult indeed because you actually require a constitutional amendment, I understand, which would probably not be supported by the other States because they get 30 per cent of their revenue from Western Australia.

REBECCA CARMODY: You don’t think it is likely to happen, but it is a fallback position for Western Australia.

NORMAN MOORE: There was always a unilateral declaration of independence which has been used in other parts of world. I suspect it wouldn’t happen in Western Australia. I think that Western Australians need to start talking about a future as a seceded separate nation. At the end of the day, under a centralist system in Canberra, Western Australia will always be the biggest loser. We are a long way away - out of sight, out of mind. Federal politicians simply rely on Western Australia to produce a huge amount of wealth, but, beyond that, they would not know much about what goes on here at all...

There was a short, but interesting piece on these two fraud-funds written by a mainstream commentator -- so I almost skipped it by without a glance. However, the writer involved had engaged in some interesting leg-work...which seemed to be a direct reference to my own, previous writing.

In August 2011 I wrote to the Financial Services Authority to seek confirmation that the London-based custodians of SPDR Gold Trust (GLD) and iShares Silver Trust (SLV) were being regulated as custodians...

My reason for writing to the FSA was to establish if allegations were true that bullion owned by these two trusts was being used in contravention of custody agreements...

In fact, no writer in the sector has been shouting longer/louder about this fraud than myself:

Paper-Gold Fraud Now Out In The Open
‘D-Day’ Near For GLD
The Seven Sins of GLD

SLV And Silver Manipulation
The Bogus Bullion-ETF's
Silver market fundamentals Destroyed by bullion-ETF's

...and those are merely the commentaries written 100% on this subject. I've discussed this bullion-fraud by these ETF's (and their Custodians) in literally dozens of previous commentaries.

Now what do we find out officially about these fraud-funds? They are unregulated:

...“The custody operations of the custodian are not subject to specific governmental regulatory supervision.” It is now clear that the FSA had ceded its custodial responsibility to the “best practices of the LBMA”.

Then the writer produces a detail of which I was previously unaware:

...This matters because investors naturally expect custodians to be properly regulated. It also matters because the bullion market settles through a separate entity called London Precious Metals Clearing Limited (lpmcl.com) owned by five LBMA members, including the two custodians for GLD and SLV. LPMCL is therefore at the heart of the London bullion market.

Because the bullion market in London is over-the-counter, bullion banks are exposed to counterparty risk...

Translation? Not only are these Custodians (supposedly) "backing" all the holdings of these fraudulent ETF's and their own, gigantic short positions; but the same bullion is used to back-stop the ENTIRE London bullion market.

In other words, previously I had observed that these fraud-funds were leveraged 2:1 on their very surface -- i.e. the Banksters had only shown HALF the bullion necessary to "back" both the ETF's and their short position. However that observation overlooks the fact that this same bullion is used to back the whole system. Thus in any systemic meltdown, the chances of GLD or SLV holders ending up with a single ounce of bullion are virtually nil.

Essentially this article provides some official confirmation of allegations which I have been making for over 3 years. In that respect, I can proudly claim to be one of the very first commentators to warn investors away from these scams.




The role of GLD and SLV

www.goldmoney.com/gold-research/alasdair...999_member_240169731

In August 2011 I wrote to the Financial Services Authority to seek confirmation that the London-based custodians of SPDR Gold Trust (GLD) and iShares Silver Trust (SLV) were being regulated as custodians, despite the fact that physical bullion is not a regulated investment. After some chasing on my part I finally got a response, kicking my letter firmly into touch. The FSA accepted that the custodians (HSBC Bank USA NA for GLD and JP Morgan Chase Bank NA London Branch for SLV) were regulated, but appeared to be unwilling to do anything about it other than to pass my letter on to “the supervisors of the relevant firms”.

My reason for writing to the FSA was to establish if allegations were true that bullion owned by these two trusts was being used in contravention of custody agreements. If they had any foundation there would be an important regulatory risk for the FSA which should be drawn to their attention, and in any event needed clarification to prevent a false market. Suspicions that this was the case were fuelled by obvious conflicts of interest in the firms concerned. The sensible course for the FSA would have been to investigate the matter with the custodians and give them a clean bill of health, or alternatively take appropriate action in the event of a breach. Instead, they ducked the issue, leaving the impression that there was indeed a problem.

This may have been to do with the fact that bullion, being dealt with in an over-the-counter market, operated under a different set of dealing and settlement procedures from a normal regulated investment. Subsequently the 2012 GLD prospectus was amended under “Risk Factors” on page 12, by the insertion of a new clause headed “The custody operations of the custodian are not subject to specific governmental regulatory supervision.” It is now clear that the FSA had ceded its custodial responsibility to the “best practices of the LBMA”.

This matters because investors naturally expect custodians to be properly regulated. It also matters because the bullion market settles through a separate entity called London Precious Metals Clearing Limited (lpmcl.com) owned by five LBMA members, including the two custodians for GLD and SLV. LPMCL is therefore at the heart of the London bullion market...

As we see the most-massive panic/flight out of paper-gold in history; Bloomberg has quantified this stampede.

In roughly 3 months; investors have dumped over $20.8 BILLION of this paper onto the market. If it were real "gold" it would have been the equivalent of approximately 450 TONS of gold.

Let me put this into perspective. When the Banksters were suppressing gold via extreme bullion-dumping; they were dumping a total of 500 tons per year onto the market. We've seen almost this much dumping in a single quarter -- and of course that doesn't take into account a single "ounce" of shorting activity by the Banksters themselves.

As I've pointed out from the moment we became aware of what was really happening here; there is nothing surprising here, and nothing to feel bad about. A meltdown in the (fraudulent) paper market was inevitable. Sooner is better than later. Likewise, seeing a 20% price decline after this massive dumping is in no way surprising.

But let's take a moment to remind readers of the salient point here. That 450 tons of PAPER can never be sold again. The paper market is PERMANENTLY that much smaller -- and it will continue to shrink.

What does that means? It means reduced control/influence on the REAL market for bullion via their fraudulent paper market FOREVER. As this disintegration continues; it will take more and more "effort" from the Banksters (i.e. crime) to produce less and less manipulation of the market.

Given these realities; if precious metals investors had been offered the free choice of accepting temporarily lower bullion prices in return for PERMANENTLY reducing the influence of the Banksters and kick-starting Decoupling in the sector, I suspect we could have gotten a majority to vote for that...



P.S. Note that Bloomberg can't resist repeating a lie which has already been proven false: that the sellers of this paper are "gold bears" (i.e. sellers of gold). Given that these "bears" have BOUGHT a net 100 TONS of Comex gold during this paper-liquidation -- making this the greatest (short term) GOLD ACCUMULATION in the futures market since the beginning of this bull market.


Gold Bears Pull $20.8 Billion as BlackRock Says Buy: Commodities

www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-05-12/gold-b...buy-commodities.html

Hedge funds increased bets on lower gold prices after investors pulled a record $20.8 billion from bullion funds this year while BlackRock Inc. (BLK), the world’s biggest money manager, said it’s still bullish.

Speculators held 67,374 so-called short contracts on May 7, 6.4 percent more than a week earlier, U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission data show. The net-long position dropped 10 percent to 49,260 futures and options. Net-bullish wagers across 18 U.S.-traded raw materials climbed 5.8 percent to 582,265, with gains for cocoa, cotton and hogs.

Gold is having its worst start to a year since 1982 after dropping 14 percent and sliding into a bear market in April. Holdings in exchange-traded funds backed by bullion tumbled to the lowest since July 2011 even as central banks print money on an unprecedented scale to boost growth. BlackRock’s President Robert Kapito said May 9 he would still buy the metal, echoing billionaire John Paulson, who’s sticking with a bullish view even after losing 27 percent in his Gold Fund last month...

Debsyl, I normally try not to pay too much attention to individual acts of violence. Canada alone is over 30 million people. Lots of Canadians (unfortunately) die prematurely every day; and someone killed in a traffic accident is just as "dead" as someone who is murdered.

That said, I did happen to notice the facts of this case (because it had received so much media attention), and was struck by the utter senselessness of the crime. Someone is selling their vehicle, and gets waylaid by a couple of thugs?

I can't help focusing my own thoughts on more general themes. WHY are incidents of senseless violence on the rise? Too many weapons floating around our streets. Too much violenct imagery. And (in particular) the glorification of violence.

I know Canadian society would have been a lot healthier if that NEANDERTHAL Don Cherry hadn't crawled out from under a rock 30 years ago and began relentlessly promoting fighting in hockey. What a surprise that this same knuckle-dragger is such a "staunch supporter of the troops"...going half way around the world to fight-and-kill the people of Afghanistan (for no reason).

And what sort of diseased societies REGRESS from professional boxing all the way down to "ultimate fighting"???

Societies with no respect for human life will inevitably produce a lot of victims like Tim Bosma...

My turn to add something new. Another Styx tune.

This one came out while I was still a teen, and for reasons which should be obvious (lol!!), I immediately found it personally inspirational.

Listening to it today, there is a definite quality of irony in the lyrics. However, I would argue it's lost none of its inspirational qualities...








Fooling Yourself


You see the world through your cynical eyes
You're a troubled young man i can tell
You've got it all in the palm of your hand
But your hand's wet with sweat and your head needs a rest

And you're fooling yourself if you don't believe it
You're kidding yourself if you don't believe it
How can you be such an angry young man
When your future looks quite bright to me
How can there be such a sinister plan
That could hide such a lamb, such a caring young man

You're fooling yourself if you don't believe it
You're kidding yourself if you don't believe it
Get up, get back on your feet
You're the one they can't beat and you know it
Come on, let's see what you've got
Just take your best shot and don't blow it

You're fooling yourself if you don't believe it
You're killing yourself if you don't believe it
Get up, get back on your feet
You're the one they can't beat and you know it
Come on, let's see what you've got
Just take your best shot and don't blow it


www.lyricsfreak.com/s/styx/fooling+yourself_10226068.html