Thursday, March 21, 2019

U.S. Citizen Fighting With ISIS Is Picked Up in Syria, But U.S. Gov’t Doesn’t Know Much About It


by Susan Jones, CNSNews:

Press reports say an American citizen has been picked up in Syria where he was fighting alongside ISIS, but the U.S. government apparently doesn’t know, or won’t say, much about it.

On Thursday morning, reporters at the Pentagon asked an American military spokesman to tell them about the U.S. citizen who was either captured by or surrendered to Syrian Democratic Forces, who are fighting ISIS in Raqqa and elsewhere in Syria.

“We have seen those same reports,” Col. Ryan Dillon, the spokesman for the U.S.-led military coalition, told reporters, live from Baghdad. Ryan said the SDF turns over any foreign fighters it captures to the “proper authorities.”

Read More @

Leftists More Outraged Over Trump’s Tweets Than London Terror Attack


by Paul Joseph Watson | :

In an entirely predictable reaction, leftists expressed more outrage over Donald Trump’s tweets about the London terror attack than the actual attack itself.

Victims with horrific burns, terrorist still on the run. Yeah, but those Trump tweets are the real outrage.

MSNBC producer Kyle Griffin seemed more upset over Trump describing the terrorist as a “loser” than anything else.


Romper’s Samantha Darby wrote that Trump’s response to the terror attack “relies on Islamophobia yet again,” despite the fact that Trump didn’t even mention Islam or Muslims in any of his tweets.

Journalist Jo Yurcaba followed suit, tweeting, “It was clear before that Trump relies on Islamophobia to gain support for his policies, but this morning’s London tweets confirm that.”


Again, Trump didn’t even mention Islam in any of his tweets.


Journalists and other members of the political class were more irate at Trump for tweeting that previous terrorists “were in the sights of Scotland Yard,” erroneously claiming that Trump was jeopardizing a terror investigation by referring to the terrorist involved in today’s attack – he wasn’t – he was talking about terrorists in general, but that didn’t prevent the butt-hurt.

Read More @

Gold Up, Markets Fatigued As War Talk Boils Over


by Jan Skoyles, GoldCore:


  • North Korea threatens to reduce the U.S. to ‘ashes and darkness’
  • Markets becoming used to ongoing provocations from North Korea
  • Russia and China continue to support watered down versions of sanctions on Kim’s regime
  • Both NATO and Russia running war games on one another’s borders
  • Putin says Russia will give a suitable response” to NATOs threatening behaviour
  • Gold set to climb as fears over economy and war will drive safe haven demand


Source: Bloomberg

This year North Korea has launched a dozen missiles. With the latest one it has threatened the U.S. with ‘ashes and darkness’ as Kim believes it ‘should be beaten to death like a rabid dog.’

Russia and China continue to support watered down sanctions on the isolated country. Both have made it clear that they will not tolerate a war on their borders.

War talk is not just about North Korea anymore.  NATO and Russia have been or are currently carrying out war games on one another’s borders. Both parties feel the other one has acted unreasonably in doing so.  U.K. Defense Secretary Michael Fallon has accused Russia of deliberately provoking NATO, whilst Putin has said Russia has no other choice than to “give a suitable response to all of these actions,”

Russia has previously used military exercises as a cover for what has ultimately been invasions and war. See Georgia in 2008 and Ukraine in 2014 for the most recent examples.

Saber rattling is quickly looking like its going to become full-blown sword fighting at least somewhere in the world.

But few seem to be worried. Markets are not only apparently fatigued by the war cries of the world’s nuclear powers but are evidently ignoring the risks in the financial system.

Gold is currently up over 15{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} for the year, silver by nearly 12{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528}. Both offer financial safe havens during times of war. All parties involved in the current geopolitical fracas are big holders of gold. Two of them, Russia and China are enabling the trade of the precious metal for key commodities.

Markets would be wise to look at how our great leaders are behaving before deciding that there is little to currently see on the global stage.

Read More @

Swedish Police May Have to Release Murder Suspect Because They Can’t Find an Interpreter


by Chris Tomlinon, Breitbart:

Swedish police may have to release a 15-year-old suspected of killing a 17-year-old earlier this week by stabbing him to death because they are unable to find a translator for him.

The 15-year-old who is accused of the stabbing may have to be released from police custody Wednesday because they are unable to find someone who can make him understand the charges and present him in front of a judge.

The Swedish police can only hold a suspect for a limited period unless a judge decides to extend the arrest, but without representation through an interpreter the process has stalled, Sydsvenskan reports.

Martin Persson, a councillor at Helsingborg’s District Court, said: “Two of the district court employees have spent the entire day seeking an interpreter through all possible interpreting agencies and other channels. But we simply have not managed to find an interpreter.”

The 15-year-old migrant is accused of stabbing a 17-year-old fellow asylum seeker to death at a locker room in a local gym. Police supervisor Karim Ottosson said the two came into conflict for an unknown reason and the 15-year-old attacked the older asylum seeker with a knife.

The 17-year-old died of his injuries on Monday but the 15-year-old has denied the charges according to his lawyer Olof Wettermark. Despite the denial, police say they have interviewed several witnesses to the murder who claim the 15-year-old stabbed the victim repeatedly.

Read More @

Secret Reagan Documents Shed Light on US Manipulation of Foreign Governments


by Robert Parry, The Anti Media:

“Secret” documents from the Reagan administration show how the U.S. embedded “political action,” i.e., the manipulation of foreign governments, in ostensibly well-meaning organizations, reports Robert Parry.

(CN) — “Secret” documents, recently declassified by the Reagan presidential library, reveal senior White House officials reengaging a former CIA “proprietary,” The Asia Foundation, in “political action,” an intelligence term of art for influencing the actions of foreign governments.

The documents from 1982 came at a turning-point moment when the Reagan administration was revamping how the U.S. government endeavored to manipulate the internal affairs of governments around the world in the wake of scandals in the 1960s and 1970s involving the Central Intelligence Agency’s global covert operations.

Instead of continuing to rely heavily on the CIA, President Reagan and his national security team began offloading many of those “political action” responsibilities to “non-governmental organizations” (NGOs) that operated in a more overt fashion and received funding from other U.S. government agencies.

But secrecy was still required for the involvement of these NGOs in the U.S. government’s strategies to bend the political will of targeted countries. If the “political action” of these NGOs were known, many countries would object to their presence; thus, the “secret” classification of the 1982 White House memos that I recently obtained via a “mandatory declassification review” from the archivists at the Reagan presidential library in Simi Valley, California.

In intelligence circles, “political action” refers to a wide range of activities to influence the policies and behaviors of foreign nations, from slanting their media coverage, to organizing and training opposition activists, even to setting the stage for “regime change.”

The newly declassified memos from the latter half of 1982 marked an ad hoc period of transition between the CIA scandals, which peaked in the 1970s, and the creation of more permanent institutions to carry out these semi-secretive functions, particularly the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), which was created in 1983.

Much of this effort was overseen by a senior CIA official, Walter Raymond Jr., who was moved to Reagan’s National Security Council’s staff where he managed a number of interagency task forces focused on “public diplomacy,” “psychological operations,” and “political action.”

Raymond, who had held top jobs in the CIA’s covert operations shop specializing in propaganda and disinformation, worked from the shadows inside Reagan’s White House, too. Raymond was rarely photographed although his portfolio of responsibilities was expansive. He brought into his orbit emerging “stars,” including Lt. Col. Oliver North (a central figure in the Iran-Contra scandal), State Department propagandist (and now a leading neocon) Robert Kagan, and NED President Carl Gershman (who still heads NED with its $100 million budget).

Despite his camera avoidance, Raymond appears to have grasped his true importance. In his NSC files, I found a doodle of an organizational chart that had Raymond at the top holding what looks like the crossed handles used by puppeteers to control the puppets below them. The drawing fit the reality of Raymond as the behind-the-curtains operative who controlled various high-powered inter-agency task forces.

Earlier declassified documents revealed that Raymond also was the conduit between CIA Director William J. Casey and these so-called “pro-democracy” programs that used sophisticated propaganda strategies to influence not only the thinking of foreign populations but the American people, too.

This history is relevant again now amid the hysteria over alleged Russian “meddling” in last year’s U.S. presidential elections. If those allegations are true – and the U.S. government has still not presented any real proof  – the Russian motive would have been, in part, payback for Washington’s long history of playing games with the internal politics of Russia and other countries all across the planet.

A Fight for Money

The newly released memos describe bureaucratic discussions about funding levels for The Asia Foundation (TAF), with the only sensitive topic, to justify the “secret” stamp, being the reference to the U.S. government’s intent to exploit TAF’s programs for “political action” operations inside Asian countries.

Indeed, the opportunity for “political action” under TAF’s cover appeared to be the reason why Reagan’s budget cutters relented and agreed to restore funding to the foundation.

William Schneider Jr. of the Office of Management and Budget wrote in a Sept. 2, 1982 memo that the Budget Review Board (BRB) had axed TAF funding earlier in the year.

“When the BRB last considered this issue on March 29, 1982, it decided not to include funding in the budget for a U.S. Government grant to TAF. The Board’s decision was based on the judgement that given the limited resources available for international affairs programs, funding for the Foundation could not be justified. During that March 29 meeting, the State Department was given the opportunity to fund TAF within its existing budget, but would not agree to do so.”

However, as Schneider noted in the memo to Deputy National Security Advisor Robert McFarlane, “I now understand that a proposal to continue U.S. funding for the Asia Foundation is included in the ‘political action’ initiatives being developed by the State Department and several other agencies.

“We will, of course, work with you to reconsider the relative priority of support for the Foundation as part of these initiatives keeping in mind, however, the need for identifying budget offsets.”

A prime mover behind this change of heart appeared to be Walter Raymond, who surely knew TAF’s earlier status as a CIA “proprietary.” In 1966, Ramparts magazine exposed that relationship and led the Johnson administration to terminate the CIA’s money.

According to an April 12, 1967 memo from the State Department’s historical archives, CIA Director Richard Helms, responding to a White House recommendation, “ordered that covert funding of The Asia Foundation (TAF) shall be terminated at the earliest practicable opportunity.”

In coordination with the CIA’s “disassociation,” TAF’s board released what the memo described as “a carefully limited statement of admission of past CIA support. In so doing the Trustees sought to delimit the effects of an anticipated exposure of Agency support by the American press and, if their statement or some future expose does not seriously impair TAF’s acceptability in Asia, to continue operating in Asia with overt private and official support.”

The CIA memo envisioned future funding from “overt U.S. Government grants” and requested guidance from the White House’s covert action oversight panel, the 303 Committee, for designation of someone “to whom TAF management should look for future guidance and direction with respect to United States Government interests.”

Read More @

Iran and Russia Look to Establish a Joint Bank, Trading in Non-Dollar Terms

from The Sirius Report:

Iran and Russia are traditional allies, so it should come as no surprise that as Iran continues to come in from the cold as sanctions are lifted, they would look to further develop their economic and political ties. In the latest initiative, Russian banks are at the forefront of a drive to enter Iran’s banking system. Crucially, Iran recognises after the years of sanctions that its banking sector is, in some aspects, deficient and is looking to Russia to introduce a broad range of financial products for both retail and commercial clients, to assist in its overhaul and redevelopment.

It has been reported that their respective central banks have been in talks about further cooperation and that as many as a dozen Russian banks are looking at entering the Iranian banking system. Historically there have been close ties between them, both in terms of trade and commerce as well as interbank cooperation. Sanctions put pay to those initiatives, but that is beginning to change. In recent years, bilateral trade has been conducted in either dollars or euros utilising intermediaries such as the UAE.

A by-product of the sanctions has seen many Iranian organisations conducting their trade through a network of overseas subsidiaries but there is evidence that this is beginning to change as business looks to return to Iran in a post sanctions world.

Unsurprisingly there is a desire for future trade between these nations to be either in the Iranian rial or the Russia ruble. The removal of the reliance on the dollar and the euro would circumvent the need to rely on the European and American central banking systems.

The entry of Russian banks into the Iranian market would clearly assist in this process of de-dollarisation, allowing Iranian companies to buy Russian goods in rubles and it is felt that the move can be reciprocated in terms of the Iranian rial in Russia.

Currently there is one Iranian Bank operating in Russia, which is used for the import and export of goods including food produce. Although the trade between the two nations is less than 1{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} as a proportion of Russian international trade, the launch of these banking initiatives is seen as opening the flood gates for a rapid growth in trade between the two nations.

Read More @

Buh Bye Petrobuck: Venezuela Begins Publishing Oil Basket Price In Yuan


from Zero Hedge:

Two days after the WSJ confirmed Maduro’s earlier threat that he would stop accepting US Dollars as payment for crude oil imports, Venezuela has done just that.

As a reminder, and as we reported previously, in an effort to circumvent U.S. sanctions, Venezuela told oil traders that it will no longer receive or send payments in dollars. As a result, oil traders who export Venezuelan crude or import oil products into the country have begun converting their invoices to euros.

Furthermore, Venezuela’s state oil company Petróleos de Venezuela SA, or PdVSA (whose bankruptcy is fast approaching), told its private joint venture partners to open accounts in euros and to convert existing cash holdings into Europe’s main currency, said one project partner. The new payment policy hasn’t been publicly announced, but Vice President Tareck El Aissami, who has been blacklisted by the U.S., said Friday, “To fight against the economic blockade there will be a basket of currencies to liberate us from the dollar.”

Fast forward to today, when according to a statement on the Venezuela oil ministry, the country’s weekly crude oil and petroleum basket “will be published in Chinese Yuan” – oddly, not in Euros as the WSJ hinted – going forward. We can only assume that Venezuela avoided the European currency on concerns that Brussels may follow in D.C.’s footsteps and impose financial sanctions on the Maduro regime next. Which meant that the only “safe” currency to transact in, was that of the country’s two big sources of vendor (and commodity) financing: China and Russia. For now Venezuela has picked the former.

The ministry also unveiled a price of 306.26 Yuan per barrel for the week of Sept. 11-15, up 1.8{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} from the 300.91 in the previous week, saying “the more favorable outlook on world oil demand and reports of lower global production contributed to the strengthening of crude oil prices this week.”

As for the more relevant topic, Venezuela’s abdication of the US dollar, whether permanent or temporary – until the US finds a way to intervene and restore normalcy – Nomura debt analyst Siobhan Morden warned that “you can say whatever you want for your domestic propaganda and make it look like you’re retaliating against the U.S…. this political posturing will only be to their detriment.

It remains to be seen if president Trump will use today’s official switch by Venezuela to a PetroYuan as justification for a more “aggressive” foreign policy posture.

* * *

Meanwhile, recall that the decision by the nation with the world’s largest proven oil reserves to eliminate the dollar, comes just days after China and Russia unveiled the latest Oil/Yuan/Gold triad at the latest BRICS conference.

“Russia shares the BRICS countries’ concerns over the unfairness of the global financial and economic architecture, which does not give due regard to the growing weight of the emerging economies. We are ready to work together with our partners to promote international financial regulation reforms and to overcome the excessive domination of the limited number of reserve currencies.”

“To overcome the excessive domination of the limited number of reserve currencies” is the politest way of stating what the BRICS have been discussing for years now; how to bypass the US dollar, as well as the petrodollar. Clearly, Beijing is ready to step up the game. Soon China will launch a crude oil futures contract priced in yuan and convertible into gold.

This means that Russia – as well as Iran, the other key node of Eurasia integration – may bypass US sanctions by trading energy in their own currencies, or in yuan. Inbuilt in the move is a true Chinese win-win; the yuan will be fully convertible into gold on both the Shanghai and Hong Kong exchanges.

The new triad of oil, yuan and gold is actually a win-win-win. No problem at all if energy providers prefer to be paid in physical gold instead of yuan. The key message is the US dollar being bypassed.

To promote their strategic partnership, Russia and China– via the Russian Central Bank and the People’s Bank of China – have been developing ruble-yuan swaps for quite a while now. Once that moves beyond the BRICS to aspiring “BRICS Plus” members and then all across the Global South, Washington’s reaction is bound to be nuclear (hopefully, not literally).

Washington’s strategic doctrine rules RC should not be allowed by any means to be preponderant along the Eurasian landmass. Yet what the BRICS have in store geo-economically does not concern only Eurasia – but the whole Global South.

Sections of the War Party in Washington bent on instrumentalizingIndia against China – or against RC – may be in for a rude awakening. 

Read More @



by Dawn Luger, The Daily Sheeple:

Regulators in China say the Bitcoin exchanges are all but banned, and the news caused the crypto currency to drop noticeably.

Reports from Bloomberg and The Wall Street Journal on Monday first indicated that China had planned to ban the trading of Bitcoin and other virtual currencies on its exchanges. Now, China’s second-largest digital-currency exchange announced it was shutting down its domestic trading operations. This is the latest development in China’s attempts to impose control within its borders over the stateless currency.

Bobby Lee, CEO of the bitcoin exchange BTCChina, tweeted Thursday that the firm would stop all trading on September 30 following China’s ban on initial coin offerings, the cryptocurrency-based fundraising method.

According to Bloomberg, China Business News reported that the city of Shanghai had ordered the closure of bitcoin trading platforms. The website Crypto Coins News further cited a local newsletter that said banning bitcoin exchanges was “certain.”

Bitcoin has come under pressure in recent weeks following negative headlines out of the UK and China. –Business Insider

Rumors that China will inevitably ban cryptocurrency trading altogether have escalated. A Caixin report out Friday suggested that China would even shut down all of its domestic exchanges. In addition, the Financial Conduct Authority, a UK watchdog, warned investors about the “risk” associated with ICOs.

The cryptocurrency has fallen about 25{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} since its September 1 high but it’s still up nearly 300{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} this year leading many to speculate that the Chinese ban and UK rhetoric will have a pretty small effect overall on the currency.

Read More @

What’s So Scary About an Idea?

by Harley Schlanger, via Rogue Money:

“We want a new paradigm in politics—away from geopolitics, to the common aims of mankind,” Helga Zepp-LaRouche stated in an interview published by Germany’s Junge Welt in its Sept. 13 edition. “We believe that a continuation of geopolitics holds the danger of confrontation with Russia and China. That is one of the reasons we support the initiative of Xi Jinping to create a New Silk Road on the basis of win-win cooperation among all the nations of the world.”

Zepp-LaRouche added that “the vision of the New Silk Road was an idea of ours,” and its full implementation will finally put an end to “the consequences of colonialism and the IMF credit conditionalities that followed it. Only development of infrastructure creates the preconditions for a real development of the entire continent” of Africa, and of the world.

But within hours of having published Zepp-LaRouche’s interview, Junge Welt unpublished it—they removed all traces of it from their website!

What’s so scary about an idea, you might ask, that it would cause such a pathetic, ham-fisted display of censorship?

Start with the fact that the entire trans-Atlantic financial system is dangling by the thinnest of threads, and could plunge into chaos at any moment. In fact, even the ultra-liberal Adam Smith Institute of Great Britain had to admit in a report published today, that the global financial system is an “accident waiting to happen,” and that the so-called stress tests of the banks are a fraud which are covering up the fact that the banks today are leveraged far more than they were a decade ago, right before the 2007-2008 blowout.

The British Empire decidedly does not want the New Silk Road idea on the table as an alternative, as their financial system goes down in flames.

Then, if you are London, you definitely have to worry about what President Trump might do on his upcoming November trip to Asia, where he is scheduled to meet with China’s President Xi Jinping, and will come in personal contact with other world leaders—including Russia’s Vladimir Putin—at the ASEAN and APEC summit meetings. All of London’s efforts to tar and feather Trump have failed so far: as Politico noted in an article headlined “Teflon Donald Trump,” “Democrats have attacked the president every which way, but polling and focus groups show none of it’s working.” It seems normal Americans are not as stupid as the British would like, and still want skilled jobs, serious investment in infrastructure, and cooperation with other nations to achieve those results—policies which Trump promised voters, but has yet to deliver on.

As Helga Zepp-LaRouche emphasized in discussions with colleagues yesterday (see the German language video linked above), what the British, Wall Street, and the European Union are offering people on both sides of the Atlantic, is only to stick to the existing rules and standards of the financial system, but that is “all built on sand.” It amounts to nothing more than keeping the speculative bubble intact, and to ensure there is no cooperation with China’s Belt and Road Initiative. But with every day that passes, that New Silk Road and its win-win approach to global relations, and the prospect of real investment in great infrastructure projects, becomes more and more attractive.

Read More @ Rogue

New 9/11 Lawsuit Strongly Implicates Saudi Government Involvement

from Dave Hodges, The Common Sense Show:

David Eisenbach, a Columbia University professor, said he will submit an amicus brief in a lawsuit filed by families of people killed in the World Trade Center attacks on Sept. 11, 2001.

New evidence in a 9/11 lawsuit against the government of Saudi Arabia alleges the kingdom’s embassy in Washington, DC, may have funded a test run for the deadly attacks in 2001, according to the New York Post.  Sean Carter, the lead attorney for the 9/11 plaintiffs, stated wihtout hesitation, “We’ve long asserted that there were longstanding and close relationships between al Qaeda and the religious components of the Saudi government.”

Additionally the NY Post is reporting the following:

“…Two years before the airliner attacks, the Saudi Embassy paid for two Saudi nationals, living undercover in the US as students, to fly from Phoenix to Washington “in a dry run for the 9/11 attacks,” alleges the amended complaint filed on behalf of the families of some 1,400 victims who died in the terrorist attacks 16 years ago.

The court filing provides new details that paint “a pattern of both financial and operational support” for the 9/11 conspiracy from official Saudi sources, lawyers for the plaintiffs say. In fact, the Saudi government may have been involved in underwriting the attacks from the earliest stages — including testing cockpit security…”

“…Citing FBI documents, the complaint alleges that the Saudi students — Mohammed al-Qudhaeein and Hamdan al-Shalawi — were in fact members of “the Kingdom’s network of agents in the US,” and participated in the terrorist conspiracy.

They had trained at al Qaeda camps in Afghanistan at the same time some of the hijackers were there. And while living in Arizona, they had regular contacts with a Saudi hijacker pilot and a senior al Qaeda leader from Saudi now incarcerated at Gitmo. At least one tried to re-enter the US a month before the attacks as a possible muscle hijacker but was denied admission because he appeared on a terrorist watch list….”

The NY Post further went on to report that two Saudis conducted a dry run of how to hijack a plane on a flight from Phoenix to Washington DC. The two men were also in constant contact with the elements and agencies of the Saudi government:

“…Qudhaeein and Shalawi both worked for and received money from the Saudi government, with Qudhaeein employed at the Ministry of Islamic Affairs. Shalawi was also “a longtime employee of the Saudi government.” The pair were in “frequent contact” with Saudi officials while in the US, according to the filings…”

I have reviewed more transcripts from the press releases coming from the plantiffs attorneys. The evidence, as represented by the summary evidence presented in this article appears strong. However, I have very little faith in the judicial process in this country because Obama appointed judge after judge that has expressed extreme disdain for the United States and its laws.

Even if the court case is successful in implicating the Saudi government in the 9/11 attacks, this does not explain away the apparent cover-up of the United States government, as directed by the Bush administration in which key evidence was ignored or tainted.

The Complicity of the Bush Administration in the 9/11 Attacks

A general historical rule of thumb states that one cannot judge the true implications of landmark events for 20 years following the event. History has indeed demonstrated that a culture is not a good judge of its own immediate history. With regard to the events of 9/11, we are over half way through this historical prohibition related to the judging the significance of a landmark event. However, a clear and unmistakable pattern is beginning to take shape. And that pattern points to a government who continues to lie about the events of 9/11. I want answers and I want them now!

Read More @ TheCommonSenseShow,com

Guest Post: “Discussing The London Gold Pool and SWIFT”, by James Gibson

by James Gibson, TF Metals:

Longtime TFMR member James Gibson volunteered this information in the hope of answering some questions on The London Gold Pool of the 1960s and the current SWIFT system of international payments.

Thanks to James for all his efforts in documenting this information and putting it out to the masses through his great book, “From East To West”.



Recently, I noted that a Turdite requested the story of The London Gold Pool and several Turdites have been discussing the USA’s threat to expel China from SWIFT.

So, I thought that it might be appreciated if I quoted some extracts on these subjects from my book.

The Greatest Transfer of Power and Wealth in the History of Mankind

The London Gold Pool

Amongst the many initiatives agreed on at the Bretton Woods Conference was the intention to introduce a system described by many as a gold exchange standard, which was, in essence, a diluted variation of the classic gold standard.

Under this new Bretton Woods gold exchange standard, most countries fixed, or pegged, their currency’s exchange rate to that of the US dollar. National central banks could, if they so wished, exchange their US dollar holdings into gold at the official fixed rate of US $35 per ounce. However, that option was not available to corporations or individuals. Under this Bretton Woods system, all currencies pegged to the US dollar also had a de facto fixed value in terms of gold.

The gold exchange standard did not affect the independent global or regional markets in which gold was freely traded as a precious metal commodity. For the Bretton Woods system to have been effective on a sustainable basis, the fix of the US dollar to the price of gold should have been adjustable. Failing that, the free market price of gold would have to be maintained near the official Bretton Woods’s fixed price of $35 per ounce.

The larger the gap, known as the gold window, between the free market gold price and the official fixed price, the more tempting it was for nations dealing with internal economic or financial problems to buy gold at the Bretton Woods price and sell it in the open gold markets for the higher floating free price, which was dictated by supply and demand.

With post war economic activity picking up, international trade and foreign exchange reserves rose. However, there was only a marginal increase in global gold mine production. The result was that the gold window was experiencing upward pressure. The situation was not helped by the United States suffering from persistent trade imbalances. This begs the question: Why was gold not revalued to a suitable price so as to eliminate the pressure on the gold window?

US oil import quotas and restrictions on trade inflows proved insufficient to arrest the outflow of gold from its reserves. Things came to a head during the 1960 presidential election debates, when panic gold buying led to a surge in the open gold free market price to USD$40 per ounce. The US Federal Reserve and the Bank of England reached an agreement to stabilise the open market gold price at, or near, the official price, thus ending the drain on the United States’ gold reserves. They would do this by allocating a substantial tonnage of gold to be held by the Bank of England for sale; ergo, they sought to flood the market with sufficient gold to depress the free market price and discourage investment demand.

In November 1961, a total of eight nations entered into an agreement on a system to depress the free market price of gold back down to the official fixed price of USD$35 per ounce and thereafter defend that price by means of targeted gold sales and purchases on the free gold market.

This cartel of governments, and their creation, became known as the London Gold Pool.

As part of the agreement, each of the eight participating nations made a contribution of gold bullion to the London Gold Pool, led by the United States pledging to match all other contributions on a one-to-one basis, thus contributing 50 percent of the pool.

By 1965 the London Gold Pool was increasingly unable to balance the outflow of gold. Excessive inflation of the US money supply, in part to fund the costs of the Vietnam War, resulted in the United States no longer being able to redeem other nations’ US dollar holdings into gold, simply because the world’s gold reserves had not grown fast enough to keep pace with the United States’ trade deficit, which had grown to US$3 billion.

The London Gold Pool came under ever-increasing pressure of failure, causing France to announce its withdrawal from the agreement in June 1967 and physically remove a large amount of its gold bullion from New York to Paris.

Another 1967 run on gold and an attack on the British pound accelerated the rate of collapse of the London Gold Pool’s arrangements. By spring 1968, the international financial system was moving toward a crisis more dangerous than any since 1931.

Despite policy support and market efforts by the United States, the 1967 attack on the British pound, coupled with the run on gold, forced the British government to devalue the pound by 14.3 percent on 18 November 1967.

Additional measures were taken in the United States in an attempt to avoid a continuation of the run on gold and the attacks on the US dollar. On 14 March 1968, due to heavy gold demand, the US government requested the British government to close the London gold market. The British government petitioned the queen, who declared a bank holiday on Friday, 15 March.

A conference scheduled for that weekend in Washington served as the vehicle for emergency discussions on the international monetary situation and to reach a decision with regards to future policy on gold. The events of that weekend led the US Congress to repeal the requirement for a gold reserve to back US currency as of Monday, 18 March 1968.

The London Gold market remained closed for two weeks, whilst gold markets in other countries continued trading with increasing gold prices. These events led to the closure of the London Gold Pool.

With the temporary closure of the London gold market in March 1968 and the resulting instability of the gold markets and the international financial system in general, Swiss banks took urgent action to minimise effects on the Swiss banking system and currency. They did so by establishing a gold trading organization, called the Zurich Gold Pool, which helped establish Zurich as a major trading location for gold bullion.

The collapse of the London Gold Pool forced an official policy of a two-tiered gold market system by:

(1) Maintaining the official fixed price of gold at USD$35 per ounce

(2) Allowing free open market gold transactions

It was agreed that the London Gold Pool member nations would refuse to trade gold with corporations or private persons. In an attempt to minimize the gold window, the United States pledged to suspend gold sales to any government that traded in the free gold markets.

Amidst accelerating inflation in the United States, this unsustainable situation collapsed in May 1971, when West Germany was the first nation to withdraw support for the US dollar and officially abandon the Bretton Woods accords, precipitating a quick decline in the value of the US dollar. Under pressure from currency speculators, Switzerland also withdrew support in August 1971 with USD$50 million in gold purchases; France followed suit with gold purchases of USD$191 million. This brought the US gold reserves down to approximately eight thousand one hundred tonnes, from an all-time high at the end of World War II in excess of twenty thousand tonnes!

It is worth noting that there has been no independent audit of the United States of America’s official gold reserves since 1953.

There is an old saying that goes “He who owns the gold, makes the rules.”

One cannot help but wonder how much of the gold sold during through the London Gold Pool ended up in the vaults of the Puppeteers.

Nixon Opts Out of the Gold Exchange Standard in Favour of Fiat Currency

The significant and rapid depletion of the United States’ national gold reserves was clearly unsustainable. President Nixon was faced with two choices:

  • significantly devalue the US dollar against the price of gold


  • terminate the Bretton Woods gold exchange standard

Nixon, like most politicians, did not wish to be fiscally restrained by gold, so, on 15 August 1971, he chose the easy option and temporarily suspended the gold exchange standard. As with all “temporary” government measures, it became permanent in March 1973.

Effective from 1 January 1975, it once again became legal for US citizens to own gold. The events of 1971 ignited a bull market


In 2012, under pressure from the United States, Iran was expelled from the world’s international banking transfer system (SWIFT), which had a profoundly adverse impact on Iran’s economy. This US-driven action only served to galvanise China to develop and introduce, as a matter of great urgency, an international transfer system capable of operating independently of the US dollar and SWIFT, as it was obviously critical to China’s national and economic security.

Read More @

Red China is a Creation of Globalists

by James Hall, The Sleuth Journal:

If one is blind to the truthful account of history, understanding of current events will never break the mind controlled barrier of sanitized awareness. The globalists or whatever synonym name you choose personifies the forces behind the screens that shape the political, economic and cultural impositions on the world. China has not been immune to the infliction of obscurity in the implementation of what actually is driving their regime.  As the old Chinese curse has it: “May you live in interesting times”, has proven to be much more than a platitude, it is a model for planetary enslavement. How did this conquest begin and where is it going?

In a special report by Texe Marrs, The Illuminati and Its Triad of Evil presents a credible account that most have never confronted before.

“Another revelation that U.S.A. and western journalists and historians are prohibited from writing about concerns the Jewish origins of Mao Tse Tung’s Red Chinese revolution. In fact, Mao was a stupid and inept Chinese peasant who was schooled by Skull and Bonesmen and initiated into the internationalist Masonic Lodge by socialist Jews from the United States. This was done with the tacit permission of President Franklin D. Roosevelt, a 32nd degree Mason and, later, President Harry S. Truman a 33rd degree Mason.

Mao all along has been a closely-controlled puppet of Jewish revolutionaries—men like Israel Epstein and Sidney Shapiro, who lived in China and had the reins of power over two key areas of Beijing’s Communist Government—the treasury (money) and the media (propaganda). Interestingly, Zionist Jews hold sway over these same two essential instruments of government today in the United States.”

An additional source explaining that Communist China was created by Rothschilds and their agents, presents an even more sinister chronology of the New World Order plan to extend their rule.

“October 1 1949, Mao Tse Tsung declared the founding of the People’s Republic of China in Tiananmen Square, Beijing. He was funded by Rothschild created Communism in Russia and also the following Rothschild agents: Solomon Adler, a former United States Treasury official who was a Soviet Spy; Israel Epstein, the son of a Jewish Bolshevik imprisoned by the Tsar in Russia for trying to ferment a revolution there; and Frank Coe, a leading official of the Rothschild owned IMF. Jews were behind the rise to power of Mao Tse Tung, the communist dictator of China, who tortured and murdered tens of millions of Chinese (mostly Christians) during his brutal reign. Sidney Shapiro, an American Jew, was in charge of China’s propaganda organ. Another Jew, Israel Epstein, was Mao’s Minister of Appropriations (Finance).

Mao would murder sixty million innocent Chinese people under his rule mainly to destroy traditional Chinese culture in order to gain total control. As with Christianity, any practitioners of spiritual systems where outlawed, killed, and thrown into gulags, to die a slow death through slave labor, starvation and torture. The Communistic systems became the new culture of control. With China under their flag, Tibet was next on the list as being the last bastion of spiritual and historical knowledge. All the Jewish systems seek to remove spiritual knowledge from Gentiles and keep it in the hands of the Jewish elite. This is a major part of their indoctrination program. There has been a major Jewish population in China for over a thousand years such as the Jews of Kaifeng.”

If these authorships do not provide the weight of trustworthiness for your worldview, maybe the admittance from the flagship of the establishment narrative would convince the faint hearted. In an official history of the Council on Foreign Relations, the CFR’s Peter Grose explains CHINA’S GLOBALIST AGENDA.

“The Council turned in earnest to the problem of communist China early in the 1960s. Various Council publications had started developing the idea of a ‘two-China’ policy – recognition of both the Nationalist government of Taiwan and the communist government on the mainland. This, Council authors suggested, might be the least bad policy direction. Professor A. Doak Barnett published a trail-blazing book for the Council in 1960, Communist China and Asia. A major Council study of relations between the United States and China commenced in 1964, the year China exploded its first nuclear bomb; the group met systematically for the next four years. “Contentment with the present stalemate in relations with the Chinese is not statesmanship,” declared Robert Blum of the Asia Society, the first director of the project. “American impatience and the strong currents of political emotion often make it impossible to plan ahead to manage our policy in a persevering but flexible way.’” (Peter Grose, Continuing The Inquiry: The Council on Foreign Relations from 1921 to 1996, New York, Council on Foreign Relations, 2006; ‘ ‘X’ Leads the Way’).

Oh such a noble concept, Statesmanship. In any other reality the translation means consolidation into the global order of human bondage. The nature of the Chinese regime is based upon totalitarianism. An unholy union with the mega corporatists has produced the biggest economic transfer of all times into a Communist reign of terror model for the future of all humanity.

Preston James, PhD writes in The Hidden History of the Incredibly Evil Khazarian Mafia. “The opium addictions created by Rothschild opium sales to China harmed China so much that China went to war on two occasions to stop it. These wars were known as the Boxer Rebellions or the Opium Wars.”

The sour taste of foreign intervention into internal Chinese affairs caused a blowback. St. John Bartholomew explicates in Colonial Elite Rules China for the Illuminati.

“Beijing -The Chinese elite is a merger between the Communist leadership, Hong Kong tycoons, and the criminal Triads. All three factions derive their power from Illuminati collaboration.

China has appeared autonomous because the Illuminati developed the country internally, funding ‘revolutionary’ political parties spouting nationalist slogans. The reasoning was that the Chinese people would revolt against overt foreign domination, but embrace their place in the NWO if they believed they were in control.

Lord Bertrand Russell revealed this plan in a report on China published in 1920:”

This is the true record of intrusion driven by the proponents of Talmud rule.

So it is completely consistent when Richard M. Nixon surrendered to the Henry Kissinger prescriptions for opening the door to China. Remember that Kissinger was a communist agent for David Rockefeller. His own admission from the Corbett Report, China and the New World Order, is most revealing.

HENRY KISSINGER: “But they really are issues of the construction of a new world order, that’s what this is about, and that’s the sort of dialogue the Chinese are generally good at and so a partnership between us is central. A conflict between us is going to exhaust us both. In tactical exercises it cannot be conclusive.

INTERVIEWER: And the New World Order could satisfy both?

Read More @