This post will attract ridicule

[McKenzie]

but I feel compelled to get things off my chest people.

I'm watching the Rove case with real interest. I don't understand the issues fully although it seems the Shrub outfit is in trouble. I suspect it's a symptom of what many of us believe is going on though. A system predicated upon a tangled web of half truths and complex international relationships underpinned by one big issue - the financial system and how it operates. The US political system is revealing more and more the influence of huge financial interests at political level and the tangled web is unravelling.

The more research I do into the sorry mess we (I'm not an American but "we" are all in this together) are in the more I am convinced it's about the world (mainly the US) financial system and the desperate attempts to prop it up by trying to keep capital flowing through the world banking system. Mike Ruppert (www.copvcia.com) and Catherine Austin Fitts (www.solari.com) do very good analyses of the issues. For example, the possiblity of CIA complicity in the massive drugs trade is almost certainly geared towards maintaining the lifeblood of capital flow, wihout which the US banking system, and thus the stock market, would collapse. The maintenance of the dollar as the world's de facto reserve currency plays a similar role.

That hypothesis also explains the baffling alliance between Bliar and Shrub; it's a mutual inter-dependence relationship rather than master and poodle. At the heart of it all lies international capital theory that seems to underpin the current military adventurism. Cue the financial support for Hitler before, and even during, WW2 by US banking interests (see the book by Anthony sutton for an explanation of the background and consider the two quotes below). The desperate need to keep capital flowing through the banking system also sheds light on the apparent craziness of allowing Pearl Harbor to happen and it might just expain why 911 might have been allowed to happen too. If one uses Occam's Razor to cut away the most unlikely scenarios one is left with only ONE real possibility - financial interests although getting the oil supply under control runs a close second. The two things are linked together anyway due to the need to maintain dollar hegemony by maintaining the dollar as the de facto reserve currency for the world.

Consider that Saddam switched his $10 billion reserve fund at the UN to the euro in late 2002 and started trading oil in euros at that time...that fits perfectly with the desperate attempts to stop that happening. If the dollar was no longer used as the exlusive means of exchange for oil then the US economy could well collapse. And the UK would be cut loose to fend for itself in an EU where France and Germany are not really happy with us. Our clout in the EU would diminish substantially because we would no longer have a powerful ally in the US. Maybe that's why the UK does not put its full support behind the other EU biggies; we can't be seen to strengthen the EU because the ascendancy of the euro and the very real possibility of the petroeuro would seriously damage the dollar. We need to keep American sweet. That also explains why the corporate-owned press is constantly trying to rubbish the EU.

I urge you to get a copy of Mike Ruppert's lecture "The Truth and Lies of 911" (Portland State University, November 28 2001) - it is one of the most scholarly and sober explanations of the financial issues that underpin the current adventurism I have ever seen. If the lecture was shown publicly it is a fair bet that it'd be all over; people would suss exactly what the real deal is and the fragility of the banking system would be exposed in the glare of the light. This-is-what-it-is-all-about.

Here are some informed sources that support the international capital hypothesis>>>

"I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the civilized world no longer a Government by free opinion, no longer a Government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a Government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men." - Woodrow Wilson, 1913 (I'm not sure as to the exact date)

"Germany's unforgivable crime before the second world war," Churchill said," was her attempt to extricate her economic power from the world's trading system and to create her own exchange mechanism which would deny world finance its opportunity to profit." (Churchill to Lord Robert Boothby, quoted in the Foreword, 2nd Ed. Sydney Rogerson, Propaganda in the Next War 2001, orig. 1938).

It's all about maintaining capital flow and propping up the dollar. Macho adventurism, the desire to dominate, imposition (sic)of "freedom", threats from WMD and all the other possibilities just-do-not-make-sense. The Iraq invasion was an act of utter desperation simply because the stakes are the very survival of the entire system. It divided opinion sharply, is now deeply unpopular and the cost in human life and money seems to far outweigh the benefits of "freeing" Iraq from what was undeniably a shitbag dictatorship. The system is in deepest poo and what we are witnessing are the desperate efforts to stop it imploding on itself by trying to keep the capital flowing. That is possibly why Iran is in the gunsights of the US and why
Venezuela's nationalisation of its oil industry has been greeted with hostility with the US. It's all about capital flow and propping up the international banking system...which hasn't been around for all that long anyway...

I am a proponent of free markets, regulated to prevent the accumulation of massive amounts of capital in a few hands and thus skewing of the free market. What exists at the moment is as far removed from free and open competition as it is possible to get; we do not have a free market system in the context of what Adam Smith believed. What we have just now is a travesty of that vision enforced by a few very powerful financial interests who have grown obscenely wealthy by controlling the many in the interests of the (very) few. The system is predicated upon principles that those who originally devised the free market system would never have supported. Those chickens are coming home to roost in front of our very eyes. All the other shit such as trying to appoint nutters to the Supreme Court is important, of course, but it's not central to the single big issue...the world's financial system as it currently works now depends on keeping the war(s) going. If the capital flow dries up the
system will collapse; without the huge expenditure on warfare that's exactly what would happen. A shift away from the petrodollar would have a similar effect that would have a domino effect on other industrialised nations that depend on maintaining the US banking sytem - "If America sneezes everyone catches a cold". Maybe that's why the US has many strange bedfellows.

As I say above, this post will attract ridicule. I'm not worried about appearing silly; I'm prepared to be ridiculed if it means getting to the truth.

[nadinbrzezinski]

1. ha, ha... now seriously

the Canadians did publish an article I have the PDF but not the original one, with this same theory... it has been a strategic decision from the top since 1987 to intervene at apropriate times. The Stock maket cannot be alowed to crash... which makes you wonder if it should or would already.

[applegrove]

2. Nothing wrong with intervention to fight of computer generated selling.

That is what government is for - to fight off the worst effects of market action (say the market going bust do to rumour). But when the market keeps rolling and only the people with money benefit from that.. and the middle class & the poor are left to fight inflation themselves...something is wrong.

[nadinbrzezinski]

3. No, no they did not quite mean that

the PDF was quite clear, the market should have crashed, but the gov'ment is intervening and has been since 9.11 in truly a scary and massive scale.

[raccoon]

17. Can you give us a link to that Canadian report? nt

[Nederland]

18. Ummmm

how does that explain that the market did in fact crash in spring of 2000?

[David Briggs]

4. Then how do you explain Canada?

Peaceful and prosperous with universal health care. Not by waging war, obviously. Though it definetly could be oil and other valuable natural resources which are what's propping it up.

So we levy a windfall profit tax on the oil business and use the money to sponsor the kind of intensive research in alternative energy technologies as might resemble a latter day space program. The US space program of the 60s and 70s paid off for us in so many positive ways, let's do it again but with energy this time.

[NAO]

5. Damn, now I must renew subscription to Ruppert's "From the Wilderness"

It is well worth the money, but I'd let it lapse. No other resource comes close to the astute and documented analysis of events.

Ruppert's book "Crossing the Rubicon" is a must read. I never imagined that geo-politics could be so fascinating.

From the Wilderness
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/

[shimbo]

6. Congratulations.

Most of the participants on DU or Freerepublic can't see beyond the current puppet show to reach your level of understanding about the current state of affairs.

The current contained depression is a directly result of the 1987 NYSE market crash, which begat the 1990 recession. Greenspan intervened by preventing a complete banking collapse, which then begat the 1995 stock market bubble, which leads to now, the dying dollar, and its subsequent bubbles and deficits.

For further research, look up Jerome Levy, who first coined the term "contained depression" in the early 90s. They've done some interesting work on the trade deficit since 1991 that essentially proves.... well, read it for yourself.

Also, look up Larry Summers & GATA for info and evidence of how the Clinton administration did their part by artificially propping the dollar through stealth gold manipulations since 1995.

[McKenzie]

8. thnx for the leads

will follow them up. I didn't mention the external debt although I am aware it depends on maintaining dollar hegemony.

[blm]

15. And it all still comes down to BCCI - which some of us here have been

saying for years now.

9-11, Iraq war, and our current foreign policy are all deeply rooted in BCCI.

Had all the revelations of BCCI been exposed at the time, there would have been no 9-11 and no Bush would ever have been allowed NEAR the White House ever again.

[ret5hd]

20. Before BCCI was Nugan-Hand Bank.

bcci happened because nugan-hand fell.

[mattclearing]

16. Welcome to DU.

:hi:

I thought a good number of DU'ers understood that institutional investors and the Fed are manipulating the economy to avoid a market/currency crash.

One need only look at the fluctuations of gold, oil, and the stock market, and the bizarre behavior exhibited on a day to day basis to confirm this.

I've noticed several times where prices of stocks conveniently stabilized in the midst of freefall over the past few years.

[Extend a Hand]

7. Not from me

The Iranian oil bourse starting in March may push them over the edge.

http://thetrumpet.com/index.php?page=article&id=1704

[sendero]

14. Well..

.... if we invade Iran within a couple months of that time, I guess that is all I need to see.

I'll admit, I don't exactly understand how "war financing" keeps the "capital flowing". I have only an intuitive idea of why it is so important to keep oil trading in dollars, although I accept the premise.

But even though I've never heard the term "contained depression", that is a good description of where I think our economy is right now. And I'm pretty sure it's going to get a lot worse before it gets better.

[JNelson6563]

9. That's all well and good but

who do you like for Prez in '08? :sarcasm:

Seriously, great post, I hope it is widely read, especially by those who think this is all one big game.

Julie

[willing dwarf]

10. Getting to the truth

I believe you have your finger on it here.

It's frustrating that the reasons given for the war & the terror alerts do not seem to be the real reasons these people have opted for war. Therefore, there's no way to clearly assess the consequences of not engaging in the war that's on in Iraq (and truly lots of other places too).

All that said, Americans are recognizing the costs of the war-- the death of our young men & women, the draining of resources out of the country resulting in floods and chaos in the wake of Katrina & Rita-- People see the costs and have no context to put them in. We can't say that the costs are worthy because no one is telling the truth about what the war is for.

Myself I believe that the flow of capital and the flow of oil are completely intertwined. In the US and other developed nations, we have lived off the lives and work of people in poor nations for several generations. THese nations are enslaved by burdens of debt that they were obliged to accept, and from which they see little or no true benefit.

Yet in our nation this is scarcely ever discussed. Why? Because we have been conditioned not to pay attention long enough to follow the money trail Being a patriot in the US these days means not asking questions, but keep your credit spending high.

[Jackpine Radical]

11. It makes absolute sense to me, and accords with my worldview.

I periodically get trashed for my metaphoric talk of the Illuminati. You have just shone a light on the collective face of the Illuminati.

[converted_democrat]

25. They had a great show on the History Channel 3 nights ago, it was

amazing. It was called Decoded History/ Secret Societies. I had always thought of NWO, Bilderbergs, and The Trilateral Commission (talked about many more too) as a conspiracy, they presented it as fact. It was amazing. It discussed why it doesn't matter who you vote for a Dem or a Puke, if they are a member of these societies, your voting for the same agenda. It also discussed how having legacies in a democracy was dangerous. And how our freedoms are being taken away by degrees, so we don't revolt. It was amazing, I have never seen such coverage of this issue before, on a mainstream cable channel. It laid it out all on the line, like I have never seen before.

[farmbo]

12. You've gone a bridge too far...Pearl Harbor and 9/11 are not related

Certainly, there are far too many "coincidences" leading up to 9/11 to lay it exclusively at the feet of a Afghanistan- based Mujhadeen force; the purchase of Airline stock "puts", the USAF stand down, Building WTC Seven's inexplicable collapse (implosion)on the afternoon of 9/11. I'm at least willing to nibble on your theory that world capital markets needed something-- anything-- to keep the pumps primed in 2001.

But it is clearly over-reaching to ascribe Pearl Harbor to the same conspiratorial machinations. (BTW, this also greatly degrades your overall premise). First, half the world was at war already--indeed those very conspiratorial financiers were "selling arms to both sides" by financing both Hitler and the West. Second, military bungling DOES tend to explain the Pearl Harbor debacle. They were NOT ordered by superiors to stand down. And alas, the military bureaucracy stifled all initiative in getting warnings on the morning of the attack to the top of the chain of command.

There is also the not-too-insignificant issue of a four carrier Japanese Navy task force. This took decades to assemble and equip and lets the air out of your argument that financiers pulled the strings on that sneak attack.

Finally, Japanese Navy observers were in Italy in 1940, when carrier-based Royal Navy Swordfish aircraft launched a successful seaborne sneak attack against the Italian fleet at Taranto. Upon information and belief, no international financiers were among them.

http://www.geocities.com/Broadway/Alley/5443/tar.htm

Enjoyed your article, though.

[bunny planet]

13. I won't ridicule you for this post.

As far as our 'secret' government's reason for going to war with Iraq, Randi Rhodes, one of our liberal radio hosts, has always mentioned that the real reason was that Saddam was going to start trading in petroeuros as opposed to petrodollars. The World Bank and the International Monetary Fund do control the many in the interests of the few, why do you think Paul Wolfowitz went to work for the World Bank right after he'd seen to getting the Iraq War off full tilt. Why is the Afghanistan Drug trade allowed to flourish again when we are supposedly already there spreading 'freedom'. No, I'm afraid your post can't be ridiculed at all, and it does go a long way to explaining Tony Blair's inexplicable support of the Village Idiot we have as our President (not that I think Jr. understands any of it on any deep level, he's the figurehead).

[npincus]

19. really interesting- thanks.

[shance]

21. This is information Americans need to be learning more about.

Thanks.

[TreasonousBastard]

22. Your sources are bit suspect, but...

there is some truth in all of this.

For one thing, the world financial system does have its bad points, but it is absolutely necessary to have some control and balance so that things don't get out of hand-- crashing an burning. Wilson's comment was most likely about the need for a central bank to take control away from the small group of financiers at the time. It was under him that the Federal Reserve system was establshed.

There's a lot of bitching about he Fed going around, but look up what happened when Whitehall brokerage failed, or the Penn Central bond fiasco when it went belly-up, and you'll see a couple of spectaular times when the Fed literally saved the US economy. It does that sort of thing all the time in smaller cases.

Internationally, everything is now a house of cards, and everyone knows it so they are all working to keep the delicate balance that keeps the whole thing from falling. Unfortunately, the US external debt is the primary thing that could screw it all up. In the old days, the Bundesbank would buy up Eurodollars to prop up the price of the dollar, but it's a whole new ballgame now.

I wouldn't say it was the main reason we went to war in Iraq, but everyone in Washington was worried about their changing from dollars to euros in oil sales. Fact is, they sell oil to us, but buy equipment from Europe, and the exchange from dollars received to euros spent costs all the oil countries billions and others, even the Saudis, were thinking of making the change. Such a change would then cost us billions, and make our Current Account problems infinitely worse.

Conspiracies about the Swiss gold bugs, mysterious strangers with billions secreted away, and governments in their employ are fun, but the reality is that Britain and the US do share one thing-- we are both slaves to international trade and capital movements. The Brits import money in their finacial structure-- their banks and insurance companies are international in scope and perhaps the largest international financiers, and we import stuff. Neither of us makes much of what people actually buy any more, but both of us built our economies in the past on our manufacturing and engineering excellence, and are now struggling with the new realities. And Britain still won't use the euro, so we both have our currencies to worry about when competing with the yen, yuan, and euro.

I don't trust anyone in this administration to do the proper thing, but talking to Britain seems almost unavoidable.

[ArkDem]

23. Pretty funny

:spray:

[pberq]

24. No ridicule from me - nominated!

Ruppert and and C.A. Fitts are reporting things at a level that is not understood by most people. It was only after I read "Crossing the Rubicon" that I started understanding some of this stuff.