See other War, War, War Articles
Title: Currency War III—the Libyan Intervention
Source:
Adask Law
URL Source: http://adask.wordpress.com/2011/06/ ... ibyan-intervention/#more-6950
Published: Jun 12, 2011
Author: Al Adask
Post Date: 2011-06-12 10:41:49 by noone222
Keywords: None
Views: 67
Comments: 2
Adask's law adask.wordpress.com/2011/...n-intervention/#more-6950 Currency War III—the Libyan Intervention 05 Jun 8 Votes “Legal reform” is a catch-all for dissidents who’re fed up with governmental abuse—especially in our courts. I’ve been a political activist in the “legal reform” movement for 28 years. I published a magazine (the AntiShyster) for 12 years that dealt with “legal reform” issues and strategies. The issues were almost always valid. The strategies devised to combat governmental abuse sometimes worked, but were often half-baked, ineffective or even unlawful. Those strategies weren’t “wrong,” per se—they were simply the first steps in learning to understand and resist governmental oppression. As a result of publishing a multitude of articles in the AntiShyster on these various “legal reform” strategies, in the 1990’s I came to understand a fundamental truth: dissidents could advocate almost any strategy they liked (no drivers license, stop paying income tax, even call for the assassination of the President) and they might attract some onerous governmental attention—or they might not. (The gov-co doesn’t really care if you kill a president. They can screw ‘em in and screw ‘em out of office—just like light bulbs. In the eyes of the gov-co, even presidents are “disposable”.) But any dissidents who dared to effectively challenge the money system (and some did with homemade money orders, “comptrollers warrants,” and even attempts to initiated their own silver-based money, etc.) were going to jail. You could bet on it. I learned that the heart of darkness of the entire gov-co was the fiat monetary system and the gov-co would defend fiat money at any cost. It would take another decade before I realized that gov-co’s determination to defend fiat dollars also included protecting the fiat dollar internationally—at any cost. • Last week, Russia Today television (RT) aired an English-language news report (www.youtube.com/watch?v=GuqZfaj34nc&NR=1&feature=fvwp) on the real reason for the recent military intervention into Libya: to prevent Libya from “burying the American buck.” According to RT, some said the NATO intervention was intended to protect civilians from violence committed by the Libyan government. Others claimed the intervention is all about stealing Libyan oil. But others “are convinced that the intervention into Libya is all about currency. Specifically, Khadafy’s plan to introduce the gold dinar—a single African currency made from gold.” Russian Today reported that in the months leading up to the military intervention, Khadafi had called on African and Muslim nations to come together to create a new currency that would rival the dollar and euro. The African nations would sell oil and other resources around the world only for gold dinars. It’s an idea that would shift the economic balance of the world. Countries’ wealth would depend on how much gold they have; not on how many dollars they trade. Anthony Wile: “If Khadafi priced his oil in gold or launched a new gold currency, that move would not be welcomed by the power-elite who are responsible for controlling the world’s central banks. That would certainly be something that would cause his immediate dismissal . . . .” Russia Today: “It’s happened before. In 2,000, Saddam Hussein announced that Iraqi oil would be traded for euros, not dollars. Sanctions and an invasion followed—some say because the United States was desperate to prevent OPEC from trading its oil for euros. “A gold dinar would give the African countries the power to demand payments in gold and the some say the US and other western countries couldn’t allow that to happen.” Hence, RT argued that the current military intervention into Libya wasn’t intended to protect the Libyan people or even steal Libyan oil, but rather to protect the almighty fiat dollar. • Indeed, war to protect the fiat dollar has happened before. In August of A.D. 2010, I wrote an article entitled “Currency Wars” (adask.wordpress.com/2010/...currency-wars/#more-1057) wherein I explained the rationale for protecting the fiat dollar: “The U.S. dollar lost its gold backing domestically in A.D. 1933. It lost its domestic silver backing in A.D. 1968. It lost its international gold backing in A.D. 1971 and became a pure, fiat currency. As a result, the fiat dollar should’ve inflated into oblivion at least 20 years ago. “However, the inflation that inevitably destroys a fiat currency was postponed when the Nixon administration negotiated an A.D. 1971 agreement with Saudi Arabia. Under that agreement, the U.S. guaranteed the Saudi’s national security in return for the Saudi’s guarantee to sell their crude oil for only U.S. fiat dollars. Nixon then cut another deal whereby OPEC would also guarantee to sell all of its oil for only U.S. fiat dollars. “As a result of the agreements with the Saudi’s and OPEC, any nation that wanted to purchase crude oil on international markets had to use intrinsically-worthless, fiat, paper, U.S. dollars to do so. This created a massive international demand for U.S. dollars which gave fiat dollars the illusion of intrinsic value. Thanks to the Saudi’s and OPEC, the fiat dollar (no longer backed by gold or silver) was implicitly backed by the world’s crude oil. “So long as the dollar was the World’s Reserve Currency, America could run spectacular balance of trade deficits, spend fiat dollars globally like a drunken sailor, buy every treasonous whore in every capital of the world, and expand the size and power of the U.S. government on a national and international scale. “The right to issue the World’s Reserve Currency is the bankers’ ‘holy grail’ and the politicians’ ‘philosopher’s stone’ all rolled up into one. The power to spin the world’s currency out of thin air is the single biggest prize this world has ever known. There has never been a time in history when nations would not go to war to seize such powers for themselves.” • Currency War I (CWI)—Iraq. Our “petro-dollars” served admirably as the World’s Reserve Currency until A.D. 2000, when Saddam Hussein started selling Iraqi crude for euros and thereby threatened the illusion that fiat dollars had intrinsic (petroleum-backed) value. If other currencies could be used to purchase crude oil, the apparent value of the fiat dollar would fall. Under the pretext of preventing Hussein’s use of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs), we invaded Iraq in A.D. 2003. But there were no WMDs—at least not nuclear bombs or poison gasses. Instead, Saddam was wielding a far deadlier “WMD”—a willingness to attack the U.S. dollar by selling Iraqi crude for euros. By selling Iraqi oil for euros, Saddam incited Currency War I. We invaded. We hanged Hussein. But Saddam had struck a mortal blow to the fiat dollar. As our “shock and awe” attack bogged down in Iraq, other nations took courage and also began selling crude for currencies other than dollars. As a result, the fiat dollar’s purchasing power has declined by at least one-third since Saddam started selling crude for euros in A.D. 2000 and the U.S. and global economies are therefore teetering on the edge of depression. • Currency War II (CWII)—North Korea. According to the August 20th, A.D. 2010 World Net Daily, “North Korea attacking U.S. with fake $100 bills: The State Department confirmed that a rash of almost undetectable counterfeits, called ‘supernotes,’ have been flooding the U.S. from North Korea in a form of monetary sabotage that one former FBI agent warns could constitute an act of war.” Since last August, North Korea has been persuaded to stop counterfeiting US dollars and Currency War II has cooled down into a truce. Therefore, calling that conflict a “currency war” may have been an exaggeration. Perhaps it was only a “currency conflict”. More, last August, I speculated that Currency War III would be with Iran. That speculation has also proved false. So far. Perhaps the “Arab Spring” has blunted any US plans for an immediate attack against Iran. Or maybe the US is simply too broke to unilaterally invade another country. Nevertheless, last August, I asked (and answered) the following questions: “How far would the forces of the New World Order go to insure that our monetary future was based on the central bankers’ fiat currency rather than the people’s gold? Would the NWO go to war to impose a fiat currency on the world? I say the answer is not merely Yes—but, Hell, Yes!” Time suggests my answer was correct. • All of which brings us back to our current “intervention” in Libya. As the Russia Today news report warned at the start of this article, the real reason for our Libyan intervention was to protect the US dollar. French journalist Thierry Meyssan agrees. In “Obama, financial war and the elimination of DSK” (published by VoltaireNet.org), Mr. Meyssan suggested what may be the “real” reason for the recent charges of sexual assault against former IMF head, Dominique Strauss-Khan (DSK): “It is impossible to understand the downfall of Dominique Strauss-Khan without linking it to his project for the creation of a new international reserve currency, which was to be launched on 26 May 2011 at the Deauville G-8 summit. The project was paradoxically anticipated as much by the Emerging States as by stateless financial capital, but rejected by the U.S.-Israeli military-industrial complex.” Mr. Meyssan’s reference to the “U.S.-Israeli military-industrial complex” sounds like a “conspiracy theory,” but Meyssan may have a point. Insofar as Israel’s post-WWII existence has been significantly based on US financial support, and insofar as that financial support has (since A.D. 1971) been in the form of fiat dollars—what would happen to Israel if the US fiat-dollar collapsed? It’s not hard to suppose that Israel has considerable interest in supporting the fiat monetary system that supports Israel. So, if it were true that Dominique Strauss-Khan (DSK), the head of the IMF, were advocating the “creation of a new international reserve currency,” his advocacy could be construed as dangerous to the interests of the US gov-co and Israel. In this regard, DSK’s attempt to implement a new “international reserve currency” could be seen to parallel the recent efforts by Libyan president Khadafi to implement a new gold-based currency for Africa. Interesting coincidence, hmm? And . . . coincidentally . . . Khadafi (who proposed a new gold currency for Africa) is being bombed into oblivion while DSK (who proposed a new “international reserve currency”) lost his job as IMF chief and may be imprisoned for the balance of his life for rape. Gee, what’re the odds? • Mr. Meyssan continues: “IMF Managing Director [DSK] was held in confinement for 10 days. During this period the functioning of the IMF was blocked in want of a signature. For 10 days the problems related to the euro and the dollar, Greece’s default, and many others crucial issues were put on standby at the mercy of the police, judges and prison guards. Why were Hollywood-like means deployed to block the IMF during 10 days? There are two possible answers, and they may be linked. “On 29 March 2009, the governor of the People’s Bank of China, Zhou Xiaochuan, challenged the predominance of the dollar as reserve currency. [He advocated] a supranational currency [composed of] IMF Special Drawing Rights. On 2 April 2009, yielding to pressure, the United States agreed to the tripling of IMF resources and to the issuance by that institution of Special Drawing Rights (SDR) for a value of 250 billion dollars. On 8 July 2009, Russia submitted that the new world currency should be minted rather than being virtual.” International pressure was growing. China, Russia and the IMF were working in concert to replace the dollar as world reserve currency. A “virtual” currency would be a fiction. All “fiat” currencies are “virtual”. A “minted” currency would constitute an assault on all fiat/virtual currencies and a return to tangible reality. “Minted” implicates coins. Coins implicate metal. Metal implicates gold and silver. Because they are real, metal “minted” currencies cannot be “spun” out of thin air. The New World Order is based on appearances and fictions. The forces for the New World Order and fiat currencies would never agree to “minting” a new reserve currency. “Spinning,” Yes; “Minting,” No. The New World Order (and the US) will not sanction a return to “real” money and financial reality. • “This project [establishing a new reserve currency] should have seen the light of day on 26 May 2011 at the G8 summit in Deauville (France). The dollar would thus have met its demise as the reserve currency against the backdrop of an imminent cessation of payments on the part of the U.S. Federal Government.” Would the fiat dollar really “have met its demise as the reserve currency at the G8 Summit”? Who can say? But this much seems certain: While the G-8 declined to “execute” the dollar on May 26th, that “execution” was at least considered. The fiat/virtual/fictional dollar lived to rob another day. But clearly the fiat dollar is closer to its end than to its beginning. • “Although the exact details of Dominique Strauss-Khan’s [DSK] device for the creation of the new currency sustained by IMF Special Drawing Rights remain secret, it would appear that Libya had a key role to play. On an experimental level, the Libyan Central Bank was the first to base its currency, the dinar, on gold and later on SDRs.” According to Mr. Meyssan, DSK and Libya had apparently acted in concert to challenge the (fictional) value of the fiat dollar. Coincidentally, both have since been attacked and virtually destroyed. Again, what’re the odds? • Is the US government mighty or bankrupt? The answer depends on what kind of currency the world will accept. So long as the world accepts fiat dollars, the US gov-co is mighty. If the world demands specie-based currencies (actual payment in gold), the US gov-co is broke. Our gov-co’s fundamental power is not moral or even military. It’s monetary. The United States gov-co’s military might is based on a fictional currency. The US military might is based on an illusion; on a financial lie. Our military might is ultimately based not on our industrial capacity or our national cohesion, but rather on the lie that our green pieces of paper have real value and the ability of the Federal Reserve to “spin” fiat currency out of thin air. That insight should scare the hell out of every US General and politician. Why? Because once the lie is exposed, it will fail. Once the lie fails, the Fed will be unable to spin fiat currency, and US military power must therefore diminish dramatically. Given that our fundamental power is not military or industrial, but monetary, you can see why wars could be waged over currencies. Every government’s survival depends on the vitality of its national currency. The gov-co will give up the launch codes to Poseidon nuclear missiles before it voluntarily surrenders to power to “spin” fiat currency out of thin air. Why? Because, if the fiat dollar goes down, the US gov-co’s powers go down right along with it. Thus, as a matter of self-preservation, our gov-co will do anything to ensure the survival of the fiat US dollar. Again, today’s fiat monetary system is the “heart of darkness” of the US and world governments. Fiat money is the source of the US and NWO’s powers. They will spare no cost to protect the fiat money system in general and the US fiat-dollar in particular. Curiously, it was widely reported that during the Libyan “intervention,” NATO dispatched HSBC bank executives to Libya to set up a rebel central bank. Can the idea of “currency wars” be dismissed if NATO is establishing a “rebel central bank” to dispense loans even before they establish a USO to dispense donuts? It seems all but certain that the Libyan intervention can be accurately described as Currency War III. • Mr. Meyssan concludes: “We are now witnessing a financial war on an unprecedented scale. While the economic situation of the United States is on the brink and the dollar could rapidly turn into monkey currency, the agreement concluded at the G8 and endorsed by the G20, implemented by the IMF in conjunction with the World Bank and the international banking circles, of which DSK was the architect, has been suspended. “The hegemony of the dollar remains intact albeit more artificially than ever.” True. For now. A “Currency War” is raging in Libya. The fiat dollar, for now, is winning. In a world of fiat currencies, the dollar remains the best of a bad lot. But what is the real value of a currency whose fictional value is increasingly sustained only by military force? Not much. Insofar as we must go to war to force people to use the fiat dollar, voluntary public confidence in the fiat dollar will diminish. Paradoxically, each “Currency War” to “save” the fiat dollar will ultimately only diminish the apparent value of that dollar. When the US leaves Libya, the fiat dollar will be intrinsically weaker–just as it was weakened by the Iraqi War. Sooner or later, the world will see that the fiat/fictional dollar is also a “fascist” dollar that lies at the heart of US military (and police state) powers. Sooner or later, the world will agree that the fiat dollar is intrinsically worthless. At that moment, the US and global economies will largely collapse. There will be chaos as fictions fail. And there will be truth. That “moment of truth” might occur this Fall. It might occur ten years from now. But that moment must occur because, inevitably, the truth will out. The fiat/virtual dollar’s apparent value is a fiction, a lie. That lie—and the fiat dollar—must inevitably fail. OMG! The truth is coming! Buckle up.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 2.
#1. To: noone222 (#0)
The Moral Hazard of Modern Banking: "As the entire world financial system becomes undone people will begin to understand that money as a store of value and work and the money banks lend are two very different things for which the banks want you to think they are one and the same."
Spot on ! Not only that ... using debt instruments as money reduces the Constitution to a "worthless piece of paper" !
There are no replies to Comment # 2. End Trace Mode for Comment # 2.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestThe fiat/virtual dollar’s apparent value is a fiction, a lie. That lie—and the fiat dollar—must inevitably fail.
#2. To: GreyLmist (#1)
"As the entire world financial system becomes undone people will begin to understand that money as a store of value and work and the money banks lend are two very different things for which the banks want you to think they are one and the same."
Replies to Comment # 2.