Economic Causes of the Probable Next Regional War

What I intend to do is demonstrate that there are several events, logically linked among them that are meant to produce a regional war in the middle east and bring a white supremacist leader as President of the United States in 2004.

The framework used is very similar to the event that lead to the WWII except that the people are of course different and the order of events is shuffled without diminishing their effectiveness.

The main assumption are the following:

• Democracy, the sum of individual interest, can be manipulated and used against a minority.

"Even outside the field of finance, Americans are apt to be unduly interested in discovering what average opinion believes average opinion to be; and this national weakness finds its nemesis in the stock market."

- Lord John Maynard First Baron Keynes of Tilton.

• Capitalism, the sum of individual interest does not produce the best social economic system.

In order to understand this scheme you can separate three trails that do, through time, interact one with the other:

• The gold trail.

• The oil trail.

• Rhe interest rate trail.

Before you follow those three trail, you need to see how close they are. Watch the:

• Graph of the rate of the 30 years US-TBond.

• Graph of gold.

• Graph of oil.

You will notice for example that oil is going up since 1999. That is incoherant with the recession but very coherant with the ... upcoming 911.

Same thing about Gold. The return on Gold is still below any return on long term assets. But since sudenly once the Central Bank geve the insurance of the Washington Agreement on Gold, Gold starts to rise. It is incoherant but very coherant with 911 and the following events.

Do we believe in the ability of markets to forecast 911 or do we believe that Greed has be the engine that caused people who knew to profit?

All of the three trails originate in Bretton Wood.

The trail is not a goal in itself all the three trails have only one goal: put a White Christian Nationalist in power in the United States and create the conditions of a regional war in the Middle East that would be a final solution to the Jewish Problem.

• Most Expected Scenario

• Conclusion on Conspiration

Bretton Woods: The United States was committed to establishing a framework for the post- war world that would ensure economic development and stability. In July 1944, it sponsored the U.N.Monetary & Financial Conference in Bretton Woods, New Hampshire. Forty four nations attended the Conference. A plan was agreed upon to establish an International Monetary Fund to help stabilize currencies and promote international trade.

July 22nd 1944 is produced the Bretton Wood Agreement was issued.

Breton Woods created the UN, the IMF and the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, which later came to be known as the World Bank.

UN charter with the "democratic" vote on the Security Council and at the General Assembly

One of the result of Bretton Woods was a fixed exchange rate against a gold standard, where by the one ounce of Gold was worth 35 US$...

"An almost hysterical antagonism toward the gold standard is one issue which unites statists of all persuasions. They seem to sense... 
that gold and economic freedom are inseparable."

Alan Greenspan

The rigidity of the system was such that interest rate and currencies couldn't vary in order to adapt to local economic conditions... This fact was known since the 30's. It was then known that it is precisely the gold standard that had accelerated the coming of the 1929 crisis.

"In the long run we are all dead"
- Lord John Maynard First Baron Keynes of Tilton.

Why then did Bretton Woods established the gold standard?

It is probable that someone did know already that Capitalism was doomed to fail and that its failure accelerated by the gold standard would cause Antisemitism and a regional war.

"Practical men, who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influence, are usually the slaves of some defunct economist.

Madmen in authority, who hear voices in the air, are distilling their frenzy from some academic scribbler of a few years back."
- Lord John Maynard First Baron Keynes of Tilton.

The Trails

On 2 April 1947, the British Government informed the Secretary-General of the United Nations of its intention to place the question of the future government of Palestine on the agenda of the next regular session of the General Assembly. It asked that a special session should be convened to constitute and instruct a special committee to make recommendations on the future government of Palestine.

A nation which does not know what it was yesterday, does not know what it is today, nor what it is trying to do. 

Woodrow Wilson

May 14th 1948: The state of Israel is born: it is the only country born ex nihilo by the vote of the UN.

However in 1944 the UN charter with the "democratic" vote on the Security Council and at the General Assembly had made sure that the State of Israel would always be wrong against a majority of Antisemitic countries would vote against it should the case come up.

Operation Twist: A New Frontier Confronts A New Challenge

When the Kennedy administration assumed office in January 1961,the United States was facing two serious economic problems:It had been in recession since April 1960, and it had a persistent international balance-of-payments deficit.In fact, the U.S.balance-of-payments had been in deficit since 1951.Under the Bretton Woods agreements of 1944,the currencies of the industrialized world were pegged to the U.S.dollar,and the U.S. dollar was fixed in its value to gold.Essentially, the world was on a dollar standard,while the United States was on a gold standard.Thus any country that ran a balance-of-payments deficit with the United States could pay off the debt in U.S. dollars. The United States,on the other hand,had to exchange dollars for gold, if requested, to pay off a creditor country.

Central banks in creditor companies began converting accruals of dollars into gold and threatened to convert their reserve balances as well. As a result,gold was leaving the United States at what was considered an alarming rate,with even greater losses foreseen.

Under this fixed exchange rate regime,policymakers believed that managing the recession and the balance-of-payments deficit required two,very different,governmental actions:an expansionary policy aimed at increasing aggregate demand for the recession;and a contractionary policy aimed at reducing aggregate demand (thereby reducing the demand for imports) forthe balance-of-payments deficit. The Fed, having control of monetary policy, had to choose which need—the recession or the balance-of-payments deficit—was more pressing.After all,it could not correct both at the same time.Or could it?

Which Front to Attack,the Domestic or the International?

The Fed decided to attack on both fronts by engaging in a swapping operation—purchasing long-term bonds while simultaneously selling short-term bills.This operation was intended to fight the recession by lowering long-term interest rates to stimulate domestic investment,and the balance-of-payments deficit by raising short-term interest rates to attract foreign investment to the United States through a relatively high rate of return.This swapping policy became known as Operation Twist because the Fed attempted to artificially flatten or twist the typically upward-sloping yield curve. This policy,begun in February 1961,moved the Fed away from its March 1953 "bills only"policy that restricted open market operations to the short end of the market, especially Treasury bills.The February 20 directive of the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC), the Fed's main policy arm, authorized the Federal Reserve Bank of New York to purchase intermediate-or long-term U.S.government securities of up to 10 years in maturity,in an amount not to exceed $500 million.The plan initially limited acquisitions to securities in the range of one to five and one-half years,allowing the market time to adjust to the new policy. Afterwards,securities in the range of five and one-half to ten years would be purchased.These purchases were to occur before the March 7 meeting of the FOMC. This directive also included a clause requiring that purchases of intermediate-or long-term securities be offset by sales of short-term securities, thereby having the effect of altering the maturity pattern but not the dollar holdings of the Fed's portfolio.The purchases were thus "designed primarily to affect the rate structure rather than to provide reserves,"according to the Minutes of Federal Open Market Committee. In March 1961,the FOMC renewed this special authority to buy longer-term securities and permitted purchases of bonds with more than 10 years until maturity.Also being the month for annual review of the "bills only"policy,it tabled considerations for possible changes and decided to return to the question of reaffirmation later.In December 1961,the FOMC formally rescinded "bills only"after more than eight years in practice.

A True Panacea,or Just Some More Snake Oil?

Operation Twist was in effect, but to a gradually lesser degree each year, until 1965 when it was officially abandoned.

The Trails

Operation Twist and its failure shows how effective the gold standard can be in bringing down a credit based economy.

1971       April:  Due to heavy demands for dollars the Treasury issued notes to foreigners to absorb dollars being dumped by others. (At this time John Connally was the Secretary of Treasury, Paul Volcker was Under Secretary for Monetary Affairs at the Treasury, and Arthur Burns was Chairman of the FED.)

                 May:  Despite the Treasury measures the rush out of dollars accelerated.  The United States balance of trade went into deficit for the first time in the Twentieth Century.

              June:  In the face of these mounting difficulties Nixon calls an economic summit of his advisors at Camp David.

              August:  The English demand a major swap, obviously wanting to drastically reduce their exposure in dollars.

             August 14:  An emergency meeting is called at Camp David.  Mainly Nixon. Connally, Volcker and Burns gather to discuss what to do.  A plan is worked out.

              August 15:  Nixon goes on TV on Sunday to announce the plan worked out that weekend.  It is a major turning point in the history of the international monetary system and a direct slap at American allies reasserting American power.

The basic outlines of the plan include:

1. An end to the convertability of the dollar into gold.

2. A 10% surcharge on imports.

3. Domestic wage and price controls.

4. Cuts in government spending.

5. Tax cuts to spur investment.

                 December:  A meeting is held at the Smithsonian Museum in Washington, D.C. to reach agreement on new monetary relations.  Out of the bargaining came:

1.     The dollar price of gold would rise to $38/oz.

2.     There would be no general float but fixed rates would be changed, generally the dollar would be devalued.  Some of the new exchange rate changes included:  NF would rise 8.6% against the dollar, the DM would rise 13.6%, the lire would rise 7.5%, the Yen 16.9% and the pound would rise 8.6%.

These adjustments were seen as temporary pending major reform of the system.  Although the US got what it wanted it later turned out that the devaluations were inadequate and the dollar would have to be devalued again.

At this point the major issues of reform, besides the devaluation of the dollar, were those of liquidity (e.g. that of how liquidity would be provided, the role of the dollar, of gold and of SDRs) and of the role of the IMR, for which there was growing pressure for its expansion.

September 1980 - 1988: Iran Iraq war: The Iran-Iraq War was multifaceted and included religious schisms, border disputes, and political differences. Conflicts contributing to the outbreak of hostilities ranged from centuries-old Sunni-versus-Shia and Arab-versus-Persian religious and ethnic disputes, to a personal animosity between Saddam Hussein and Ayatollah Khomeini. Above all, Iraq launched the war in an effort to consolidate its rising power in the Arab world and to replace Iran as the dominant Persian Gulf state.

1984-87: The Tanker War

Much of Iraq's export capability was lost during the Iran-Iraq War, either to war-related damage or due to political reasons. In 1982, for instance, Syria (allied with Iran at the time) closed the 500-mile, 650,000-bbl/d-capacity Banias pipeline, which had been a vital Iraqi access route to the Mediterranean Sea and European oil markets. By 1983, Iraq's export capabilities were only 700,000 bbl/d, or less than 30% of operable field production capacity at that time.

Iran's revenue share fell after the 1978/79 Iranian Revolution, followed soon thereafter by the Iran-Iraq War for much of the 1980s [and has not recovered since]. All Iranian onshore crude oil production and output from the Forozan field (which is blended with crude streams from the Abuzar and Doroud fields) is exported from the Kharg Island terminal located in the northern Gulf. The terminal's original capacity of 7 million bbl/d was nearly eliminated by more than 9,000 bombing raids during the Iran-Iraq War.

The tanker war seemed likely to precipitate a major international incident for two reasons. First, some 70 percent of Japanese, 50 percent of West European, and 7 percent of American oil imports came from the Persian Gulf in the early 1980s. Second, the assault on tankers involved neutral shipping as well as ships of the belligerent states.

The tanker war had two phases. The relatively obscure first phase began in 1981, and the well-publicized second phase began in 1984.

The relatively obscure first phase began in 1981, and the well-publicized second phase began in 1984. As early as May 1981, Baghdad had unilaterally declared a war zone and had officially warned all ships heading to or returning from Iranian ports in the northern zone of the Gulf to stay away or, if they entered, to proceed at their own risk. The main targets in this phase were the ports of Bandar-e Khomeini and Bandar-e Mashur; very few ships were hit outside this zone. Despite the proximity of these ports to Iraq, the Iraqi navy did not play an important role in the operations. Instead, Baghdad used Super Frelon helicopters equipped with Exocet missiles or Mirage F-1s and MiG-23s to hit its targets. Naval operations came to a halt, presumably because Iraq and Iran had lost many of their ships, by early 1981; the lull in the fighting lasted for two years.

In March 1984, the tanker war entered its second phase when Iraq initiated sustained naval operations in its self-declared 1,126-kilometer maritime exclusion zone, extending from the mouth of the Shatt al Arab to Iran's port of Bushehr. In 1981 Baghdad had attacked Iranian ports and oil complexes as well as neutral tankers and ships sailing to and from Iran; in 1984 Iraq expanded the so-called tanker war by using French Super-Etendard combat aircraft armed with Exocet missiles.

In March 1984 an Iraqi Super Etendard fired an Exocet missile at a Greek tanker south of Khark Island. Until the March assault, Iran had not intentionally attacked civilian ships in the Gulf.Neutral merchant ships became favorite targets, and the long-range Super-Etendards flew sorties farther south. Seventy-one merchant ships were attacked in 1984 alone, compared with forty-eight in the first three years of the war. Iraq's motives in increasing the tempo included a desire to break the stalemate, presumably by cutting off Iran's oil exports and by thus forcing Tehran to the negotiating table. Repeated Iraqi efforts failed to put Iran's main oil exporting terminal at Khark Island out of commission, however.

The new wave of Iraqi assaults, however, led Iran to reciprocate. In April 1984, Tehran launched its first attack against civilian commercial shipping by shelling an Indian freighter. Iran attacked a Kuwaiti oil tanker near Bahrain on May 13 and then a Saudi tanker in Saudi waters five days later, making it clear that if Iraq continued to interfere with Iran's shipping, no Gulf state would be safe. Most observers considered that Iraqi attacks, however, outnumbered Iranian assaults by three to one. Iran's retaliatory attacks were largely ineffective because a limited number of aircraft equipped with long-range antiship missiles and ships with long-range surface-to-surface missiles were deployed. Moreover, despite repeated Iranian threats to close the Strait of Hormuz, Iran itself depended on the sea-lanes for vital oil exports.

These sustained attacks cut Iranian oil exports in half, reduced shipping in the Gulf by 25 percent, led Lloyd's of London to increase its insurance rates on tankers, and slowed Gulf oil supplies to the rest of the world; moreover, the Saudi decision in 1984 to shoot down an Iranian Phantom jet intruding in Saudi territorial waters played an important role in ending both belligerents' attempts to internationalize the tanker war. Iraq and Iran accepted a 1984 UN-sponsored moratorium on the shelling of civilian targets, and Tehran later proposed an extension of the moratorium to include Gulf shipping, a proposal the Iraqis rejected unless it were to included their own Gulf ports.

Iraq began ignoring the moratorium soon after it went into effect and stepped up its air raids on tankers serving Iran and Iranian oil-exporting facilities in 1986 and 1987, attacking even vessels that belonged to the conservative Arab states of the Persian Gulf. Iran responded by escalating its attacks on shipping serving Arab ports in the Gulf. As Kuwaiti vessels made up a large portion of the targets in these retaliatory raids, the Kuwaiti government sought protection from the international community in the fall of 1986. The Soviet Union responded first, agreeing to charter several Soviet tankers to Kuwait in early 1987. Washington, which has been approached first by Kuwait and which had postponed its decision, eventually followed Moscow's lead. United States involvement was sealed by the May 17, 1987, Iraqi missile attack on the USS Stark, in which thirtyseven crew members were killed. Baghdad apologized and claimed that the attack was a mistake. Ironically, Washington used the Stark incident to blame Iran for escalating the war and sent its own ships to the Gulf to escort eleven Kuwaiti tankers that were "reflagged" with the American flag and had American crews. Iran refrained from attacking the United States naval force directly,

1985 Irangate  In the midst of the war, the United States changed its position and unexpectedly helped the Iranians. In 1985, the Reagan Administration agreed to secretly sell weapons to Iran to win support for the freeing of American hostages being held by terrorists in Lebanon. The principal negotiator on the U.S. side was Lieutenant Colonel Oliver North, a military aide to the National Security Council, who reported his activities to the National Security Adviser Robert McFarlane and his successor John Poindexter.

When the exchange was revealed, it proved embarrassing because of Reagan's oft-stated pledge not to negotiate with terrorists and his claim not to have traded arms for hostages. The situation was further complicated by the disclosure that part of the proceeds of the arms sale had been diverted to support the Contra rebels fighting the Sandinista government in Nicaragua; this was in violation of a law prohibiting U.S. aid to the Contras.

If this was not convoluted enough, the initial sales to Iran were made through Israel. 

The Iran-Contra Affair, as it came to be known, tarnished Reagan's image, but he was ultimately found to have had no direct knowledge of the secret operation???

From what we know the CIA never does anything against the will of the President of the USA except kill him if he menaces to throw its bits in the winds... 

The 1987 financial crisis:

Another way for accelerating the plunge of capitalism in the Liquidity Trap hence to accelerate the raise of Antisemitism is to give shocks to the financial system, any shock. it can be an Oil shock like in 1973 and 1979 or a fiancial shock like in 1987.

What surprises about the crisis of 1987 is that neither the growth nor the inflation justified at that time the crisis. What the popular press said at that time was that it was due to computer trading. Nothing is less true. Computer trading accelerate the volatility of the market it can never create a financial crisis.

What did happened was a concerted and/or competitive movement of the central banks including the US FED, the Banque de France and the Bundesbank in order to bid up the short term rate in an absurd behaviour that resulted in a sharp rise of long-term interest rates, hence the crash.

At that time Trichet was governor of the Banque de France and Volker was still the boss at the FED.

COGEMA Affair:

In 1986 - 1987: Through what appeared to be an extortion by Arbitrage S.A. of 259 million french francs from COGEMA a state owned company plus 70 millions French Francs from Buisson S.A. a french broker was in fact a transfer of funds to both Iraq and Iran for the service of several companies among which France's Aerospatiale, COGEMA and Total orchestrated by the financier Jean-Charles Naouri for the account of the French government.

Jean-Charles Naouri was the previous "chef de cabinet" of Pierre Beregovoy who he made a Prime Minister of Francois Mitterand.

One of the unwilling participants was Robert Maxwell known also as Captain Bob. I will prove that Captain bob has told to the world, before his death, that he was targeted by the CIA or at least a intelligence service.

I will prove the participation of Carlyle even before that company was incorporated.

I will later post more exclusive details of this affair in which a relation of mine was a close witness. This affair was never judged.

The week end after my friend gave a voluntary witness account to judge Eva Joly, Pierre Beregovoy committed suicide. People will have to convince me that it was a coincindence.

Jean-Charles Naouri who had nearly nothing when he left the government in 1986 controls today, alone, Fonciere Euris which is one of the ...Fortune 500.

Jean Charles Naouri and Carlyle may pretend they were doing legitimate businesses, they will have to prove it. And my friend is not Judge Eva Joly or on of the french investigative journalist.

By the way EURIS stands for EURodif - osiRIS. Where Eurodif was the contract COGEMA made with the Iran Shah and got a 1billion dollars credit for it. And Osiris is the sister reactor of Osirak which was destroyed, before delivery, on June 7th, 1981by the Israeli Air Force.

Those two debts have been mobilised illegally through over the counter options on Matif Notional. The trick was the "suprising" movement on short term interest rate that created ultimately movement on long term debt that was the root of the 1987 Crash.

Knowing the relations that Jean Charles Naouri has always kept with the French Tresor Public and the Gouverneur of the Banque de France at that time, Mr Trichet (Yes the one that heads the ECB today), no one would be surprised if he knew in advance and even influenced those interest rate swings.

The total real amount of the transfers involved must be in the order of several billion of US Dollars.

Those of you who lost fortunes because of the 1987 crash may also be interested.

Come Back Soon!

The foreign position on Iran-Iraq:

In fact nor the France of Francois Mitterand nor the USA of the different Republican Administration ever took side in the Iran-Iraq crisis. The idea was to weaken both sides, inflame the Shiite-Sunni opposition and make Iraq borrow the most money from Kuweit.

Desert Storm:

When Saddam Hussein consolidated his control of Iraq on 11 July 1979, the country had cash reserves of $36bn and no long term foreign debt. Just over a year later, in September 1980, Saddam invaded Iran. The war lasted eight years and cost around a million lives. Part of Saddam’s legacy is huge borrowing during the war which today is threatening to keep the Iraqi people enslaved and impoverished.

Debt enabled vast unprecedented military spending to constitute up to three quarters of Iraq’s GDP.[1] Between 1981-85 oil revenues were just $48.4bn, while military spending was two and half times higher at $120bn.[2] Taking 1982 as an example, military imports were $6.4bn and non-military imports were $21.5bn while export earnings were just $10bn, leaving a trade deficit of $17.9bn.

This huge imbalance between earnings and expenditure was possible precisely because many countries made loans and exported goods, including weapons systems, on credit. Because of the Islamic revolution in Iran both Western and Soviet countries supported Iraq, as did most Arab states. Saddam had plenty of willing creditors and the end of the war the US Export-Import Bank estimated that Iraq owed $27bn to Western countries and $50bn to the Gulf states.

DEBT CRISIS SPARKS ANOTHER WAR

As Iraq emerged from the war and attempted to rebuild it faced a serious financial crisis due to a low oil price and annual debt services obligations of around $3bn. By mid-1990, Iraq had an inflation rate of 40% and only enough cash reserves for three months of imports.

On 17 July Saddam accused Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates of conspiring with the United States to cheat on oil production quotas and keep the price low. As the situation escalated, Egyptian President Husni Mubarak and Saudi King Fahd arranged a meeting between Kuwaiti and Iraqi officials, in Jeddah on 31 July, to find a peaceful solution. The Iraqi representative, Izzat Ibrahim Ad-Duri, walked out, complaining of Kuwaiti reluctance to forgive Saddam's debt to Kuwait.[3]

According to King Hussein of Jordan (now deceased), the Al-Saud (Saudi Arabia) and al-Sabah (Kuwait) families agreed, in a closed door meeting before the conference, to forgive their debt claims and give $10bn to help repay the rest of Saddam’s debt. But on 30 July Kuwait’s foreign minister, Sheikh Sabeh Ahmed al-Jaber al-Sabah, the Emir’s brother, ridiculed the Iraqi army to Jordanian diplomats and said, "If they don't like it, let them occupy our territory ... we are going to bring in the Americans."[4] At Jeddah the next day, he announced to Ad-Duri that Kuwait was only offering $500m (instead of $10bn). Two days later Iraq invaded.

There are a few things you must know:

-It is probable that the American guaranteed or even twisted the arms of the Gulf States in giving the loans to Saddam. The role of the US in the tanker war make the hypothesis highly probable. By stopping that guarantee they could force Kuwait to reclaim its money, and force the invasion of Kuwait!

- OPEC is composed of several countries which in total control 30% of the world consumption. Try that in any way you want but you can't control the world price of Oil with that market share. If you admit that the americans give them a hand by the intermediary of the Energy traders, the biggest of which was Enron then the math do add up. Hence the Americans do have the ability to influence the price of Oil with the help of some Gulf States. It explains also why, later, Eron had leverage on the Bush Jr. administration and why it had to fail.

What is interesting is that first Israel receives 34 Scuds on its soils and contrary to everyone's expectation it conforms to the orders of the USA and does not react.

The big mess has failed. Bush is told to stop immediatly the war and not to catch Saddam. 

When the war stops Saddam turns against the Shias and the Kurds who had already started a wide rebellion.

300.000 people are said to be dead in these attacks.

Suddenly the Shias are much less ready to welcome the Americans.

The Embargo 1991-2003

The interruption of the war will allow the US, the so called proxy of the Jews, to impose undue economic hardship on the iraqis and humiliate this proud people. 

The Trails  

Bush Jr. Election: The parallel of the Bushes in post WWI is Hindenburg. Who disappears to give way to the true Furher.

"The avoidance of taxes is the only intellectual pursuit that still carries any reward."

- Lord John Maynard First Baron Keynes of Tilton

Bush Jr. nominates two blacks at post that will be strategic ones: Condi at the NSA and Retired General Powell as secretary of State.

Knowing that as a Republican Texan he hates the guts of the blacks one can ask why did he do it? The answer will be found later at the end of the disastrous second Iraq War.

Around 2000 all the central banks, including US, France, Switzerland, England Russia have sold their gold reserve at the lowest price since the 1980. The market has never been lower since!

Sunday, 26 September 1999: The Wahington Agreement on Gold: 

It began with a statement released jointly by European central banks from Washington, D.C. on Sunday, 26 September 1999 under support of the following signatories---

The European Central Bank and the central banks of Austria, Belgium, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and England.

Mr. Wim Duisenberg, President of the European Central Bank, announced the joint Statement on Gold:

"In the interest of clarifying their intentions with respect to their gold holdings, the above institutions make the following statement:

1. Gold will remain an important element of global monetary reserves.

2. The above institutions will not enter the market as sellers, with the exception of already decided sales.

3. The gold sales already decided will be achieved through a concerted programme of sales over the next five years. Annual sales will not exceed approximately 400 tons and total sales over this period will not exceed 2,000 tons.

4. The signatories to this agreement have agreed not to expand their gold leasings and their use of gold futures and options over this period.

5. This agreement will be reviewed after five years."

The following remarks are from George Milling-Stanley, Manager, Gold Market Analysis--World Gold Council, from an October 6, 1999 address to The 12th Nikkei Gold Conference in regard to this important announcement:

"Central bank independence is enshrined in law in many countries, and central bankers tend to be independent thinkers. It is worth asking why such a large group of them decided to associate themselves with this highly unusual agreement...At the same time, through our close contacts with central banks, the Council has been aware that some of the biggest holders have for some time been concerned about the impact on the gold price -- and thus on the value of their gold reserves -- of unfounded rumours, and about the use of official gold for speculative purposes.

"Several of the central bankers involved had said repeatedly they had no intention of selling any of their gold, but they had been saying that as individuals -- and no-one had taken any notice. I think that is what Mr. Duisenberg meant when he said they were making this statement to clarify their intentions.

Why did they need to clarify their position on gold which, at that time was going steadly down and was not in any way a concern for central bankers since 1973!?

The Trails

911:

When you see Arab workers on a building you never conclude that both the Architect and the Promotor must also be Arabs. So why did you do it here?

Did you notice that the only thing that Osama said about 911 he couldn't have heard before on CNN or Al Jazzeera was that the terrorists didn't know till the moment they climbed in the plane what they were supposed to do.

So yes he knew that it concerned planes, yes he knew that it was a suicide attempt and yes he knew that he had to provide 20 men.

So yes he probably did provide the manpower, but that is probably all he did.

For me who is knowladgeable of Arab activism I know a few things about it: they operate at home, they make bloody attacks but the scale is generally small: never much more than 20 deads. This looked much more like a bad Hollywood flick with much FX and no blood. This was made by someone who was culturally American, a Texan for example.

Another point: you don't get away from your route unoticed easily when you fly a plane. Doing that need to master the skies of the US and the codes. You don't learn that in a few course learning how to pilot. You need to be a high ranking officer in the Air Force.

Anothing you need to know is the mechanical structure of the towers: the plane were neither too high nor too low, you don't learn that in the desert.

Another point does not make sense: I am of French origin my background was engineering. I have learned business for my MBA in the US: I have never read or bought a book in French about business. And these guys have left a book on flying in Arab in the car they left at the airport. They checked their lessons at the last minute? affraied to get an F? That does not make sense. And these books were found minutes after the crash. like they were affraied that we wouldn't know they were Arabs! 

Sometime, someone is obliged to do things he does not condone. And may die because of it. But he always find a way, like Robert Maxwell did, to blow the whistle.

The Architect of 911 told us three things (at least): 

• The first is 911 is "to protect and to serve" in Afghanistan, Iraq and in Homeland security..

• The second thing he did by blowing the twin towers is that the danger was coming from the DNA: when one tower falls a few minute later its identical twin falls too.

• The third thing is giving the post WWI parallel, the arson of the reichstag which is indicated by the plane that didn't succeed and was aimed at the US House of representative. (a significant lapse has the same informational content as a success, some time it is even bigger.)

Patriot Act: This act which restrains individual freedom and give the military the upper hand in the management of the security of the country has for post WWI parallel the "Enabling Act" passed on March 23, 1933, by the Reichstag.

Afghanistan war: an easy war that allows to build on international support for the US and Nationalism in the US.

The second Iraq War: In fact several foreign countries had sold WMD to Iraq and this under the supervision of the CIA among which Germany, England France and the US of A. But Saddam was smarter he guessed that these weapons would be an excuse to topple him and did get rid of them before the war.

Washington, Nov. 11, 2003 George Gedda Associated Press - 

"A Nov. 3 Post story reported that several high-ranking detainees have said ''they believe that Hussein was afraid to lose face with his Arab neighbors. Hussein concluded, these prisoners explained, that Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates and other countries paid him deference because they feared he had weapons of mass destruction. Hussein was unwilling to reveal that his cupboard was essentially bare.''

The assertions of the detainees are not new. Kay acknowledged last month that some Saddam loyalists had told his weapons inspection team the same thing. Kay saw that as one of five or six possible explanations as to why no weapons had turned up after several months of searches. Kay is expected to issue a final report next year."

CIA: No evidence of WMD transfer

Agency has no proof that Saddam gave weapons to terrorists

Nov. 16 — The CIA’s search for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq has found no evidence that former president Saddam Hussein tried to transfer chemical or biological technology or weapons to terrorists, according to a military and intelligence expert.

However, against what the CIA told him, Bush deemed it strategic to invade Iraq and toiled with the intelligence reports he got from the intelligence community in his 2003 State of the Union Adress.

The war is said to be for the good of the Israelis but Shaul Mofaz, the Defense minister of Israel at that time, said before the war:

"Iraq does not prevent me to sleep."

Why do you believe the US want to bring Democracy to Iraq when it knows that 60% to 65% of the population is shi'a? Is it to counter the nuclear power of the Iranians shi'a or may be they don't read the CIA - World Factbook?

"Iraq:
Religions:
Muslim 97% (Shi'a 60%-65%, Sunni 32%-37%), Christian or other 3%

Iran:
Religions:
Shi'a Muslim 89%, Sunni Muslim 10%, Zoroastrian, Jewish, Christian, and Baha'i 1%"

The simple math tells you that the end result will be the creation of a Great Iran with gigantic oil Reserves and Nuclear capabilitie. The minutes the US leaves Iraq you know that the first thing in the morning they attack the Zionist entity. And that you could know even before you started destabilizing Iraq.

Shiites impatient for vote in Iraq

Mistrust greets new U.S. plan for transition

BASRA, Iraq, Nov. 16 — ....“I believe absolutely in democracy,” he said, sitting next to bookcases filled with volumes on jurisprudence, law and history. “Why are [U.S. officials] running away from elections? The people have a hunger for democracy, for the person who will represent them.”
       Nasseri’s displeasure results from a decision announced this weekend by the United States and its allies to grant independence to a provisional but unelected government by next summer. Under the plan, elections for a constitutional convention will follow in March 2005 and a permanent government will follow by the end of that year.

Activist clerics and the growing number of small, but militant Shiite parties are increasingly demanding more immediate elections that will in all likelihood deliver authority to Shiites, a community relentlessly repressed under Hussein and now looking toward political power that, as the majority, it considers its destiny.

This struggle in southern Iraq is a window on change across the Middle East: How quickly can a country long repressed democratize? What is the relationship between Islam and power? What happens when religious activists are the biggest proponents of rapid democratic change? And how will the Bush administration respond to the ascent of Islamic forces that are hostile to U.S. policy?

Along the walls across from Sayyid Ali Abdel-Hakim Musawi’s office in Basra are the graffiti of militant Islam. “Long live the Islamic Republic of Iran,” one slogan read. “Iraq and Iran are one people, one nation, destroying colonialism and fighting the tyrant,” another said. But inside his office was a message of tranquillity. Musawi preached patience.
       “We don’t care about the time period,” he said. “We only want a constitution that serves us.”

 It is an irony of the U.S. occupation that Shiite groups most opposed to it are the biggest advocates of democratic elections. Their support is dismissed by the more mainstream Shiite groups, and their infrastructure pales before the organization of groups such as the Dawa party and the Supreme Council, whose leaders sit on the Governing Council. But the groups claim a popular voice.

The purpose of going in Iraq was certainly not to restrain the real threat of Iran Nukes!

The war as planed by Donald Brumsfeld and the civilians of the Pentagon will soon appear a catastrophic adventure where the US will have lost its prestige, the violence of the conflicts between Shias and Sunnis will be exacerbated. And where all the Muslims in the world that want to make a Jihad will have met.

The Trails

What happens really at the Federal Reserve?

Good Cop, Bad Cop Bernanke/Greenspan 7.25.03

But more importantly by the King of the leaks:

Federal Reserve wars CNN 7 Nov 2003

Where you understand that while Greenspan is trying to talk up long term rate Bernanke does all he can do in order to make the public aware of the Liquidity Trap and hence bring it closer.

What is the Most Probable Scenario?

• Because of the recession in the western economies Antisemitism grows in the Western Countries

3 Nov 2003: EU poll shows Europeans see Israel as leading threat to peace

RAF CASERT

BRUSSELS (AP) - The European Union condemned lingering anti-Jewish bias it said was reflected in a survey released Monday in which more Europeans named Israel as a threat to world peace than any other country.

• Those Democracies frightened by the Islamic dominance and willing to buy time tilt against the Jews for the positions of the Islamic and Arab world.

21 Oct 2003: UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - The U.N. General Assembly overwhelmingly approved late on Tuesday a resolution demanding that Israel halt construction of a barrier cutting deep into Palestinian West Bank lands.

The vote was 144-4 with 12 abstentions, with the United States and Israel voting 'no' along with the Marshall Islands and Micronesia.

Suicide Car Bombers Kill 23 in Turkey - Saturday November 15, 2003 

By JAMES C. HELICKE, Associated Press Writer

ISTANBUL, Turkey - Suicide car bombers attacked two synagogues in Istanbul at almost the same time Saturday, killing at least 23 people and wounding 100, the interior minister said.

One explosion went off outside the Neve Shalom synagogue, the city's largest. The other severely damaged the Beth Israel Synagogue in the affluent district of Sisli, three miles away.

• Wall Street crashes. 

• The Jews pushed by Antisemitism and economic problems emigrate en masse toward Israel.

We can not exclude that Islamic Antisemites and terrorists actions committed outside Israel, including in Iraq, and for which are no one has claimed responsability might be what in the 70's was called agit-prop! As long as I can remember Arab and Islamic activits always claimed responsability for their operations!

Tempting Jews to Israel proves difficult

By Khalid Amayreh in Jerusalem
Tuesday 18 November 2003, 20:10 Makka Time, 17:10 GMT