I first heard about this story some years ago, but little evidence existed at that time. Essentially that America had created a load of fake gold bars and sold them onto the world market. Well to be clear, they were gold plated with Tungsten in the middle. The reason being is that Tungsten has a density of 19.25 g·cm3 whereas Gold has a density of 19.3 g.cm3. So Tungsten is the perfect substitute for Gold.
Working on the assumption that the global Gold market has become largely tainted with fake bullion, it also neatly explains why the Rothschilds exited the Gold market in a hurry some years ago.
LONDON, April 14, 2004 (Reuters) – NM Rothschild & Sons Ltd., the London-based unit of investment bank Rothschild [ROT.UL], will withdraw from trading commodities, including gold, in London as it reviews its operations, it said on Wednesday.”
Perhaps also this is also why Gordon Brown sold off most of Britain’s Gold Reserves to the Chinese, because between 1999 and 2002 Gordon Brown sold 60% of the UK’s gold reserves. Various explanations have been offered as to why he may have done this.
- He knew most of them were fake
- He was driving the price of Gold down to stop a UK bank default.
- To keep the Rothschilds solvent
Whatever the real motivations behind the sell off, it all points to how fragile and corrupt our economic system is. Whilst we the people rely on paper-based FIAT-currencies, people with money have been buying Gold or Silver but now Gold has been shown to be largely fake. Various economists have been talking about the return to the Gold standard when paper based currencies were directly related to actual wealth, in this case Gold. But that won’t ever work with much of the Gold in circulation being fake.
Also the Germans have recently got a whiff of this story and are busy reviewing where their gold is and whether it is really Gold. Imagine what would happen if Germany was find that most of its gold was fake.
The German Federal Audit Office has criticised the Bundesbank’s lax auditing and inventory controls regarding Germany’s sizeable gold reserves – 3,396.3 tonnes of gold or some 73.7% of Germany’s national foreign exchange reserves. - Source
What is new about this story is that yesterday a gold bullion bar was purchased from a scrap dealer in the UK but the buyer was suspicious when the weight was slightly off. So the customer decided to cut the bar in two. In doing so he revealed that the bar had been drilled out and filled with Tungsten. The problems will really come if our Banks are holding phony gold, then the whole house of cards could come tumbling down. Perhaps that would be a good thing, we can not carry on with this charade much longer. And what to replace it with? Peer-to Peer virtual encrypted currencies and an end to the Central Bankster’s oppression. Hoorah!
thanks to Silver Doctors
Solar, one of our commentators asks me to name one living anti-Semite. I’m happy enough to do this but before I do, I ask him what he means by the term.
Solar is reluctant to commit himself so, to help him along, I say what the term means to me.
For me, there seems two possible meanings. The first is someone who opposes all Jews simply because they’re Jews. The second is someone who opposes ‘Semitism’ – some kind of Jewish ideology, mindset or spirit.
The first is of course absurd. In all my life I’ve never come across anyone who opposed Jews just because they were Jews. Oh, I’m always running into people (more and more these days) who don’t seem to like Jews very much, but that’s always because of the way Jews think and behave, – more recently the way Jews behave towards Palestinians and the way other Jews behave to defend the way Jews behave towards Palestinians.
Anyway, the notion is implicitly absurd. I don’t like cauliflower, but not just because it’s cauliflower, but because it’s white, looks funny and smells of sick.
Trouble is, the situation becomes so much more complicated with the possibility that a Jew is a Jew only because he/she thinks and behaves like a Jew (I suppose a cauliflower is also only a cauliflower because it’s white, looks funny and smells of sick).
Still, any way you look at it, people don’t much like the way Jews think and behave and my feeling is they’re not going to put up with it forever.
So what to do?
Well, one way is that Jews simply stop being Jews – just as Jesus, St Paul, Karl Marx, Israel Shamir and Gilad Atzmon have done. It is a solution but, for me, not a satisfactory one. A few years ago I went to observe Jewish Book Week in London. During one of the sessions, someone from the audience asked the distinguished panel whether they agreed that if our Royal Family were Jewish they would be slightly more amusing. The panel thought they would and so did I. It would be a pity if there were no Jews and for me, it would be a tragedy.
No, there’s a better solution. Jews should be Jews but they should try and contain themselves a bit more. Sure, there’ll be peaks and troughs in their behaviour just as there always has been, but perhaps the peaks could be a little less peakier and the troughs a little less troughier.
Because if they don’t, it’ll take me a lifetime to meet Solar’s challenge and name all the living anti-Semites and the day will surely come when you’ll all be singing, ”We’re all anti-Semites now!”
‘Western civilization? I think it would be a good idea.’ Mahatma Gandhi
The US army staff sergeant Robert Bales, who shot dead Afghani civilians on their home two weeks ago, has now been formally charged with 17 counts of murder. Aside from the heartbreaking tragedy of this incident, it’s clear that, in the West, the prototype of the ‘lone wolf solder’ has some advantageous side effects. He plants a false discrepancy between murder that is permissible, and murder that is a violation of our collective moral code.
We in the West slaughter innocent men, women and children en masse – but we prefer to do it remotely, ‘humanely’, from a palatable distance. We kill without looking into the faces of our victims. We kill with regret, not pride. We do not own our actions. Yet this gap between authorised violence and renegade barbarism is imaginary. From the victim’s perspective there cannot be a significant difference between being executed by a robotic drone or blown up by one American solder. It is estimated that at least 40,000 civilians have so far been killed in Afghanistan since 2001. Add to that the 36,000 members of the Taliban, the 14,000 Northern Alliance and the 10,000 members of the Afghan Security Forces, and the figure is shockingly high. As painful as it may be to admit, Robert Bale’s murder of 17 Muslim peasants was totally consistent with the very ideology that planted him on Afghani soil in the first place. The decorated American father of three was not transgressing the ideology that his uniform represents. He was merely seeing it through. For us to imagine otherwise is a subtle form of self-congratulation, implying that we live in an ethical culture temporarily punctured by the arbitrary whims of a mad man. This is not the case.
Meanwhile, the case of the Algerian French ‘lone wolf’ of Toulouse, who gunned down seven civilians in France last week, highlights the embarrassing disparity between the way in which the actions of individuals are interpreted as being indicative of the collective from which they hail. When a Muslim commits an atrocity, his actions are understood to represent the values maintained in his culture. American Robert Bales is an isolated maniac with anger management issues, but Mohamed Merah is acting on behalf of ‘a group’. We may not know who the group is (so far alleged links include al-Qaeda, ‘The Knights of Pride,’ Syrian extremists and Salafism in general), but it’s definitely ‘a group’. It’s inconceivable that it could just be him.
Regardless of what the truth of the matter may be, it’s clear that when it comes to appropriating the Enlightenment notion of ‘the sovereign individual’, we are conspicuously selective. We do it only when it suits us. This applies to the victims in France as well as the perpetrator. The death of the first two (Muslim) men shot dead on 11 and 15 March did not qualify as headline news in the global media until they became an appendix to the harrowing murder of a Rabbi and his sons.
Hence the very concept of ‘war crimes’ appears to be a western luxury. The My Lai Massacre committed by troops in Vietnam, the Haditha massacre of Iraq, the killings in Sabra and Shatila, the bombing of United Nations shelters in Gaza, were all understood as aberrations. In order to reconcile ourselves with this endlessly unfolding catalogue of carnage and abuse, we enjoy the prototype of the young, vulnerable, undereducated soldier who just got slightly over excited by the chauvinist revenge rhetoric inherent in their training. Lynndie England, of ‘Human Pyramid’ fame, for example, is often described as a ‘poor, brain-washed, trailer-park dimwit’ rather than an ordinary American patriot enjoying her moment of Schadenfreude.
Perhaps its time that we ponder on the clue loaded in the often-used phrase describing this phenomenon: ‘the lone wolf’. In the animal kingdom and in war, the lone wolf’s singularity is shaped by his essentialist nature as a pack animal. It is because of the pack, not in spite of the pack, that he strikes out alone.
Sarah Gillespie is a singer-songwriter living in London. www.sarahgillespie.com