You are here

Daily Bell

Subscribe to Daily Bell feed
Updated: 2 hours 6 min ago

Silver and Gold May Muddle in August But Fall Could Tell a Different Tale

5 hours 10 min ago

Fed Worries Are Crushing Gold and Silver Stocks … Gold slumped today, finishing at its lowest level in a month after investors grew worried that the Fed would signal that interest rates would rise when it meets this week. – Motley Fool

Strange that the US central bank can preach increased prosperity at a time when some 90-100 million potential workers in the US don’t seek formal, mainstream employment.

On top of this, as Ron Paul wrote recently (here), the numbers that do issue from fedgov regarding employment are untrue.

The most recent employment numbers featured an increased amount of service jobs. But even that wasn’t really true as the numbers were “adjusted” upward by fedgov itself.

In this case the word “adjusted” means that the numbers were simply arbitrarily enlarged.

Because this number is so “good,” the Federal Reserve is now contemplating a rate increase, presumably one of .25%

In  fact nothing has changed. The quasi-depression that afflicts the US and the world remains. The impatience of central bankers also remains.

It is a matter of control. The Fed needs higher rates in order to move them back down. Going negative in the US is probably a difficult proposition, one that would arouse considerable media controversy, which the Fed probably doesn’t want at this time.

So it really doesn’t matter what the “real” numbers are. The Fed needs to move rates up in order to move them back down.

And presumably that is what will happen. More:

Gold bugs are growing uneasy given recent comments by members of the U.S. Federal Reserve. On Sunday, for example, Vice Chairman Stanley Fischer said in a speech that the U.S. was “close” to hitting its targets for employment and inflation.

That statement seemed to imply that the Fed might hike interest rates this year. Meanwhile, Fed Chairwoman Janet Yellen is scheduled to speak this Friday at its annual retreat in Jackson Hole, Wyoming. Some analysts expect her speech to signal that the Fed is ready to raise rates, which would be bad news for gold.

The reason rising interest rates are bad for gold is that it gives investors an alternative to owning gold, which doesn’t pay any income. Further, higher interest rates tend to tamp down inflation, which is also bad for gold.

Money metals have had a great year but the summer has yielded to price doldrums versus the dollar. September is a different story and October as well.

The dollar in particular will come under pressure as October looms  (here). Russia is beginning to transition currency away from the dollar toward gold.,

And at the beginning of October, the IMF will place the yuan in the SDR basket of currencies. The yuan is now eligible to be issued out by international financial facilities such as The World Bank. Eventually yuan-denominated bonds will have an impact on US dollar bonds as value flows out of the dollar. As dollar bonds become less popular, the dollar themselves will flow back to the US creating price inflation.

Long term, neither the US economy nor the dollar itself can be said to present positive trends. And as the dollar and precious metals are inversely related in modern trading, the more damage the dollar undergoes, the brighter metals shine.

Even in August, silver has not lost all momentum. Silver exchange traded funds saw significant inflows early in the week, pushing holdings to record highs. Gold ETF holdings moved up as well to record highs despite struggles against dollar pricing.

The markets, in other words, are not confirming the price action and sooner or later, we will see a broad variety of metals instruments begin to reflect underlying demand.

Here at DB, our sponsor Golden Arrow has participated in silver’s upward trend and no doubt will continue to make progress as silver does, itself. For more information on Golden Arrow, please see an interview here.

Since we began to promote the opportunities available at Golden Arrow, silver has had an upwards move along with gold. Golden Arrow partner Silver Standard  has announced it is working toward a new mine by the end of the year with Chinchillas, a Golden Arrow subsidiary.

Golden Arrow informs us that “the application for the mining permit has been filed.” Those who wish to investigate silver mining properties may want to consider the Chinchillas project. You can see the Golden Arrow website here, which contains information on Chinchillas.

Golden Arrow Contact: Shawn: 1-800-901-0058 or 778-686-0135.

Stock Symbols:

Canada: GRG
Frankfurt: GAC

GOLDEN ARROW RESOURCES is a sponsor of The Daily Bell under a new marketing program. The company welcomes your interest and support. Please consult DB’s disclaimer before making investment decisions.

Nuke Miniaturization Threat Emerges Conveniently as Pentagon Seeks $1 Trillion

Wed, 08/24/2016 - 14:13

The Homeland Security Department is trying to ramp up wearable devices that can detect nuclear radiation …  DHS has made a handful of awards for well-developed prototypes, of wearable products from companies including Leidos and Physical Sciences, Inc., according to a recent FBO posting.  Last year, DHS made a broad agency announcement soliciting proposals for so-called Wearable Intelligent Nuclear Detection, or WIND, technology.-NextGov

DHS has been attempting to secure wearable nuclear detection devices and this is the next wave of atomic propaganda. We are supposed to be frightened by the continued miniaturization of nuclear weapons.

Conveniently, one new threat is emerging in North Korea just as the military-industrial complex is seeking a $1 trillion nuclear arms upgrade:

Here from Bloomberg in 2015:

North Korea has deployed its new road-mobile KN-08 intercontinental ballistic missile and is capable of mounting a miniaturized nuclear warhead on it, the U.S.’s top homeland security commander said.

“Our assessment is that they have the ability to put a nuclear weapon on a KN-08 and shoot it at the homeland,” Admiral William Gortney, the head of the U.S. Northern Command, told reporters Tuesday at the Pentagon. “We have not seen them do that” and “we haven’t seen them test the KN-08.”

He said “yes sir” when asked if the U.S. thinks North Korea has succeeded in the complicated task of miniaturizing a warhead for use on such a missile. North Korea has conducted three nuclear tests since 2006.

Elite propaganda?  More fear-based reporting?

From global warming, to vaccines to various US war, The New York Times, Washington Post, Bloomberg and other publications participate in disseminating faux elite dominant social themes.

The dissemination used to be organized through fedgov’s Operation Mockingbird (here).

Such thematic elements are supposed to frighten people. Invariably, the solution is bigger government, either domestically or preferably through the UN. And of course, solutions are expensive. Fedgov needs to be paid. The taxpayer provides.

The nuclear meme is an obvious one in retrospect. We’ve continually dissected this popular meme in the past few months, here and here. It began even before the first nuclear test weapon in the US. The Pentagon only communicated about nuclear weapons with a single reporter from the New York Times, (here).

No other reporters received information from the Pentagon and it was later discovered this individual was on the Pentagon payroll. He called it an “honor.”

An honor? He was a cog in a vast Pentagon disinformation campaign. The Pentagon was so intent on controlling the nuclear narrative that along with Japan it helped pass laws that made it a capital crime to report on nuclear weapons and even to discuss them.

It seems obvious that we are being lied to systematically about nuclear weapons, or weapons of mass destruction as they are now being called. We’re  fairly sure Hiroshima was firebombed, in addition to any nuclear device that was supposedly dropped on it. Also, the initial damage to Hiroshima and Nagasaki was much less than advertised (here).

At least one bombing division of 66 bombers on August 6 was likely diverted from its original target to firebomb Hiroshima. In fact, it makes no sense that this bombing division would have bombed its target – already flattened – for a third time.

Even given that Hiroshima and Nagasaki were bombed by “atom bombs,” lies still cluster thickly around the Pentagon nuclear program. Every bit of nuclear test film apparently went through Los Angeles-based Lookout Mountain, (here). Film was manipulated, enhanced and even reconfigured.

But if you look at the film today, it’s hard to find any believable footage. Almost always the missile or plan streaks into the sky but one never sees the entire graphical narrative. Films inevitably cut away and the explosion is seen separately.

Even foreign films of nuclear explosions seem faked. And we have pointed out that it is perfectly possible for the Pentagon to mimic a nuclear explosion using large amounts of TNT. You can see one such mimicked explosion here. Who is to say there are not other ones?

The latest narrative to emerge from the Pentagon regarding nuclear weapons is that people are in danger of being blown up by “miniaturized” weapons.

Here, from the New York Times in January 2016:

As North Korea dug tunnels at its nuclear test site last fall, watched by American spy satellites, the Obama administration was preparing a test of its own in the Nevada desert.

A fighter jet took off with a mock version of the nation’s first precision-guided atom bomb. Adapted from an older weapon, it was designed with problems like North Korea in mind: Its computer brain and four maneuverable fins let it zero in on deeply buried targets like testing tunnels and weapon sites.

And its yield, the bomb’s explosive force, can be dialed up or down depending on the target, to minimize collateral damage.  In short, while the North Koreans have been thinking big — claiming to have built a hydrogen bomb, a boast that experts dismiss as wildly exaggerated — the Energy Department and the Pentagon have been readying a line of weapons that head in the opposite direction.

… The B61 Model 12, the bomb flight-tested last year in Nevada, is the first of five new warhead types planned as part of an atomic revitalization estimated to cost up to $1 trillion over three decades.

As a family, the weapons and their delivery systems move toward the small, the stealthy and the precise.

North Korea’s discovery of miniature nuclear weapons along with other threats of nuclear miniaturization are certainly an advantageous occurrence for the Pentagon.  They provide justification for Congress to vote the Pentagon as much money as it needs.

Conclusion: Exactly how much of the nuclear narrative is actually legitimate? There is yet no way of knowing because the Pentagon remains in charge of the information that emerges about the program. Even the “tests” are top secret. Until this changes, the true breadth and validity of the US program cannot be known. We will have to take the Pentagon’s word on it. Of course, the Pentagon is not always truthful. In fact, it recently emerged that top brass had mislaid some $8 trillion (here).


Hillary’s Campaign Grows Noticeably More Aggressive

Wed, 08/24/2016 - 04:48

Hillary, beset by rumors about her health and ethics, is becoming more aggressive with her critics. She is hiring groups to fight back in chat rooms and on websites against criticism, (here).

Additionally, she is moving ahead with her campaign as she prefers – and apparently without fear of what her opponents will think – taking a jet for only 20 miles to attend a Rothschild fundraiser in Nantucket at $100,000 a plate, (here).

She will be making few formal appearances or speeches during the rest of August, even though her campaign reportedly sent out a panicked fund-raising memo to supporters.

Most recently, it has been reported that FBI notes related to the death of Bill Clinton special council Vince Foster are missing (here). A researcher who saw the notes previously has revealed that they are not in the files lodged at with Congressional records.

The notes that are missing are not the only missing information pertaining to the death of Foster. Information on a Bill Clinton hard-drive has been missing for years.

The missing FBI information involved a report on how Hillary Clinton berated Foster in front of many others as a result of the Whitewater fraud case and various political situations.

Kenneth Starr investigated Whitewater as a special council and was vilified in the media for his role. However, it turns out that in some ways Starr was not at all aggressive.

He didn’t even mention Hillary’s angry, public outburst against Foster because he thought, apparently, it might be perceived as disrespectful to her.

A few days later Foster after the outburst, Foster supposedly killed himself. We use the word “supposedly” because even after decades, controversy swirls around the death.


Two investigators – Robert Fiske and Kenneth Starr – separately concluded that Foster shot himself and died, due to suicide.  But over time, major questions have been raised about what may have really killed him.

Now, recently discovered evidence … in files of the National Archives and Records Administration shows Starr’s lead prosecutor Miguel Rodriguez submitted a 2-page resignation letter and a 31 page memo about the injuries Foster sustained.

Rodriguez notes in the letter details about injuries around Foster’s neck which were not reported in official government documents.  At the time, the FBi claimed that Foster’s neck injury photos were underexposed, and therefore useless to them.

Rodriguez claims that after he produced additional damning evidence of a possible Foster murder coverup, he became a target and was investigated internally!

The main additional evidence Rodriguez refers to has to do with a second bullet hole in Foster’s neck. This would certainly contradict conclusions that Foster committed suicide.

Foster’s death is not by any means the only controversial one surrounding the Clinton’s. Years ago Clinton “death lists” were popular on the Internet. But now again, murder accusations swirl around the campaign and the couple.

These accusations are based on the deaths of individuals who are said to be close to the Clintons of involved with them via business or political dealings.

  • Victor Thorn, Julian Assange’s lawyer was recently hit by a train His death was ruled a suicide.
  • John Ashe died when his throat was crushed in a weight-lifting accident. Supposedly, he was scheduled to testify against Hillary regarding corruption charges.
  • Staffer Seth Conrad Rich was shot and killed. Some say he was preparing to go to the FBI with inside knowledge about Hillary’s criminal activities. Others believe he leaked DNC emails to WikiLeaks
  • Shawn Lucas who delivered a lawsuit to the DNC is dead as well. His body was discovered in his bathroom and there seems to be some question about how he was killed.

There is of course no definitive evidence that Hillary was involved in any violence against these individuals. Snopes, for instance, has issued numerous debunkings, here. But the deaths and the reports surrounding them further emphasize the suspicions that Hillary opponents harbor about her.

Conclusion: Hillary’s recent actions seems calculated to reinforce those suspicions. The idea is that perhaps she wants her opponents to think the worst of her. We commented on that here. Such an approach is obviously intimidating. It would also indicate that she is fairly confident about winning the election. The possibility that voting machines in certain areas are “rigged” may reinforce this confidence, (here).

One Can Never Have Too Much Freedom When Building Fruitful Societies

Tue, 08/23/2016 - 14:27

Being an Ideologue Means Never Having to Say You’re Wrong … “Communism would have worked, if the Soviet Union had only tried it for real.” … For any political-economic ideology, there is always a hard core of believers who will never waver in their conviction that if only the program were tried in its pure form, it would succeed. Any failures — even debacles on a grand scale, including the fiasco of 20th century communism — will be chalked up to ideological impurity and improper application.- Bloomberg

Bloomberg’s Noah Smith, the site’s most provocative and often wrongheaded columnist compares communism to free-markets in this editorial. His conclusion: “Hard core believers” of any type are probably wrong.

We don’t think so.

Communism in its modern form is a pervasively authoritarian ideology. Its corollary is state control. Free-market economics is exactly the opposite. It is most effective when the state is  at least dormant.

Can societies ever be too free? That’s hard to fathom. Certainly – and sadly – that doesn’t seem to be a problem in the world today. Nonetheless, Noah pursues his points.

In reality, true believers often cling tenaciously to their worldviews … [But] the tendency toward ideological commitment is now being tested in the U.S., as free-market dogma — sometimes known as neo-liberalism — is coming under increasing attack.

Bernie Sanders’s presidential campaign gained a surprising amount of support from young people. Economists, both in the public eye and out of it, are focusing more on inequality and embracing a more activist role for the state.

Business professors are starting to question the short-termism of financial markets and shareholder control. Some researchers at right-leaning think tanks are saying that Republicans need to move away from Reaganomics and its mix of tax cuts and deregulation.

In fact we don’t recognize what Smith calls “free-market dogma.” What the US has in place now is what we’ve called technocratic fascism.

To conflate it with a pure form of anarcho-capitalism is ludicrous.

The US government runs on well over $3 trillion a year. It pursues bloodthirsty hegemony abroad and repression at home.

The dominant ideology of the US – and the West in general – is corporatism. And corporatism is the result of Supreme Court decisions that have at least partially created a reign of judicial terror that includes intellectual property rights, corporate personhood and monopoly central banking.

Absent these three disastrous influences, the US probably would look a lot more like it did before the Civil War, when the country – despite slavery and genocidal policies toward Native Americans – produced something of a golden epoch in the annals of industrial freedom and creativity.

The success of this era, ironically, laid the building blocks for the current American empire. Pre-Civil War, creativity was fairly untrammeled by government regulations and entrepreneurship was not constrained by the current faux fervor of environmentalism.

Here, a summary, as follows:

The antebellum era was a time not only of profound political change but also of great technological and economic innovation. The Industrial Revolution, which began in Europe in the 1700s, had produced new inventions and methods of production.

American inventors transformed the U.S. economy with new innovations of their own. This rapid development of manufacturing and improved farming had such a profound effect on American society that historians often refer to it as the Market Revolution.

Some antebellum inventions? The cotton gin, the steamboat, the Erie Canal and railroads.

The building blocks of modernity not just for the US but for the world were put in place during a period of incandescent creativity. People could invent what they wanted and put their ideas into production.

Contrast this with communism. From what we can tell,  Stalin’s number one product was genocide. Certainly, people abandoned communism as soon as they could. The system was only kept in place by force.

Contrast that to the US, where it took a war – the Civil War – to change the texture of society and replace laissez-faire with the beginnings of the technocratic capitalism that the US is sinking under today.

Smith writes in his conclusion that people generally are not ideological. The implication is that free-market “neoliberalism” has moved in an overly energetic fashion in the direction of industrial anarchy.

But as explained above, laissez-faire has been retreating in the US for well over a century-and-a-half now. Smith seems to be confusing fascism with freedom.

Nonetheless, he is fairly certain what’s coming next:

“I expect the U.S. public to cast around for alternatives to the neoliberalism of Reagan, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush … Some sort of course change, rather than a doubling down, seems inevitable.”

Leave aside our disagreement with his characterization of the philosophies of these three men, it is hard to conceive of a society failing from too much entrepreneurship, industrial vitality and freedom.

On the other hand, it equally hard to visualize a successful society shaped by the brutal intolerance of communism – as it apparently evolves inevitably when it is tried.

Conclusion: One can never have too much freedom, in our view. And one can never have too little forcible communism. Human action is preferable to authoritarianism. Societies work best when people (absent sociopaths) are left to their own devices.

TIME Argues ‘Trolling’ Demands Formal Policing of the Internet

Mon, 08/22/2016 - 13:17

How Trolls Are Ruining the Internet Joel Stein … Troll Culture of Hate Time … They’re turning the web into a cesspool of aggression and violence. What watching them is doing to the rest of us may be even worse  …  This story is not a good idea. Not for society and certainly not for me. Because what trolls feed on is attention. And this little bit–these several thousand words–is like leaving bears a pan of baklava.  It would be smarter to be cautious, because the Internet’s personality has changed. – TIME

TIME magazine has written yet another horrible article, this one basically calling for the Internet to be controlled and censored because of too many “trolls.”

It’s not clear why there are more of them now than before. The only reason the article gives is that “mores” are being stripped away by anonymity and “aggression and violence” are “seeping from our smartphones into every aspect of our lives.”

This doesn’t make much sense but TIME often doesn’t seem to make a great deal of sense. Smartphones have been around for years but TIME has only decided now, apparently, that trolling is a big enough problem to warrant a major article.

And it’s one, eventually, that TIME suggests ought to dealt with by civilian policing. You’d think the Internet itself provides enough ways, for the most part, to deal with all but the most persistent harassment. But TIME doesn’t see it that way.

TIME is actually a little late to the party. The article actually builds on reports (here) that London’s Metropolitan Police are setting up a £1.7 million “Twitter squad” to fight social media trolling. Some £500,000 is funding a Home Office Online Hate Crime “hub” as well.


Once it was a geek with lofty ideals about the free flow of information. Now, if you need help improving your upload speeds the web is eager to help with technical details, but if you tell it you’re struggling with depression it will try to goad you into killing yourself.

Psychologists call this the online disinhibition effect, in which factors like anonymity, invisibility, a lack of authority and not communicating in real time strip away the mores society spent millennia building.

… The people who relish this online freedom are called trolls, a term that originally came from a fishing method online thieves use to find victims. It quickly morphed to refer to the monsters who hide in darkness and threaten people.

Internet trolls have a manifesto of sorts, which states they are doing it for the “lulz,” or laughs. What trolls do for the lulz ranges from clever pranks to harassment to violent threats.

The article goes on to mention “doxxing” –  which is “publishing personal data, such as Social Security numbers and bank accounts.”

Also something called “swatting,” –  “calling in an emergency to a victim’s house so the SWAT team busts in.”

So we can see the article is conflating words with actions. Trolling, it is implied includes the theft of data and false reports of an emergency. Additionally, some of the examples of trolling seem aimed at men and women whose belief structures seem to be emphatically politically correct.

No matter. Toward the end of the article, we get to the argument that the Internet needs official policing.

As more trolling occurs, many victims are finding laws insufficient and local police untrained. “Where we run into the problem is the social-media platforms are very hesitant to step on someone’s First Amendment rights,” says Mike Bires, a senior police officer in Southern California who co-founded, a tool for cops to fight on-line crime and use social media to work with their communities.

“If they feel like someone’s life is in danger, Twitter and Snapchat are very receptive. But when it comes to someone harassing you online, getting the social-media companies to act can be very frustrating.” Until police are fully caught up, he recommends that victims go to the officer who runs the force’s social-media department.

This excerpt mentions Twitter, which (controversially) has been relatively aggressive about punishing users it deems abusive. In some cases, lifetime bans are levied. Of course, it’s not just Twitter. Facebook and Google (via YouTube) monitor user communications on an ongoing basis.

This is ironic, however, because both Facebook and Google are basically CIA-supported and funded facilities (here and here). One can make the argument within this context that the Internet’s largest providers are basically part of the US’s military-industrial complex.

Thus the same groups that fight interminable overseas conflicts wounding and killing millions are also concerned with “trolling.”

Certainly some “trolling” may be extremely malicious and even dangerous. But it obvious as well that the Internet has given people an independent voice along with important, alternative points of view. And this is obviously – and increasingly – disturbing to those who control society from behind the scenes.

Conclusion: The idea is to generate yet another faux reason to regulate and police information technology. Britain has already begun, and TIME apparently wants to ensure that the US won’t be far behind.


Surprise Surge as an Important Poll Shows Trump Leading

Mon, 08/22/2016 - 09:30


Donald Trump has beaten Hillary in a major poll.Donald Trump appears to have made a political comeback for the ages, but the media has gone silent about a major new poll that shows the Republican has catapulted back into the lead instead showing their viewers polls from three weeks ago. -Sputnik

A recent poll released by the USC/LA Times, here, found that Trump held a two point lead over Clinton, nationally. The daily poll questioned some 3,000 US citizens.

Trump recently changed top campaign staffers, bringing in new manager Kellyanne Conway and Brietbart CEO Steve Bannon to help run his effort. And now in at least one poll he has seen a massive jump in tracking polls of some eight percent, pushing him past Hillary.

Both Trump and Hillary have moved up and down in the polls, especially because of the recent conventions. But now Trump seems headed up.

It could be that Trump’p recent apology helped reassure voters about his essential good nature.  He’s also supposedly attempting to make a special efforts to appeal to African Americans.

Over the weekend, Trump supposedly held a 45% to 43% lead over Hillary. But as suggested in the above article excerpt, the development is not getting much play in the rest of the mainstream media.

Here’s the latest according to the Daily Wire:

Despite some positive movement for Donald Trump over the least week, he still finds himself trailing Hillary Clinton in the nationals polls by an average of nearly 6 points and losing to the Democrat in most of the key battleground states. Though many of the polls are looking grim for the Republican, an Aug. 19 LA Times/USC poll finds the two candidates tied in a head-to-head.

We’ve written about polling here. Given the ongoing negative news about Hillary, we don’t understand the massive lead she has in many states.

It’s been pointed out that Trump fills stadiums while Hillary has trouble filling much smaller venues.

We’ve written that one possibility when it comes to this election is that Hillary’s poll numbers will remain relentlessly positive and that the election itself may be fixed in accordance with the polls (here).

This may sound far-fetched, but Hillary has powerful backers at the top levels of US society. She wasn’t indicted by the FBI and it’s perfectly possible that the election is “fixed” in certain parts of the country. Trump himself has worried out loud about this possibility (here).


Philippines’ Duterte Has Been Called to Account Over Violence, Not the US

Mon, 08/22/2016 - 08:32


President Duterte kicks out all presidential appointees in government … Duterte on Sunday lashed out at the U.S. police killings of black men in his latest outburst against critics of his anti-drug campaign, which has left hundreds of suspects dead. – Inquirer

Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte said Sunday that he would be firing thousands of federal officials. Duterte is operating a violent campaign against drugs and corruption since coming to power two months ago.

Some 500 or more “drug dealers” have been killed in gun-battles with the police. A huge number – some 600,000 –  have surrendered and are likely in jail.

He’s done this, he says, to cut down on crime in the Philippines. But he is receiving considerable criticism as a result.

Many countries including the US have indicated their disapproval. The US State Department and two UN human rights experts have told Duterte that he needs to ensure law enforcement is compliant with human rights obligations.

The UN’s Agnes Callamard, a Special Rapporteur has informed Duterte that his government could be held liable for his actions.

“Claims to fight illicit drug trade do not absolve the government from its international legal obligations and do not shield state actors or others from responsibility for illegal killings.”

The result? Duterte has indicated he may withdraw from the United Nations. And he  has responded with criticisms of his own aimed at the US.


“Why are you Americans killing the black people there, shooting them down when they are already on the ground?” he asked. “Answer that question, because even if it’s just one or two or three, it is still human rights violations.”

He also criticized US involvement in Middle Eastern wars, especially Syria and indicated that if the UN continued to threaten him that he would go to Russia and China and suggest they form an alternative body to the UN.

As regards the US, Duterte’s response is surely an effective one. The US is suffering from a plague of police violence. Too often, US police shoot suspects rather than arrest them. And, too often, individuals are assaulted or even shot as a result of mistaken identity.

When it comes to overseas wars, the US in particular has killed millions in serial confrontations with Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and now Syria. Duterte has been called to account. Not so the US.

New Gov. Analysis Shows Fed Policies Have Deepened Downturn for Many

Sun, 08/21/2016 - 14:07

Wealthy Have Nearly Healed From Recession; the Poor Haven’t  … The Great Recession and the subsequent recovery from it have deepened the wedge between the very wealthy and everyone else in America, plunging the poor deeper into debt and wiping out two-fifths of the wealth held by families in the heart of the middle class. The wealthiest Americans, meanwhile, appear close to regaining all their losses over the same period, according to an analysis released last week by the Congressional Budget Office. – Washington Post

This analysis helps prove a point we’ve been making for years: Fed stimulation provided by too-low interest rates does NOT stimulate industry only finance and speculation.

The Congressional Report doesn’t seem to mention central banking, so in this article we will rectify the omission. The entire justification for central banking is that it helps policymakers produce prosperity. But it doesn’t.

We don’t need a government analysis to confirm this but it’s useful to have because it illustrates once more the truth of what’s occurring in terms of economic manipulation. The entire apparatus of monetary leadership, and its influence on the marketplace itself, does not deliver what it is supposed to.

The idea is that the Fed provides additional liquidity as necessary. But this is a form of price-fixing. In a  normal economy where the government itself was not involved in “adjusting¨ the value and volume of currency, the value would be provided by the market itself.

This is the way it has traditionally worked throughout history. The last century has been one enormous experiment. But the consequences are obvious.

Say an economy utilizes gold as money. When too much gold circulated in the marketplace, the value relative to what could be purchased would likely decline. As the value declined, less gold would be produced and circulated. Mines would close, etc.

When less gold was produced, demand would build. The competitive marketplace itself would define the value of “money” and thus the contraction or expansion of money stock.

This does not seem to be a complex point. It is generally admitted that the only way to set a valid price is to allow the market itself to produce the value.

But somehow, not when it comes to money.

Then it seems to be universally acknowledge by power brokers in the US and abroad that a monopoly facility (a central bank) is necessary to adjust the price.

It makes no sense. And furthermore it is an example of what we call an elite dominant social theme.

It is paradigm circulated throughout the world that is so prevalent and fundamental that the mainstream media simply doesn’t question it.

Global warming is such a theme (here). Vaccines are such a theme (here). These themes and many others constitute the propaganda launched by governments – and shadowy power brokers – to reinforce and justify authoritarianism.

Every dominant social theme has two parts. The first part is the problem. Fear is to be raised and deepened whenever possible. That’s why so many elite memes focus on scarcity. The world is running out of water, food, air, etc.

The solution is always to be found in government – the bigger the better. The idea is to justify and advance global government (via the UN) whenever possible.

This is one reason that we are suspicious of the “nuclear weapons” narrative that we have been concentrating on of late. It fits perfectly into the fear-based elite paradigm. Nuclear weapons exist and can destroy the world. Only government can stop their spread and usage.

The same paradigm can be spotted when it comes to central banking. The world is ever in danger of recessions and depressions. And only monopoly central banking – the control of the money supply by an elite, technocracy – can save us from poverty.

Questions do arise of course. But always they have to do with the “job” a given central bank is doing. They are policy questions pertaining to the competence of a monopoly money-printing facility.

But the basic functionality is almost never questioned in the Kabuki ritual that passes for establishment dialogue.

But it should be. Unfortunately, as with so many articles in the mainstream media and Washington Post in particular, when something substantive is presented, the analysis is lacking.

The article presents the information but then leaves it lying there like a dead thing. No fundamental explanation is offered.


The analysis shows the wealthiest 10 percent of Americans now hold three-quarters of the nation’s wealth, up from two-thirds in 1989, and a three percentage-point increase from the start of the recession.

Most Americans found themselves with less wealth in 2013 than Americans of a similar age had in 1989; the only age group doing better than its counterparts from a quarter-century ago was senior citizens.

The report was commissioned at the request of Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, who made inequality a central theme of his run for the Democratic presidential nomination this year.

In a statement, he said the analysis “makes clear that since the 1980s there has been an enormous transfer of wealth from the middle class and the poor to the wealthiest people in this country.”

Of course Sanders has the answer! He doubtless wants MORE government interference so that the problem government has created with its monetary price fixes can be cured by yet more meddling.

When central banks provide more money to the economy than necessary (and there is no way to prove how much IS necessary), the extra cash flows into the hands of the wealthy closest to the central bank money spigot.

Often this money is “invested” in securities exchanges and more money is made. This money doesn’t necessarily translate into industrial stimulation.

The wealthy make more money from central bank processes. But workers are left out of the process.

This is a simple and clear result of monopoly money printing. Price fixing never provides us with expected results. It always damages certain groups at the expense of others.

Over time, monopoly central banking has increasingly impoverished the people it supposedly seeks to help.

And gradually in this Internet era, workers are realizing it. The Fed, for instance, just launched a Facebook page (here). It is already bombarded with negative, nasty comments.

People, more and more of them, do understand the impossibility of improving the economy by giving a handful of people the power to expand or contract the money stock at will.

In simplest terms it is a ridiculous idea. It can’t work. It doesn’t work. And this analysis is further proof.

We’ve been reporting on the gradual decline of central bank – and Federal Reserve – credibility for about a decade now here at DB. Nothing that we have seen leads us to conclude that central banking is held in higher esteem than before.

In other words, the trend is down. And sooner or later the current system will not have the necessary popular support to survive.

While this will be a good development for the prosperity of many, we also know the corollary  difficulty that will emerge. At this point those who stand behind central banking have long-ago concluded the system is not viable.

But that doesn’t mean they will cooperate with removing it. What they will inevitably suggest is that because the current system doesn’t work, a larger, global system is necessary.

The groundwork is already being laid for this global  system. Just yesterday we pointed out that both the ruble and the yuan were being positioned to compete with the dollar. And yet the positioning elements – the IMF and World Bank – were being provided by the West!

The upcoming currency crisis is being manipulated by Western programmatic elements. The solution is to be some sort of increasingly globalized (world) government.

And as this conversation proceeds in the mainstream media, you will find little or no analyses of the price-fixing that inevitably accompanies monopoly central banking at any level.

It will be proposed that global price-fixing will somehow ameliorate the problems coming from regional price fixing of money.

Conclusion: But it won’t. The only path to prosperity is to privatize money and let the market itself calculate its value and volume. This should be done as soon as possible. The disease of central banking should be cured by the application of free-market solutions. We eagerly await this outcome and confidently expect its application within the better part of, hm-mm … a thousand years?

Dollar Disaster Looms? China and Russia’s Currencies Break Away

Sat, 08/20/2016 - 07:28

Russia leaves the Dollar based monetary system and adopts a system of Sovereign Currency. The implications are phenomenal! “In 1990 the first priority of Washington and the IMF was to pressure Yeltsin and the Duma to “privatize” the State Bank of Russia, under a Constitutional amendment that mandated the new Central Bank of Russia, like the Federal Reserve or European Central Bank, be a purely monetarist entity whose only mandate is to control inflation and stabilize the Ruble. In effect, money creation in Russia was removed from state sovereignty and tied to the US dollar.”

2016: “The Stolypin club report advises to increase the investment, pumping up the economy with money from the state budget and by the issue of the Bank of Russia”. Putin decided to follow the Stolypin club advice as the new monetary policy of the country. -Before It’s News

Money is changing fast and the US dollar is going to crash.

Here’s an excerpt from yet another recently published article (translated from the Russian) describing how the ruble may now evolve (here).

We must nationalize the ruble. What does it mean? It means that we must separate the internal markets from the external ones.

… Thus, the first step for Russia is secession from the IMF and others similar institutions designed to keep the entire world in bondage. The dollar noose must be cut.

Now the amount of printed rubles will not be determined by how many dollars we have but by the actual needs of our economy.

… We have absolutely no need in the central bank in its current form, but we do need a financial regular. Under any regime, it was the Treasury that performed this function. Let it remain the same now regardless of the official name. It may continue to be called the Central Bank. If the essence is changed, there is no need in changing plaques.

You can also see an article (here) that goes into this issue more deeply and claims that Putin has in mind backing a portion of the ruble with gold as well. (We should note there are claims the  ruble is backed by gold already.)

The dramatic – historical – Russian currency changes (if these articles are accurate) seem a little difficult to discern in full at this moment, but obviously things are changing fast. And they are changing for China’s “money” as well. In fact, some have speculated China and Russia could launch a joint, gold-backed currency (here, see bottom of article).

At the beginning of October, the yuan joins the IMF’s SDR  basket (here). This means that major international institutions can issue bonds payable in yuan (actually RMB, the Chinese external currency).

And that is just what has happened already. The World Bank is issuing a large yuan/RMB tranche and this will be the first of many (here).

Investors who want to place funds in RMB rather than dollars will use the new yuan/RMB-based instruments. The US will continue to print dollars but those dollars may not find a home abroad so easily. Instead they may circulate back into the US economy creating significant price inflation.

The US was able to do so much damage domestically and abroad because of its virtually unlimited spending power. It’s been able to prosecute endless, horrible wars and imprison up to five percent of its adult population at any one time.

Now things are changing. Between the Russian announcement and yuan/RMB convertibility, the US will gradually have more trouble printing money at will. Perhaps the corrupt military-industrial complex will be impelled to shrink and large-scale social programs like the wretched Obamacare will have more difficulty with funding as well.

As a libertarian publication, we should rejoice over the upcoming starvation of the US fedgov.

But we will not. We are well aware that the same banking influences that created the monstrous, modern state is ruining US and the West generally in order to build up a more febrile internationalism.

The BRICs, invented by Goldman Sachs are part of it. So is this reconfiguration of reserve currencies.

It seems natural, of course, as “directed history”always does. But it is not natural in the slightest. From what we can tell, it is pre-planned.

Remember both the IMF and the World Bank are controlled by the US. And yet it is these two organizations that are facilitating the rise of the yuan/RMB.

Also, please pay attention to how Russia will issue rubles into the economic system (from the same translated article we quoted previously):

How can we calculate [how many rubles Russia needs]? In exactly the same way as the United States calculates the amount of dollars needed for its economy. Just as the European Union does the same.

The best justification would be that from now on Russia issues rubles based on the value (in rubles) of all natural resources explored on its territory. It is quite amusing that subsequent steps are no rocket science; they are dictated by common sense itself. Since we are breaking down the disadvantageous system,

Putin may be taking a big step, but by circumventing his central bank (initially imposed by the West) he can be seen as moving toward more state control of Russian currency.

And for years, we have debated heatedly with people like Ellen Brown (here) who believe that federal governments can do a much better job of printing money than quasi-independent central banks.

Good Lord! What’s wrong with a little monetary freedom?

All Putin has to do if he wants a healthy currency is declare that the new ruble will be backed by gold and that its issuance will be a private or regional matter.

Let a thousand gold mines bloom. Let the circulation of gold and its related paper notes travel up or down depending on quantity and demand – not the determinations of yet another shadowy, elite clique.

This is the way the US ran before the Civil War and created one of the world’s most prosperous and freest cultures. Those in the US live yet on the dregs of that “golden” period.

But this is not well understood. As time goes on the often-illiterate alternative media may join in hosannas for Putin’s upcoming currency shift. But, again, just because “Russia” will now control its currency instead of a central bank reporting to the IMF, doesn’t necessarily create a better system.

Of course, the argument will be made this sort of system is what Hitler installed in Nazi Germany in order to create the German “miracle” of the 1930s (which we are supposedly not able to talk about). But that system might have destroyed itself over time. Surely it would have.

To begin with, such systems may work very well. But since the “money” is being created by human deciders rather than the competitive market, distortions are inevitable. Price-fixing, which is what it is, never works.

And while we are making the point that this newfound ruble freedom may not be so profound as advertised, let us note that the advent of a currency war is being accompanied by military tension as well.

Conclusion: Whether such tensions are legitimate or dramatized is difficult to say. But given elite banking control of so much around the world, we would not be surprised if we are simply being exposed to a gigantic performance of sorts directed from the top down.Ironically, despite apparent “setbacks,” London’s City surely leads the way.




Wracked by Corruption and Fraud, the Pentagon Is Now Increasingly Exposed

Fri, 08/19/2016 - 22:02

Air Force ballistic missile upgrade said to be stalled over cost … The U.S. Air Force’s program to develop and field an intercontinental ballistic missile to replace aging Minuteman III weapons is stalled over Pentagon concerns the service underestimated the cost by billions of dollars, according to a defense official familiar with the program. – Stars and Stripes

The Pentagon seems to be getting an attack of fiscal responsibility as we can see from the above article excerpt.

Only it is in the wrong direction.

The Pentagon is worried the US Airforce is underestimating how much its new intercontinental ballistic missile is going to cost.

As we write, the Pentagon is being exposed to significant negative media commentary regarding its inability to track upwards of $8 trillion of budgetary items.

See here, from Zerohedge:

Shocking Government Report Finds $6.5 Trillion In Taxpayer Funds “Unaccounted For”

Last week, we first touched on a topic which, in any non-banana republic, would be a far greater scandal than what Ryan Lochte may or may not have been doing in a Rio bathroom: namely, government corruption, falsification and potential fraud and embezzlement, which has resulted in the Pentagon being unable to account for up to $8.5 trillion in taxpayer funding.

Today, Reuters follows up on this disturbing issue, and reveals that the Army’s finances are so jumbled it had to make trillions of dollars of improper accounting adjustments to create an illusion that its books are balanced.

… The Army’s financial statements for 2015 were “materially misstated.” … “Forced” adjustments rendered the statements useless because “DoD and Army managers could not rely on the data in their accounting systems when making management and resource decisions.”

The initial story ZeroHedge refers to came from The Daily Bell (here), and while the lack of proper Pentagon accounting is a huge story, what is even bigger in our view is the constant fabrication of Pentagon technological successes.

The Pentagon’s NATO/NASA axis – the public part of the Pentagon’s mission – is riven with fraud.

Purposeful fraud.

Why purposeful? Because while NASA debunking of various aspects of technological successes are available on YouTube,  less attention has been paid to nuclear fraud.

What we’ve found in a number of months of examining Pentagon nuclear releases is that very few of them, if any, are “real.” Most of them appear to be considerably falsified. It’s not just enhanced graphics. It runs deeper than that.

How powerful are nuclear weapons really? A can they be used on a regular basis (here, here and here)?

We’re skeptical of the entire NATO/NASA information effort.

If it were just NATO or just NASA, we might be able to accept that “rogue” elements were to blame.

But given the depth of obvious falsities when it comes to BOTH programs, one must begin to accept the obvious conclusion that the Pentagon’s misinformation is purposeful and amounts to a policy.

When it comes to nuclear test films released by the Pentagon over the decades, any unbiased observer who spends enough time with them will be forced to admit they are fake. Not just one or two, but very possibly ALL.

Even the most recently released film of a Bikini Island test seems obviously faked (here).

Reportedly, the Pentagon passed all of its nuclear film through its Lookout Mountain, Los Angeles special effects studio (here and here). But as stated, the fakery seems deeper than graphical enhancements.

The NASA fakery is bad as well. The most obvious example we’ve been able to find is this vignette of an astronaut rising from the surface of the moon without using his legs (here at 2 minutes, 15 seconds). There certainly seems to be something pulling him up. Maybe a wire?

And then there is the issue of the first “lunar rover” which seems to have been built on top of the skeleton of a Willys Jeep – of the sort that was popular during World War II (here).

Ideally, one would be impressed by Boeing’s recycling of wartime materiel. But not when they billed fedgov some $40 million, reportedly, for its development.

And then there is the issue of the “destroyed” tapes of the initial moon landing. NASA explains that the footage was written over to save space (here). But later NASA released a “colorized” version of moon footage.

Actually, there was probably something on the original tapes that did not stand up to scrutiny in this YouTube era. Surely that’s obvious to anyone applying an ordinary level of skepticism to NASA’s explanation

Do we deny that NASA went to the moon or that nuclear weapons don’t blow things up? Why would we make such an incendiary statement? After all, you can fake some things without faking others. So we’ll restrict our stance to questions, many questions, not answers. And we are surely skeptical in general … on a variety of levels.

The main reason we are skeptical is because the Pentagon itself seems in charge of its narrative, certainly when it comes nuclear weapons and secondarily as regards NASA.

And now the military-industrial complex that runs the Pentagon wants a cool $1 trillion to “upgrade” the “nuclear triad” that supposedly protects America.

One might think in the current climate that the Pentagon would be leery of pushing forward with such extravagant numbers.

But arrogance permeates DC like a fog.

Let us for the moment restrict our questions to nuclear weapons.

Who supervises the Pentagon’s dollar estimates when it comes to nuclear weapons? Who certifies that the military industrial complex even delivers all the weapons that they say they are providing?

The Pentagon has been in charge of the nuclear narrative since before the announcement of the atom  bomb. During the entire process of building, testing and using the bomb, the Pentagon fed information to a single New York Times reporter who was later discovered to be on the Pentagon’s payroll (here).

Who had access to the Pentagon’s nuclear tests? Certainly real witnesses were not allowed. And even those who did witness the tests were kept miles away from the actual explosions.

And then there is this: A Hawaii “test” called Sailor Hat featured the explosion of 500 tons of TNT to mimic a small nuclear explosion (here). How many other times did the Pentagon use TNT or dynamite as a substitute for atomic explosions? More than once?

There is a theory that nuclear weapons can only be triggered at certain times of the year, depending on the sun’s radiation and other issues (here).

And there are even some who don’t believe in nuclear weapons at all (here).

The Pentagon is about to charge America $1 trillion for more of them. But where is the oversight – outside of the Pentagon itself – when it comes to these numbers?

And who is to say that the Pentagon is actually getting what it pays for?

How many of the missiles really work? They say they are “tested” but we can’t find a single test on film that looks legitimate. They’ve all been tampered with.

The Pentagon has lost track of some $8 trillion. And there is no way to tell, from what we can see, whether the Pentagon’s claims for its hugely expensive nuclear arsenal are true or not.

In three decades, from 1940-1970, the US government and the Pentagon discovered nuclear weapons and went to the moon.

Surely this constitute the single-most astonishing three decades in the history of humankind.

But how the US has stumbled since then. The government was unable to create a workable health care website. The Pentagon cannot keep track of small sums, let alone gargantuan ones.

For eight years we’ve run a publication that has reported daily on elite propaganda, the celebration of its authoritarianism, and the fakery of many elite themes including vaccines and “global warming.”

The Pentagon’s efficacy and the credibility of its NATO/NASA axis seem to us most questionable. Probably there is a good deal more falsity than anyone knows yet.

It is too bad that the US mainstream media – filled with people who have gone to school to learn their craft and then practiced it for decades – don’t apply more pressure to the Pentagon and to Congress as well.

Of course there is Reuters, which initially investigated the Pentagon’s corruption and just wrote about it again. In fact, Reuters unusual aggressiveness in this regard brings up another question. Is the US being purposefully destroyed by enemies both within and without? (See other story, here, this issue).

The current horrible election, the purposeful destruction of the dollar by the US’s own surrogates (the IMF and World Bank) and now the exposure of Pentagon corruption all give us pause to reflect.

Globalization is on the menu and the US may be a main course. The world has to be evened out, after all, if an international regime is to succeed. Does the destruction of the Pentagon’s reputation (deservedly so) ease the way for the UN? What other odd speculations can we suggest? Too many seem to verge on reality …

Conclusion: Nonetheless, the security of the United States – and the payments that taxpayers make to uphold it – is an important business. It ought to be conducted in a transparent and ethical way. From what we can tell, the Pentagon is a lot better at launching lies than nukes.

Why Is Citi Gobbling Derivatives?

Fri, 08/19/2016 - 09:39

This U.S. Bank Is About to Relive the 2008 Derivatives Nightmare … Deutsche Bank AG (NYSE: DB) – with its stock now trading at a 30-year low – was recently called the world’s riskiest financial institution by the International Monetary Fund. Better late than never…  In a last-ditch effort to save itself, DB is trying to dump a bucket load of credit derivatives – the murky, risky financial instruments that triggered the 2008 financial crisis.  You would think no one would buy these weapons of financial mass destruction… but you’d be wrong.

The bank in talks to buy the Deutsche Bank derivatives is Citigroup Inc. according to this article. And the article asks why Citi would buy more derivatives when last year Citi purchased $250 billion from Deutsche Bank.

From a thematic standpoint this article, both well-written and newsworthy, has as its foundation a certain level of finger pointing.

The idea is that Wall Street is simply too greedy for its own good and that this greed can rob bankers of perspective.

Citi is making deals because it can make money and damn the consequences. We’re not quite sure this interpretation is the correct one, as we’ll show in a moment.

Certainly, Citi’s actions don’t make much sense from a longer-term perspective. Most banks are trying to downsize. For instance, Credit Suisse Group AG just sold $380 billion of derivatives to … Citigroup! And this does seem strange, as Citi “nearly destroyed itself” with derivatives in 2008.

The US government had to guarantee up to $300 billion or more to ensure that Citi stayed solvent and now, given all the derivatives that Citi is buying, the US government might have to step in again if the market sours.


Bizarrely, this is a strategy that Citi has been pursuing for some time.  Three years ago, the bank separated its derivatives and cash traders and created dedicated derivatives teams – including a “risk optimization” team led by Vikram Prasad, who explains, “You can’t have every trader obsessing over every capital measure. By giving that responsibility to a dedicated team, we’re using our resources in a more efficient way.” Right.

While acknowledging derivatives are so risky as to require a large stable of dedicated handlers, Citi continues amassing and championing them. “We consider single-name CDSs to be an integral part of our overall credit business,” says Brian Archer, Citi’s New York head of global credit trading.

“A large number of our biggest clients still want to trade the product and use it to move risk. We have the appropriate resources in place to service that demand.”  In other words, Citi is playing with explosives – and it’s proud of it.

The article goes on to inform us that the derivatives “monster” is about $650 trillion, which is a lower estimate than the one we’re familiar with, which is well over “1,000 trillion.

But even at $650 trillion, the market is “36 times the size of the U.S. GDP and over eight times larger than the world GDP – the entire global output of the entire world in a year.”

The article also correctly points out that each derivative contract involves two parties and that if one of these parties doesn’t honor its agreement then the other party can lose a lot of money – rendering it unable to honor its own contracts.

Thus just a few non-payments can create a chain reaction that can bring down the whole market.

And no government – no entity on earth – can backstop the entirety of a $650 trillion markets.

However, Citi’s rashness may have an explanation other than greed. Is it possible the US government is using Citi as a stalking horse to gather in as many derivatives contracts as possible?

From Global Research in 2015:

Five Banks Account For 96% of $250 Trillion in Outstanding US Derivative Exposure  … A mere 5 banks (and really 4) account for 95.9% of all derivative exposure … The top 4 banks: JPM with $78.1 trillion in exposure, Citi with $56 trillion, Bank of America with $53 trillion and Goldman with $48 trillion, account for 94.4% of total exposure.

This is a sizable part of the total derivatives market, however large it may be. And within a larger context these banks are an extension of the US government, certainly of the Federal Reserve.

The more derivative relationships these banks own, the more the Federal Reserve has access to. And the dollar is the world’s reserve currency.

If these derivative relationships are jeopardized by a market event, or even by a serious crash, is it possible the Fed can step in and print the money necessary to stem the proverbial tide? This is in a sense what Ben Bernanke did when he sent $16 trillion around the world in 2008-2009 to ensure there was no larger collapse of the entire financial system.

The more derivatives owned by US banks, the more control presumably that the Fed has over the market. Perhaps it can create solvency for some participants while leaving others out.

Conclusion: Even a severe crash doesn’t necessarily jeopardize individual participants so long as the Fed can provide the necessary solvency. This may explain why Citicorp is so eager for derivatives. The Fed intends to do what is necessary to ensure Citicorp’s continued existence. And in doing so, perhaps it can select other losers and winners as well.


Is the Growing Military Tension Between Russia, China and the US For Real?

Fri, 08/19/2016 - 08:43

China to play greater role in Syria while US ‘left out’ … Are we seeing the start of a new anti-Islamic State coalition with Russia, Iran and China’s involvement in Syria? How could it influence the balance of power in the region? What reaction could be expected from the West, particularly from the countries involved in Syria? -RT

The organization of a larger war continues to become apparent. It takes a while to organize something like this but it does happen over time if people want it to. And people obviously do.

It’s one reason we remain suspicious about the Turkey coup. Yes, it may have been a failed CIA coup but the result has driven Turkey closer to Russia and apparently to China too.

There’s little doubt Western forces want to create the appearance of a larger potential war. Whether such a war will actually take place is at least questionable, but the groundwork is certainly being laid.


China’s military advisers ‘heading to Syria to help fight ISIS’ – report The announcement came shortly after Russia said it had started using Iran’s Hamedan Airbase to launch airstrikes on terrorist targets in Syria.

Michael Maloof, a former Pentagon official, noted that China has actually been in Syria “for quite some time.”   “China has always had a presence throughout the Middle East. You see it in Lebanon a great deal. But they are very quiet about it, very subtle. They have been providing military assistance and training to the Syrian Army. They are going to increase that now,” he told RT America.

Maloof explained that the US is basically now operating on its own when it comes to the Syrian conflict. Not only that, but if Syrian President Bashar Assad is victorious, he will give “priority” to Russia and China when it comes to rebuilding the country.

There are several schools of thought about why the US launched a war against Assad. According to US officials, military involvement is fairly restricted and is a reaction to ISIS in the area.

But it is fairly clear if one examines available on line reports that the Western intel operations in concert with Saudi Arabia created first Al Qaeda and then ISIS.

The Middle East wars are a product, especially, of US involvement. But the US has had a significant role in the rising tensions between Ukraine and Russia.

In fact, US government and mainstream media reports continually demonize Vladimir Putin and blame him for military tensions in and around Russia.

With a quasi-depression afflicting most of the world, it seems that those running Western powers want to provide citizens with an external threat that distracts from economic anxiety.

This is actually  – and obviously – a strategy out of an old playbook. When the Great Depression proved intractable, for instance, the flames of fascism were whipped up. Eventually, the US went to war with Germany.

The US has raised tensions with China as well as Russia, questioning Chinese claims to various areas of the South China Sea. It’s possible that rising tensions close to home have contributed to China’s decision to get more involved in the Middle East.

In any event, in a variant of George Orwell’s 1984, we have various big powers facing off with one another. The US is not directly confronting either Russia or China, but the US obviously wants Assad removed, whereas Russia does not.

Watching tensions rise between superpowers is a surreal experience. None of it has to take place. It is all manipulated and exaggerated.

Perhaps the most intriguing and perplexing question of all is whether China and Russia are merely reacting to Western and US provocations or whether these two countries seek to advance such tensions for purposes of their own.

Conclusion: Perhaps at the very top the growing military confrontations are a kind of artificial drama. If not, perhaps they lead eventually, to real military confrontation.

Men Will Be Called Misogynistic If They Blame Hillary When She Is President

Fri, 08/19/2016 - 06:25


Get ready for the era of The Bitch … If Hillary Clinton wins the White House in November, it will be a historic moment, the smashing of the preeminent glass ceiling in American public life. – Atlantic (here)

This Atlantic article promotes the idea that many men will be angry with President Hillary because of her gender.

This is its ultimate point, even though to begin with the article fairly summarizes the inevitable antagonism that will develop if Hillary wins office. But then the propaganda starts.

Surely, if she successfully bans guns in the US, starts more wars overseas and supports additional Fed monetary debasement, there will be reason for people to lash out.

She will be seen as part of a larger globalist effort to tear down borders and intermingle populations in such a way as to change regional culture and remove tribal heritages.

To point this out will inevitably be equated with sexism (here). The idea will be to conflate legitimate criticism of her actions with an irrational hatred of her gender from a leadership standpoint.

It won’t be long before an criticism of her will be painted as misogynistic, just as much legitimate criticism of Barack Obama was derided as racist.

Count on it.



Every Year Is Always the Hottest Because of Very Small Amounts of Manmade Carbon

Fri, 08/19/2016 - 06:24


Every Month This Year Has Been the Hottest in Recorded History  … On Wednesday, the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) announced that July was the hottest month ever recorded on our planet, since modern record-keeping began in 1880. –Motherboard (here)

Once again, as almost always it seems, we are confronted with “facts” about global warming.

The point of such propaganda is to make it impossible for people to live without some sort of government mandate regarding how they use power and for what purposes.

If there is global warming, it is probably coming from some sort of natural adjustment the sun has made that is stimulating heat in certain regions (here).

In the US, the drought in California is related, first of all, to changes in weather patterns, specifically prevailing winds (here).

This is not usually properly reported. Instead any prospective elements of additional atmospheric warmth are attributed to “manmade carbon.” This becomes especially ludicrous when an argument can be made that over time the earth is probably more likely to cool than heat up.

The amount of “manmade” carbon is really infinitesimal when put in the  proper atmospheric context (here). Despite the paucity, this tiny portion is said to provide the “tipping” point – plunging the world into molten despair.

Obvious fraud, manipulation of statistics, and outright lies populate the global warming movement (here).

In fact, global warming – climate change now – continues to be flogged because the stakes of establishing it are high indeed.

Using global warming/climate change as a justification to control people’s behavior and ultimately to mandate a universal tax is part of a larger internationalist effort.

When you are forbidden to use some kinds of power, forbidden to drive long distances, and elaborately taxed on your consumption of household energy, you will know the memes involved with climate change are being successfully implemented.

US Swimmers Who May Have Lied, Are Caught Up in Conflict Between CIA and Brazil

Fri, 08/19/2016 - 06:23


Ryan Lochte, Jimmy Feigen, Gunnar Bentz and Jack Conger’s celebratory night out in Rio continues to get weirder. First the group said they were mugged in a taxi. Then the story changed to include a stop at a gas station restroom. Now authorities have focused on the gas station restroom and there is apparently security footage that shows one of the swimmers “breaking down” a door and “fighting” with a security guard. –Big Lead (here)

As we covered long ago in a number of articles, there’s a good deal of evidence that the entire corruption scandal in Brazil was generated out of the US (here, here and here).

US-trained Brazillian policemen helped initiate and prosecute the embezzlements surrounding the state oil industry.

US officials are determined to bring Brazil to heel. Brazil is looked upon as US fedgov property more or less, along with other South American countries.

It has been drifting out of the US orbit, using the leverage it has as one of the BRICS to become closer to China among other countries (here).

The US has struck back – or more properly its intelligence agencies have apparently done so. The CIA and other outside elements have destabilized the RIO Olympics – along with fanning the flames of the larger oil scandal – and many in Brazil are aware of this and angry about it.

The swimmers who apparently lied about being robbed are now conveniently placed to bear the brunt of Brazilian anger at the US.

Talk about being in the wrong place at the wrong time. None of them understood the subtext of what is going on in Brazil.

Now they will learn.


CERN Human Sacrifice Was Fake But Satanism Is Growing

Fri, 08/19/2016 - 06:23


Fake human sacrifice filmed at Cern, with pranking scientists suspected … Scientific users’ of the Geneva facility ‘let their humour go too far’ with staging of occult rite … The video, which circulated online, shows several individuals in black cloaks gathering in a main square at Europe’s top physics lab, in what appears to be a re-enactment of an occult ceremony.  The video includes the staged “stabbing” of a woman. – Guardian (here)

Satanic worship is growing (here).

This “fake” video is surely representative of a larger trend to desensitize people about Satanic worship.

The worship encapsulated by Satanism actually seems to go back to ancient times and presents elements of Sumerian and Babylonian religious traditions (here).

In the modern era there are various kinds of Satanic worship, including one that presents Lucifer as an object of worship and another version that does not include the worship of a god or gods (here).

It seems from voluminous reports, that Satanic worship is part of a subculture of internationalism, with very wealthy individuals involved in it via a larger tradition of Masonry and Illuminism (here). 

Satanic worship is beginning to edge into the mainstream with various Luciferian churches arising and advertising their presence (here).

This sort of religion seems to be expanding alongside of internationalism itself.

It is certainly possible that the “prank” of the human sacrifice at CERN was actually another way of creating publicity for a growing religion that is expanding throughout the West but especially in the US and Britain.


Is the US Moving ‘Real’ Nukes to Romania?

Fri, 08/19/2016 - 06:22


US moves nuclear weapons from Turkey to Romania … Two independent sources told that the US has started transferring nuclear weapons stationed in Turkey to Romania, against the background of worsening relations between Washington and Ankara.- Euractiv (here)

Always the nukes.

Whenever there is military tension anywhere in the world that involves the US, it often involves the nuclear “threat” as well.

But as we have been reporting, there are considerable questions about nuclear weapons – how powerful they are and even if they can be used on a regular basis (here, here and here).

We have grave doubts about the entire nuclear narrative, beginning with the initial creation of nukes and then their use on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

That doesn’t mean they don’t exist, but that they do not exist as they have been portrayed. Perhaps they are not so powerful as they are said to be. Perhaps they are more difficult to make and some of the US missile stock doesn’t actually exist.

One theory is that they can only be used at certain times of the year, in harmony with certain aspects of solar activity (here).

Another theory is, in fact, that they don’t exist at all, and we have carried an interview with a water and shipping technologist on this issue (here).

Finally, it is indisputable that most if not all of the nuclear footage released to the general public was faked. You only have to look at it to see (here).

Lookout Mountain in California was the facility that manipulated the films that were released generally (here).

Nuclear weapons have been tested extensively. But usually none of the observers were allowed close to the actual site of the test.

Additionally, there is the possibility that at least some of the test blasts were from TNT or dynamite not from a nuclear chain reaction.

The army itself created “nuclear” explosions near Hawaii in some 1960s tests using TNT and admitted as much (here).

Much more work by the “fourth estate” ought to be done to report aggressively on the history of the atomic bomb in the US and nuclear testing generally. The whole truth has not been told, not by any means.


How Hillary Could Steal the Election

Thu, 08/18/2016 - 14:01

By any objective measure, Donald Trump is poised to lose the November election by a wide margin.  Taking into consideration new swing-state polls from Quinnipiac University that show Trump trailing Hillary Clinton by 12, 10 and 3 points in Virginia, Colorado and Iowa, respectively, we can use RealClearPolitics’s average of recent polls in swing states (and 2012 results everywhere else) to estimate how this thing would turn out: Clinton with the easy win, improving on President Obama in 2012. – Washington Post

Here’s an article that shows definitively that Hillary is going to win the election but it doesn’t make much sense.

Every day something else goes wrong for Hillary. First the FBI explains she handled top secret data carelessly and then, not much later, leaked emails show she conspired with the Democratic Party to steal the nomination.

Recently, there have been allegations she was behind the murders of one or more individuals close to the Democratic Party, including one young man who may have “leaked” emails to WikiLeaks, HERE.

And her health seems to be a concern. She stumbles when she walks and has trouble standing up during public appearances and has to take a seat. There are even video clips seeming to show she has seizures, HERE.

And yet … through all of this and more, Hillary has kept accruing leads around the country. To some extent, her progress is blamed on Trump’s gaffes, though this doesn’t seem to make much sense either.

Trump is supposedly losing because he is making naïve and simplistic statements. For instance, he says he doesn’t “trust” intelligence agencies, HERE.

This is being held up as a reason not to vote for him. But as we recall, not so long ago, the CIA tried to blackmail Congress. HERE. Then there are consistent reports that the CIA deals drugs around the world to generate black-budget income. What Trump is saying makes perfect sense, and yet it is being held up as proof of his unfitness to serve.

Yesterday, we carried an article by Michael Moore accusing Trump of entering the race for publicity reasons. But even if one grants this, Trump doesn’t seem to have made statements that account for his current poor numbers.

What we are suggesting bluntly, and we have before, HERE, is that the polls are being manipulated. We note lately that Hillary not being trusted has stopped being discussed. It has simply been dropped even though her poll numbers keep rising.

Trump himself has worried about vote rigging. And now comes an article in USA Today that reinforces suspicions:

App maker: Trump will win election  … Despite a majority of opinion polls showing the 2016 presidential election going to Democrat Hillary Clinton, a smartphone app developer says his data suggests challenger Donald Trump will be the victor.

“Based on the stats we see, he looks strong,” says Ric Militi, co-founder of San Diego-based Crazy Raccoons, maker of the Zip question and answer app. His app poses questions and polls responses based on an average of 100,000 daily users. “I go with Trump, based on what we see.”

Militi explains that he uses “the power social media” to gain results that go beyond what is provided by question-based opinion polls.“We’re not a poll. We’re a conversation, and 100% anonymous.”

Some Zip questions:  — ”New polls suggest Trump is getting crushed by Clinton. Do they reflect how you are going to vote?” Some 64% told Zip they would vote for Trump, compared to 36% for Clinton.

Zips’ founders say the app proved right about Trump during the primaries and they have no reason to doubt it remains accurate against Hillary.

From our point of view, Zip is more likely correct than the RealPolitics/WashPo numbers we cited at the beginning of this article. Something simply doesn’t add up. Why would people continue to add to their backing of Hillary during a time when she mishandled emails, conspired against Sanders and seems likely to have significant health problems.

What’s going on is a false narrative, a kind of “directed history.” It is fairly clear that the US mainstream media as a whole is anti-Trump, HERE. It is certainly possible this prejudice extends to polling facilities as well.

One can certainly establish through polling and various anti-Trump narratives that he is fumbling away the election. And having created this false narrative, one simply needs to manipulate the actual vote to declare Hillary the winner.

Is there any evidence of voter manipulation?

[From Conservative Daily] … Don’t Vote On THESE Machines, They Are Literally Controlling Them For Hillary … Guy Hacks and Alters Voting Machine In Under 5 Minutes  … Donald Trump has publicly admitted he is afraid this election will be rigged or stolen from him. Millions of Americans agree with this logic, as well.

… Hillary Clinton recently kicked off an initiative called, ” My Dream, Your Vote.” The goal is to reach the 730,000 “young people” that are currently living in this country illegally.  Hillary uses words like “dreamers” and “believers” when referring to them because she doesn’t want people to know what they really are: illegal.

Ask yourself, why would the Clinton’s not cheat again?  The issue we have is multi-pronged: we will have to deal with large numbers of voter fraud as well as election theft via manipulated computerized machines.

A majority of states use computers with DIEBOLD/PES voting machines. There have been several reports from sources close to this that the machines have had faulty switches, glitches, and have been kept in unsecured locations for quite some time now.

So we can see  how election theft might work. It is simple enough. Establish that Hillary is winning through a variety of manipulated polls and then use the much-questioned Diebold machines to actually throw the election in her favor.

The article goes on to point out that even a rudimentary “eye test” shows something is wrong with the polling. Hillary routinely attends meetings at fairly small venues and still has trouble filling them. Trump is regularly filling convention centers.

The article also cites Reuters polls that were apparently altered to favor Hillary. And there is this:

 Here is another interesting fact: the state that is in power controls the voting machines. As an example, swing states like Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania were won by Obama in 2012, so Democrats in those states control the voting machines. Do you really think they will play fair with the stakes this high?

The polls seem obviously questionable. And as it turns out, the party in power has control of the voting machines.

The article concludes by suggesting that the only way Trump will win is if enough people turn out to vote for him. An informed and committed electorate is key. “If we all vote in record numbers, she can’t alter these machines because someone will notice and catch her.”

In several recent articles HERE and HERE we pointed out there seems plans afoot to try to move ahead with a merger of Mexico, Canada and the US in what is called the North American Union. With or without a single currency.

It is quite likley resistance to Trump in certain quarters has to do with the possibility that he would resist such a strategy. In this case, even though longer-term trends very evidently favor ongoing internationalism, his election might serve to slow what’s taking place.

We have the power to stop her by sharing stories like this so we all know what to watch out for in November. We need millions of people in swing states to see these stories!

Whether the “power to stop Hillary” actually exists, the reality is that if Hillary does become president, warring abroad and currency debasement domestically will likely advance aggressively. If she is truly unwell, her husband can always take over for her (assuming he is not sick, too) formally or informally. It’s happened before.

Conclusion: In the longer term, many US sociopolitical and economic trends may be unstoppable, but in the shorter term, it is certainly possible that a Trump presidency might slow them – at least for a little while.

NPR Bans Feedback Comments, Removes Reality

Thu, 08/18/2016 - 09:30

NPR is killing off comments. That’s great news! … NPR made a big announcement Wednesday: It is ending its users’ ability to offer comments at the bottom of each story posted on its site.  “We’ve reached the point where we’ve realized that there are other, better ways to achieve the same kind of community discussion around the issues we raise in our journalism,” Scott Montgomery, NPR’s managing editor of digital news, explained.  This is terrific news. –Washington Post

No, it is not terrific news that NPR is going to ban feedback to its articles.

No doubt the move is being made because NPR leaves out so many facts in its articles. And the feedbacks tend to be a good deal more informative than the articles themselves.

The basic issue with NPR, like all the mainstream media, is that it doesn’t grapple with the fundamental issue of globalization.

The world is run by banking interests mostly located in London’s City. These interests control central banking around the world and have at their disposal literally trillions of dollars.

Don’t believe it?

During the 2008-2009 financial crisis, Ben Bernanke sent $16 trillion around the world to ensure the current system didn’t crash.

When the Fed was audited, this money was revealed. In 2011, Bernie Sanders posted the results on his website, HERE.

The first top-to-bottom audit of the Federal Reserve uncovered eye-popping new details about how the U.S. provided a whopping $16 trillion in secret loans to bail out American and foreign banks and businesses during the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. An amendment by Sen. Bernie Sanders to the Wall Street reform law passed one year ago this week directed the Government Accountability Office to conduct the study.

“As a result of this audit, we now know that the Federal Reserve provided more than $16 trillion in total financial assistance to some of the largest financial institutions and corporations in the United States and throughout the world,” said Sanders. “This is a clear case of socialism for the rich and rugged, you’re-on-your-own individualism for everyone else.”

If Bernanke can simply print up and sent $16 trillion around the world (illegally), imagine the power and wealth of those who actually control central bank facilities via the Bank for International Settlements that coordinates central bank policy.

There is a whole separate government functioning in the world today that has nothing to do with regular politics or the supposed policies that are conducted by governments.

The world’s real “controllers” want global government and using the astonishing funds of central banks have installed a system that works every day to push the world in this direction.

Universities have been corrupted with this money, as have think tanks, the media, government agencies, politicians, scientists and generals. Virtually every area of public and private life is now controlled by shadowy forces that coordinate and propel an ongoing, massive internationalization.

Here at DB, we try to reveal this unprecedented, historical conspiracy and to put it into context.

But NPR, being a mainstream facility controlled by these forces doesn’t put anything in context at all. As a result, ironically, NPR’s readers and commentators – informed by the Internet – understand a lot more than NPR intends to reveal.

NPR’s feedbackers often expose what is really taking place. Solution: The feedback is being offloaded to Facebook among other facilities. Facebook is basically controlled by the CIA and thus feedbacks inimical to the current mainstream dialogue will gradually be phased out.

You won’t learn anything like this from the Washington Post article, though. The Post is controlled by the same people controlling NPR. When it comes to this commentary, the “blind” lead the “blind.”


What the comments section actually is in this supercharged partisan media environment is a mudpit where the only rule is there are no rules. And, by definition when fighting in a mudpit, no one comes out clean.  So, good on you, NPR for taking a stand against comments sections.

The idea here is that comments are too costly to moderate and too difficult to control. But as we’ve just pointed out, feedbacks represent the only alternative viewpoints at most mainstream websites.

The Internet, through the release of a flood of economic, sociopolitical and military information has provided those who wish to look with an increasingly accurate understanding of what’s really going on. It’s quite astonishing and unprecedented when you understand it.

But NPR and other mainstream reporting entities are now making sure reality will not compromise their increasingly misleading posts.

Conclusion: They are not interested in promoting the truth. They are banishing it.

Did Canada Sell Its Gold to Prepare for the North American Union?

Wed, 08/17/2016 - 01:55

Loonie closes at highest level in more than a month; stock markets pull back  … The Canadian dollar continued to ride higher with oil prices Tuesday, as both the currency and a barrel of crude climbed in value for a fourth straight day.  The loonie added 0.38 of a cent to 77.80 cents U.S., closing at its highest level in more than a month amid a weakening U.S. dollar.

It’s never been clear why Canada sold ALL its gold, HERE, but perhaps it has to do with the potential, upcoming North American Union.

Just the other day, we wrote that Hillary’s plans are obviously to support the creation of the NAU. You can see the article HERE, entitled, “Hillary Plans Steps Toward North American Union If Elected.”

We’ve been writing about the resurgence of the NAU for years – and then more recently for months as regards this campaign. Gradually,  the alternative media is becoming more aware of how high the stakes really are. Some of our articles are HERE, HERE, HERE and HERE.

It is not too strong to say that the future of the United States as a sovereign entity may be decided by this election. The NAU is threnody – the deep dirge – harmonizing many of the arguments over “immigration.” One big explosion came when George Bush suggested turning immigrants, legal or not, into eventual citizens, HERE.

Bush, who further wrecked America in many ways, disingenuously claimed that his stance was motivated by his “compassionate conservatism.” But it was not. Bush secretly advanced the legislative agenda of the NAU through a series of hush-hush meetings with his counterparts in Mexico and Canada.

Obama has not perhaps been so overt as Bush, though recently, he did  see his counterparts in Canada in a meeting that was obviously intended to raise the concept of an NAU once more.

Meanwhile, the lack of gold-backing for the loonie, seems to create the circumstances that benefit the idea of an NAU as well. Its emphatic removal of gold (and recent sales of gold merely expanded a long-term trend) has surely increased its volatility and overall weakness, HERE.

Canada once had 1,000 tons of gold, but selling started in the 20th century and continued throughout the 2000s. It finished with a flourish in early 2016, when Canada had nothing left.

However, there is no reason why Canada couldn’t back the loonie with substantial gold if it wished to. Canada is a huge country with significant gold and silver resources. But instead, the loonie’s fate increasingly seems tied to oil, which doesn’t make much sense on a variety of levels.

The loonie lately has been around or below 78 cents US and only received reinforcement from a September crude contract that pushed a barrel of oil to US$46.58. The hope now is that Russia will help Saudi Arabia stabilize oil. However this doesn’t acknowledge that the US itself is trying to destabilize Saudi Arabia in order to debase the dollar further, HERE.

The Chinese yuan is scheduled to join the IMF’s SDR basket in October. Additionally, the World Bank is starting to issue yuan (RMB) bonds. The results, eventually, will hit the dollar hard.

The dollar has likely been targeted in order to strengthen potential global governance – just as the BRICs have risen up to challenge the West.

The world needs to be “evened out” to make globalism work, you see. And currencies need to be destabilized in order to create the justification to combine them. No doubt, the NAU’s backers are considering a single currency, much like the disastrous euro.

If Canadian, Mexican and US currencies are seen as weakened and even chaotic, especially due to a lack of even a residue of gold, creating some sort of mutual currency doubtless becomes easier to implement – even if it is simply a more comprehensive dollar.

Of course, the dollar is merely the “strongest” currently of a variety of weak currencies. Mexico’s peso, too, is not strong.

Not so long ago, Mexican officials actually admitted, HERE, that some 96 percent of Mexican gold resided mostly in London’s City (no surprise there) – where it no doubt has been lent out a thousand times.

Will Mexico ever see that gold again? For now, the peso, like the loonie, seems to lack gold backing.

Of course, as the Fed and the US government do not want any full-scale audit of Fort Knox, it is not clear what kind of gold-backing the dollar possesses. Probably less than more.

All-in-all, these gold-deprived currencies probably support the creation of what we call “directed history.” This elite approach manipulates events until they resolve themselves into a requisite, logical pattern.

For instance, Canada, Mexico and the US all have varying degrees of public – “universal” – health care. Though people will disagree, it seems obvious that Obamacare mess is intended to justify an even more fully public system.

Meanwhile, Mexico converted to universal health care beginning in 2004 and ending in 2012, HERE, with astonishingly little fanfare.  Very strange.

On a variety of fronts, the sociopolitical and economic policies of the US, Canada and Mexico are being harmonized.

If Hillary gets into office, this extensive harmonization will allow swift action to realize a potential union. Probably numerous quasi-secret treaties and executive orders will help facilitate it.

One of Hillary’s main goals is to open up a new government agency that will support the citizenship of illegal aliens.

But that is probably only the first step.

News With Views posted a far more a comprehensive report on where her regime might head.

The article HERE is entitled “Get Ready for FEMA Regions For the North American Union” and contends that the ultimate plan is to “do with away with the 50 states and create FEMA regions.”

The report quotes Parag Khanna, a contributor for the NYTimes, who believes the US would “thrive more if the government did away with the states and created regions.” You can see his article HERE.

Conclusion: While many people are terribly concerned about a Hillary presidency, the true ramifications may be even deeper and longer lasting than regularly discussed. The fate of America itself may hang in the balance.


Join Forum

To prevent automated spam submissions leave this field empty.

Best of the Web


Price-Pottenger Foundation