Russia "Apocalyptic Earthquakes, Blizzards, Volcanos, Avalanches"

THE SECOND U.S. CIVIL WAR IN 2015? YES....IF THE ECONOMY COLLAPS

Anyone knows, who has half of an eye open, that American citizens are soon to become an endangered species under our present lunatic President.

Everyone should know that all of our constitutional protections against an out-of-control globalist puppet regime are melting away right before our very eyes.

Everyone knows that Obama, under the NDAA, has the legal authority to “disappear” all political opponents without so much as a trace.

Everyone knows that American economy was driven over the fiscal cliff in 2008 when Congress permitted the bankers to plunder our tax revenues and, today, we are just waiting for the official eulogy that the American economy is dead and the real “hunger games” are about to commence.

Everyone knows that when the Obama puppet masters in the Federal Reserve are done plundering what is left of our pensions, our social security, our private property and our 401k’s, that the economy will be collapsed once and for all. And then, what will the American people do? They will do what any generation of Americans would do, they will take to the streets in an attempt to rid themselves of the corrupt banker controlled government which has ruined this country. Sadly, this last ditch desperate attempt at regaining our lost liberties will not have a happy ending.

Picture, if you will, the veterans groups marching on Washington DC. Imagine bus loads of citizens following the veterans groups which will demand an end to a tyrannical government. Obama will make a formal declaration of martial law. Americans, desperate for food, water and the means to make a living will seek open confrontations with the present administration and this will commence the darkest days in American, and perhaps, even world history. As an aside, this is why Operation American Spring is a bad idea.

Will American Troops Carry Out Genocidal Orders?

Will American troops follow the genocidal orders surely to be delivered by Obama? Will they begin to secretly arrest perceived dissidents? Will the military follow orders to shoot to kill American citizens who will be desperately looking for their next meal? With FEMA’s performance following Hurricanes Katrina and Sandy, will there even be a next meal? Don’t hold your breath.

When the irresistible force meets the immovable object, what will happen? Will American troops fire, when ordered, upon their American brothers and sisters? There are two possible answers to this question. First, it is a known fact that the military is programmed in boot camp to follow orders like a bunch of Pavlovian conditioned dogs who are well trained in the art of unquestionably carrying out the orders of their superiors without hesitation. From a military training perspective, there can be little doubt that American soldiers will not only fire upon American protesters, but most will do so without the slightest amount of hesitation or conscience. 

However, the field of psychology provides an even more accurate view of why we can expect the American military to do in the coming desperate times.

Not only will our military fire upon us, their fellow citizens, but they will also willingly participate in the round up of dissidents, and the extermination of these dissidents in what has become known FEMA Camps, which will surely accompany the coming martial law. NORTHCOM has been training for this since the 1990’s.

Before I address the psychological reasons on why the coming American genocide is almost upon us and it will receive the enthusiastic support from active duty military personnel, let’s examine the fiction set forth by a group known as Oath Keepers.

Some our citizens are deluded into a false sense of security by the group known asOath Keepers. It is a well-intentioned effort to remind both law enforcement and the military to uphold the Constitution and to disobey unlawful orders which would bring harm to American citizens. Under the this false sense of security, many in the American public really believe that American troops will not fire upon American citizens. Unfortunately, the field of psychology demonstrates why only a minority of soldiers will actually resist committing atrocities against the American people.

Group Think
The world of psychological research provides the definitive answer to whether we should fear our military in the coming storm ahead in the form of a phenomenon called group think. Group think is often described as a decision-making process whereby the group members go along with what they believe is the consensus. Group think has also been used to describe individual acquiescence to authority even when the authority has limited power to enforce compliance. Group think often causes groups to make hasty, irrational decisions, where individual doubts are set aside, for fear of upsetting the group’s leadership and balance.

Just how far will people go to please authority figures and subsequently do what they know to be immoral? The first known laboratory test for groupthink occurred in 1963 by Yale professor, Stanley Milgram. Subjects for this landmark study were recruited for the Yale study through newspaper ads and direct mail. The participants were men between the ages of 20 and 50, from all educational backgrounds, ranging from an elementary school dropout to participants with doctoral degrees.


Milgram wanted to determine what percentage of people would willingly administer enough progressive electric shocks which would result in death simply based on the orders of a perceived authority figure (i.e., the experimenter).

There were three participants in the experiment:

1. The Teacher was the real subject in the experiment. Their role was to administer shocks for each wrong answer provided by the learner. How far would they go, was the true subject of the experiment. Would they actually kill a person for failing to provide the correct answer on a word pair test? Would they mindlessly follow the orders of the experimenter to continue with the abuse, regardless of the results and obvious harm being perpetrated upon the pretend victim in the experiment?

2. The second participant, the Learner, was actually a plant in the experiment. The Learner would sit in an adjacent room and pretend to be shocked for each wrong answer that they would purposely give. Eventually, they would cry out for help and beg the Teacher to stop administering the electric shocks. Their cries included pleas of mercy that were often based on an unknown level of self-expressed cardiac distress that they were pretending to experience.

3. The Experimenter was a stern looking fellow who carried a clipboard, wore a lab coat, and would urge the Teacher to continue regardless of the make believe pleas of the Learner.

The “Teachers” were told by the experimenter that they would be participating in an experiment to test the effects of punishment on learning. However, as has already been stated, this was not the goal of the experiment.

The “Teacher” was given a list of word pairs which was used to teach the Learner. The Learner was actually a confederate, or a plant, in the experiment. The Teacher would then read the first word of each pair and read four possible answers. The Learner would deliberately press the wrong button to indicate his response. Since the answer was incorrect, the Learner would receive an electric shock, with the voltage progressively increasing with each wrong answer.

Therefore, the subjects believed that for each wrong answer, the Learner was receiving an ever increasing level of actual shocks which would eventually result in death.

In reality, there were no shocks. After the confederate (i.e., Learner) was separated from the subject, the confederate set up a tape recorder integrated with the electro-shock generator, which played pre-recorded sounds of pain and distress for each successive level of shock. After a number of voltage level increases, the Learner would bang on the wall which divided him from the subject (teacher). After several instances of banging on the wall and complaining about his heart condition, the learner provided no further responses to questions and no further complaints. 

The fate of the Learner was left to the imagination of the teacher. The silence was met with the command to continue with the experiment. Although the Learner was not being harmed, the Teacher believed that they were administering progressively dangerous shocks. From the instrumentation panel, the Teacher could clearly see that their shocks were approaching the level of lethality. 

Was the Teacher being forced to capitulate and continue with the experiment? Quite the contrary was true, the prompts to continue administering shock were encouraged by minimal prompts and absolutely no threats were offered by the Experimenter.

If at any time the subject hesitated or expressed a desire to discontinue the experiment, the subject was given a planned and verbatim succession of verbal prompts by the experimenter:

1. “Please continue.”
2. “The experiment requires that you continue.”
3. “It is absolutely essential that you continue. ”
4. “You have no other choice, you must go on.”

If the Teacher still wished to stop after having listened to four successive verbal prompts, the experiment was discontinued. Otherwise, the experiment was terminated after the subject had administered the lethal 450-volt shock three times in succession.

Milgram expected that less than one percent would actually administer a fatal electric shock. The actual results were so stunning that he decided to film the results on the final day, fearing that nobody would believe his results. And what were the results? Despite expressing some measure of discomfort and the minimal use pressure, in Milgram’s first set of experiments, 65% (26 out of 40) of the subjects administered the experiment’s final and hypothetically fatal 450-volt shock. Amazingly, no participant steadfastly refused to give further shocks before the 300-volt level!

Milgram’s results were confirmed when Dr. Thomas Blass performed a meta-analysis on the results of repeated performances of the experiment. Blass found that the percentage of participants who were willing to administer fatal voltages remains remarkably constant, between 61% and 66%.

The results of Milgram’s and Blass’ work are stunning in their final conclusion which demonstrated that almost two-thirds of all Americans will mindlessly follow the commands of a “perceived” authority figure even when the authority figure has no real power over the people. Is this why our military continues to serve a despot who does not hesitate to throw away their lives or anyone else under his charge such asAmbassador Stevens?

To achieve political success, every authoritarian regime requires a high level of voluntary cooperation (i.e., group think) from its citizenry. Cooperation can be coerced as many times, in dictatorial regimes, cooperation is obtained as a result of extreme intimidation by carrying out a relatively small number of exceptionally harsh punishments in order to serve as a warning to the masses. 

However, there are not enough police, inspectors, auditors, etc. to control a populace in which the majority would fail to comply with the status quo. Then why do we continue to follow leaders who have abandoned the Constitution and the welfare of our people long ago? Is America a prisoner to the group think phenomena? What about gross ignorance as a contributor to America’s capitulation to such bad leadership? Can anything be done? Now that we have had the confirmation of FEMA Camps, are you concerned about the propensity for the American people to follow directions right to the planned extermination of Americans as planned by the globalists?




Conclusion
I wholeheartedly support and applaud the efforts of the Oath Keepers and for some military personnel, Oath Keepers will make some difference, and thank God, because they are one of our last lines of defense. However, when one considers the conditioned response training of the military and the propensity for even nonmilitary personnel to blindly follow orders, through the process of group think, I think Oath Keepers may only be able to exert a minimal effect on the overall outcome as it pertains to the American troops committing genocide against the American people. In addition to the brainwashing of boot camp, our soldiers are getting years of indoctrination with regard to the killing of civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan. They are getting years of practice, through multiple tours of duty, on how to confiscate guns and how to conduct civilian roundups. When the troops begin to be withdrawn from Afghanistan, the American people should become very worried.

The number of troops which will not obey the heinous order can fixed at between 35-40% based upon the work of Blass and Milgram. If you are a member of the military and reading these words, you may no doubt become angry that about two-thirds of the military will not stand down. Although it is true that you may not obey an unlawful order to fire upon American citizens, the soldier on your left and the one are your right will obey that order.

There is an unspoken message, heretofore, in this post. No military can operate with a dissension rate of 35-40%. This kind of widespread dissension can only spell one outcome, civil war!


Credit to The Freedom Fighter´s Journal

THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION SAID ITS JOB WAS TO PROMOTE ISLAM

On Thursday, White House press secretary Josh Earnest announced that the Obama administration would prioritize fighting Islamophobia in the aftermath of the terrorist attack on Charlie Hebdo in France. Never mind that most Westerners aren’t Islamophobic, but rather GettingShotInTheFaceForExpressingMyOpinion-Phobic.

The real problem, according to the Obama administration, is lack of leadership in defending Islam:


There are some individuals that are using a peaceful religion and grossly distorting it, and trying to use its tenets to inspire people around the globe to carry out acts of violence. And we have enjoyed significant success in enlisting leaders in the Muslim community, like I said, both in the United States and around the world to condemn that kind of messaging, to condemn those efforts to radicalize individuals, and to be clear about what the tenets of Islam actually are. And we’re going to redouble those efforts in the days and weeks ahead.

This, of course, is not the first time the Obama administration has discovered a duty to illuminate the inherent beauty and wonder of Islam. Over and over again, the Obama administration, in high culturally imperialist dudgeon, has attempted to explain to the world the true meaning of Islam.

Here are five other examples:

President Obama, 2009: Immediately upon taking office, Obama did an interview with Al-Arabiya in which he explained that his job as president encompassed apologizing to the Muslim world for evil America, and explaining to Americans that Muslims are the cream of the religious crop:

My job is to communicate to the American people that the Muslim world is filled with extraordinary people who simply want to live their lives and see their children live better lives. My job to the Muslim world is to communicate that the Americans are not your enemy.

If you forgot the provision of Article II of the Constitution that gives the president the authority to do outreach on behalf of Islam in the United States, that’s because it doesn’t exist. But don’t worry: Obama’s on the job.

President Obama, 2009: In speaking about Islam at Cairo University on June 4, 2009 – a speech to which the Obama administration invited the then-banned Muslim Brotherhood – Obama stated:

So I have known Islam on three continents before coming to the region where it was first revealed. That experience guides my conviction that partnership between America and Islam must be based on what Islam is, not what it isn’t. And I consider it part of my responsibility as President of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear.

If you forgot the provision of Article II of the Constitution that places responsibility for fighting negative stereotypes of Islam in the hands of the executive branch, that’s because it doesn’t exist. But don’t worry: Obama’s on the job.

NASA Administrator Charles Bolden, 2010: Speaking with Al-Jazeera, the head of NASA explained that the mission of the space agency would now include outreach to Muslims:

When I became the NASA Administrator, [President Obama] charged me with three things. One, he wanted me to help re-inspire children to want to get into science and math; he wanted me to expand our international relationships; and third, and perhaps foremost, he wanted me to find a way to reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science, math and engineering.

If you forgot the provision of the National Aeronautics and Space Act that grants authority to NASA to make Muslims feel good about medieval contributions to astronomy, that’s because it doesn’t exist. But don’t worry: Obama’s on the job.

President Obama, 2012: In the aftermath of the murder of four Americans in Benghazi, Libya, President Obama took to the podium of the United Nations to condemn a YouTube filmmaker in the United States exercising freedom of speech:

[A] crude and disgusting video sparked outrage throughout the Muslim world. Now, I have made it clear that the United States government had nothing to do with this video, and I believe its message must be rejected by all who respect our common humanity.
It is an insult not only to Muslims, but to America as well — for as the city outside these walls makes clear, we are a country that has welcomed people of every race and every faith. We are home to Muslims who worship across our country. We not only respect the freedom of religion, we have laws that protect individuals from being harmed because of how they look or what they believe. We understand why people take offense to this video because millions of our citizens are among them….The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.

If you forgot the provision of the First Amendment to the Constitution that gives the president of the United States the authority to officially criticize exercise of First Amendment rights under color of authority, that’s because it doesn’t exist. But don’t worry: Obama’s on the job.

Secretary of State John Kerry, 2014: Last year, as ISIS released video after video of the beheadings of Westerners, Secretary of State Kerry explained that his mission was to promote true Islam – which makes perfect sense, given his status as imam of Martha’s Vineyard:

[Our effort] has to start major efforts to delegitimize ISIS’s claim to some religious foundation for what it’s doing and begin to put real Islam out there and draw lines throughout the region.

If you forgot the provision of Article II that lends authority to the State Department to “begin to put real Islam out there,” presumably in violation of the separation of church and state, that’s because it doesn’t exist. But don’t worry: Obama’s on the job.

Even as the Obama administration pretends to push “true Islam,” the Obama administration completely ignored the words of Egyptian leader General Abdel Fatah al-Sisi, who just days ago called for a “religious revolution” in the Muslim world. Al-Sisi explained:

I say and repeat, again, that we are in need of a religious revolution. You imams are responsible before Allah. The entire world is waiting on you. The entire world is waiting for your word … because the Islamic world is being torn, it is being destroyed, it is being lost. And it is being lost by our own hands….It’s inconceivable that the thinking that we hold most sacred should cause the entire Islamic world to be a source of anxiety, danger, killing and destruction for the rest of the world. Impossible that this thinking — and I am not saying the religion — I am saying this thinking. This is antagonizing the entire world. It’s antagonizing the entire world! Does this mean that 1.6 billion people (Muslims) should want to kill the rest of the world’s inhabitants — that is 7 billion — so that they themselves may live? Impossible!

Al-Sisi seems significantly more qualified to lead an educational effort about Islam than Barack Obama. But for the Obama administration to recognize the truth of al-Sisi’s statement would suggest that their own ignorance about Islam has prevented them from effecting change for the past six years. And that is an admission that President Obama and his lackeys refuse to make, given their deeply held belief that Islam isn’t the problem in any way.

Credit to Breitbart

FEMA Camps Will Soon Outnumber Banks

FEMA Camps will soon outnumber the banks that will be left standing.

In life, how many times have we seen that two similar men face a set of similar circumstances only to witness two entirely different outcomes? One man meets the challenges, grows stronger and more successful as a result. The other man ignores the crisis at first, hoping that it will go away. When the denials breakdown, the second man feels overwhelmed and succumbs to the problem and his life is subsequently ripped apart.

Nations are like people, they have a character, a personality and a persona. They either have resilience and can bounce back from adversity, or they do not. They either have courage or they cower in the corner because they are weak and timid in the face of danger. And like with the two men, when countries face the same challenges, one country may thrive and the other country takes a dive.

When we look at how two countries, Iceland and the United States, responded to economic Armageddon in 2008, one country was head and shoulders above the other in terms of displaying a spirit of resilience.

The 2008 World’s Economic Meltdown Began In Iceland

America is once again ready to enter into the economic disaster zone in a much more significant manner than we did in 2008. Iceland has already been there and their journey was inspired and controlled by Goldman Sachs and fellow Wall Street banksters. Iceland’s journey down the path to economic Armageddon actually began in the late 1990s and early 2000’s, when Iceland’s Prime Minister David Oddsson, began to do the bidding of Wall Street bankers and instituted a set of Reagan-style policies and privatization. According to author, Roger Boyes, as he documented the world’s descent into economic tyranny in his former best-selling book, Meltdown Iceland, Boyes stated that “the fix was in”and Wall Street began to financially obliterate Iceland after plundering its hard assets.

Under the globalists from Wall Street, the Iceland’s banking sector grew rapidly, propelled by borrowed money. Icelanders could access credit easily in just the same manner as pre-2008 crash America. Iceland had its own devastating housing bubble as housing prices escalated exponentially and consumption skyrocketed. In order to attract international currency investments, Iceland raised its interest rates to 15% and the same devastating consequences which befell America was visited upon Iceland. In 2003-2004, prices on the Iceland stock market increased 900% before crashing.America, are you nervous yet?

Iceland’s bubble was no different than any other economic bubble. By 2006, what I call the heroin effect kicked in and the average Icelander was 300% wealthier than in 2003, but hopelessly in debt. Iceland was experiencing a 1929 pre-crash America as well as the symptoms of our impending crash in 2013. The citizens were seduced by easy money and acted as if they were addicted heroin. Meanwhile, the government, banking and corporate debt grew out of control until the time to pay up finally arrived.

By 2008 Iceland’s banks collapsed, it was time for Icelanders to pay for their extravagant ways and 50,000 of its people’s savings were wiped out (that represents one in three adults in Iceland lost their bank accounts). Keep in mind that Iceland only has a population of 300,000.If those same numbers were to be visited upon America, we would be looking 50 million Americans having their savings wiped out.  Let me ask the same question that I always ask at this point. Do you now understand why DHS has purchased 2.2 billion rounds of ammunition to go with 2700 armored personnel carriers?

The problem for Icelanders became far worse as by 2009, 25% of homeowners went into mortgage default. Please allow me to ask another rhetorical question, do you now see why the Federal Reserve spent two years buying $40 billion dollars in mortgage backed securities each and every month beginning in September of 2012?

People of America, can you spell f-e-u-d-a-l-i-s-m?

Many champion what Iceland did back in 2008. Yes, it was the right thing to do. However, Americans do not have the options available that Iceland did back in 2008.

What Did Iceland Do?

The people of Iceland have more courage in their little finger than America has in its entire being? Iceland’s financial failure forced its government to resign or be removed, and it also caused citizens to re-evaluate the merits of their reckless spending, borrowing and consumption. Just how did Iceland do it?

Iceland’s President Olafur Ragnar Grimmson was interviewed last year at the World Economic Forum in Davos on why Iceland has enjoyed such a strong recovery after it’s completefinancial collapse in 2008, while the rest of the West is still mired in debt, poverty and hopelessness to go with empty promises of an economic recovery.

When asked whether Iceland’s policy of letting the banks fail would have worked in the rest of Europe, Grimsson stated:

“… Why are the banks considered to be the holy churches of the modern economy? Why are private banks not like airlines and telecommunication companies and allowed to go bankrupt if they have been run in an irresponsible way? The theory that you have to bail-out banks is a theory that you allow bankers enjoy for their own profit their success, and then let ordinary people bear their failure through taxes and austerity. 
People in enlightened democracies are not going to accept that in the long run. …“

Can we imagine Obama ever speaking this way in public? The short answer is that it does not matter if he ever did. America is hopelessly mired in debt and there are no options except financial collapse and likely martial law, followed by civil war.

Iceland Was Only Attacked by Bankers

As Goldman Sachs and friends sought to plunder Iceland’s banking structure and individual bank accounts, the people of Iceland fought back.  However, today’s attack on America is far worse.

The United States is facing both a coming bail-in (e.g. Greece) and a bail out (America 2008).  In other words, the bankers are robbing the American people from both the inside and the outside (i.e. G-20 bail-ins) and (more talk in the media about having more bail-outs).

During the height of the Wall Street takeover of the Iceland banking system, each person in Iceland was $150,000 in debt. Based only on the derivatives debt alone, every man women and child in our country owes $318,000,000,000,000 dollars ($318 billion dollars). And even if America were to successfully occupy every country in the world, along with their assets, we could only acquire $65 trillion dollars, which is the entire wealth of the planet. In other words America, in which century would you like to pay off this debt? The 21st, the 30th, the 90th century? And please remember, these numbers don’t represent the $240 trillion dollars in unfunded liabilities.

What is more likely, the bankers forgiving the debt, or an economic collapse followed by a civil war? The FEMA Camps are being built for a reason.

 Credit to Common Sense

Money, Gold And Liberty In 2015 & Beyond

Looking Back at 2014

2014 was quite an eventful year for global markets: Janet Yellen became the new Chairman of the Federal Reserve; we were on the brink of war in Crimea, and Germany won its fourth world cup title. Many countries around the world held elections, the Scotts and the Swiss had referendums and both of them decided to maintain the status quo, whether it was against Scottish independence or the Gold initiative.

I wouldn’t describe this year as a tough one for gold, considering that it is ending the year close to where it left off end-2013. While some may perceive this negatively and against the rationale for holding physical gold, I find it more relevant than ever, like I said last year. The main reason why gold did not move against the tide this year is, in my opinion, because appearances have a stronger influence on the minds of the people than the facts presented by reality.

Image credit: Glenna Goodacre

The global debt situation is much worse than a few years ago and real economic growth is near zero. Income inequality is rising faster than ever before. The Federal Reserve’s balance sheet expanded from about USD 890 billion to more than USD 4.5 trillion since end-2007 and the only outcome so far has been an artificial spike in different asset classes and an expansion of the welfare-warfare state. The fact is that a fiat-money system always results in massive centralization, in terms of the economic landscape, “wealth-accumulation” and an ever-expanding state apparatus. The accumulation of debt is part and parcel of this mechanism. No necessary reforms or structural changes have taken place, which would allow a more positive outlook for 2015.

The vast expansion in the Fed’s balance sheet – click to enlarge.

More and more people feel that something is going completely wrong because they understand that it is not possible to fight over-indebtedness by piling up even more and more debt. The majority of the public, I believe, understands they need to sacrifice the present for the future. However, they suppress their conclusion. Most of them want to believe in a miracle and live in the hope that only others will be affected by the negative consequences of today’s system, which my friend Prof. Dr. Thorsten Polleit calls a system of “collective corruption”.

Men refuse to think about the rational outcome of our unsustainable system and prefer to believe in the lie they have been told a hundred times rather than a new truth which is based on the facts. However, we can’t hide from the future or as Herbert Stein used to say: “if something cannot go on forever, it will stop”. The Soviet Union did not collapse because ist citizens finally changed their minds and opposed communism; the USSR collapsed because it could no longer be funded.

The only achievement since the global financial crisis is that central banks purchased time financed by “money” that we simply don’t have. According to the Bank of International Settlements, total non-financial debt in advanced economies rose by 37 percentage points to 279% of GDP since the global financial crisis! Even emerging markets, which managed to somehow resist the pileup of debt in the past, have now reached a debt level of 157% of GDP. Instead of cutting the cord and putting an end to this dependence on additional credit, the western economies seek to solve their problems by printing more money and accumulating more debt! Mario Draghi believes that the way out is for the ECB to buy corporate bonds and asset-backed securities amongst other assets, dreaming of increasing the ECB balance sheet by EUR 1 trillion to reach around EUR 3 trillion!

The ECB plans to expand its balance sheet back to the highs of 2012 – click to enlarge.

Also Japan, which has been in a QE mindset for years plans to address any prospect of a recession with even more asset purchases! How valuable can money be if all central banks just want to print more of it? Money is no longer a property title, instead it became an I-owe-something, the Dollar and every other paper money we hold today are simply IOUs. Due to this debt-based system, we need more and more money so that the system does not collapse, because as we all know, loans need to be repaid with interest. This constant increase in the money supply reduces its purchasing power. As long as governments and central banks can redistribute wealth from the middle class, they will continue to do so – the outcome of which will be impoverishment on a wide scale and the destruction of our society.

BoJ assets: QE in overdrive – click to enlarge.

Let’s have a closer look on what has been going on in the physical gold market. Physical demand is very strong and the refineries are again working 24 hours straight to meet demand but mining supply as well as scrap gold seems to be tightening. The Swiss Customs released import/export data showing another strong month of gold exports in November. Exports totaled 232 tons, stronger than the already good month of October with 200.8 tons. India was the main export destination with 77 tons, followed by 34.7 tons to China, 34.2 tons to Hong Kong, 22.8 tons to Turkey and 16.4 tons to Singapore. The Gold Offered Forward Rate (GOFO) has recently turned negative. When the GOFO rate becomes negative, it implies that the demand for physical gold in the spot market is high and market participants are willing to pay a premium to get immediate delivery of gold. The last time we saw such a development was back in 2009 when we witnessed a substantial increase in gold prices for several years. So, in this situation particularly with a shortening in the physical supply, we just don’t feel that comfortable about the future.

Gold over the past year, in dollar and euro terms. In euro terms a new bull market seems to be underway already – click to enlarge.

Paper Money Destroys the Values Allowing us to Coexist Peacefully 

With low or even negative interest rates associated with the debasement of the purchasing power of money itself, every saver appears to be a fool. This process has a strong impact on us, because saving does not make sense and therefore people end up buying things they don’t need or they even can’t afford. This imbalance in which consumption and debt carry bigger weight compared to savings leads to the moral degeneration of society. Excessive consumerism stands for absolute contemporary fixation – a devil-may-care attitude. Because money becomes worth less and less, people start running after yields to compensate for the loss of purchasing power. The ways we think and act adjust according to our short-term problems and goals, ignoring the long-term ramifications.

I believe that as a result of this, we lack time to reflect, to discuss, to care for the family but also to think about the values and ideals of our society. State activism and an inflationary monetary system are destroying our understanding of a “traditional family”. It loosens the ties between parents, reduces the attraction to bring children into the world and particularly to rear children in the best proper way so as to pass on these values to future generations.

It is therefore that I firmly believe that state activism undermines the respect for all non-state authorities and is therefore destructive to our cultural and traditional values. Wilhelm Röpke, a German economist, once said in this regards, that “Self-discipline, a sense of justice, honesty, fairness, chivalry, moderation, public spirit, respect for human dignity, firm ethical norms — all of these are things which people must possess before they go to market and compete with each other. These are the indispensable supports which preserve both market and competition from degeneration.”

In our Las Vegas conference back in September I expressed my strong opinion how liberty has been slowly dying since 9/11. Governments have expanded their infrastructures to increase their infiltration into societies and intensify their control to curb civil liberty, ironically, in the name of protecting liberty. I particularly like to share a quote by Henry Hazlitt from an article he wrote back in 1956, saying “that the greatest threat to American liberty today comes from within. It is the treat of a growing and spreading totalitarian ideology.”

There are three ways or tenets whereby a society drifts into totalitarianism, but it all starts with increasing government regulation of every sphere of life, whether social, economic or cultural – you constantly have to ask the government for permission. The more the government spends the more far-reaching the government intervention becomes. I also believe the increase in government regulation is indicative of a lack of trust the elites have towards individuals.

The government doesn’t trust us with our choices, but how can we be confident that the government will make the right choice for us? It is evident that the political and economic spheres of government reinforce each other towards this objective, and in the end it is our liberty that we lose. Here in Switzerland, an already established state endorsing deregulation of government, I was optimistic that the Gold Initiative would pass. And though it didn’t, I am convinced it succeeded in making the public question the system that regulates their financial and economic interests. And therefore I am optimistic we will have interesting discussions to witness in Switzerland.

The East knows better! 

The ongoing geopolitical power shift from West to East has become crystal clear this year. History has shown us that currencies rise and fall with the rise and fall of their empires. It is obvious that the current currency system is at war. Demographics in the western world are unfavorable. The East, as we all know, is highly motivated to increase their productivity and aim for better standards of living and quality of life. At the same time they don’t have a gigantic welfare-state in place and their hunger for gold is unstoppable. They know all too well that the tides will turn at some point and they want to make sure they have the support to protect them from the damage that we’ll see when the system breaks down.

Whom can we trust? 

We cannot take the media at face value. With about six companies in the US controlling the media landscape – how can we guarantee objectivity or that there isn’t a certain bias or agenda at play? Edward Bernays, the father of propaganda, once said, “[t]he conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in a democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government, which is the true ruling power of our country [… ] we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons […] who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind”.

And though there is a strong force promoting government agendas I believe there is an opposing current in the Internet questioning the media and the ideas they are promoting. I would like to take this opportunity to ask you to read the article written by my friend Marco Ricca that explains how the Internet is helping to make the world a freer place (please refer to the abstract and link in this Outlook). The exponential growth rate that for example the Austrian School and its proponents are witnessing, particularly since the crisis in 2007, is a strong indicator of this.

Nothing can Protect You Better than Gold

If we review the events of 2014, it seems the situation has intensified: governments are still overwhelmed with debt, our fiat money system is unsupported, our central banks insist on accumulating debt and making money valueless. It doesn’t look all too good. Or does it? Will someone realize we have to pull the plug? And when we do, because it will happen whether we want it or not, how can we hedge against the damage that we will all be exposed to? I am a strong advocate of physical gold and can’t stress enough the importance of owning physical precious metals stored outside the banking system. It is a proven and essential form of monetary insurance against the uncertainties and negative surprises we see in our world today.

Let me close with the freedom train metaphor for building a movement that I heard from Jeff Deist, President of the Mises Institute, a few weeks ago. “If you want more freedom, join us. Get on the train. You can get off whenever you like. Maybe you favor 60 percent of our ideas, or 80 percent or 90 percent, or whatever. Just join us and go as far as you like, get off when you like. As I said earlier, we are so far from what we could consider a free society that we hardly should concern ourselves about it now. Let’s just get the train moving in the right direction!”

Great change has always come from the bottom upward and not the other way round. I recall the words of Mahatma Gandhi: “Be the change that you wish to see in the world.” Like Gandhi, I firmly believe change stems from the individual – but the individual needs to believe in his power and potential to create it.

Credit to Zero Hedge

The Road To War With Russia

For several weeks now the anti-Russian stance in the US press has quieted down. Presumably because the political leadership has moved its attention on to other things, and the media flock has followed suit. 

Have you read much about Ukraine and Russia recently?

I thought not, despite the fact that there's plenty of serious action -- both there as well as related activity in the US -- going on that deserves our careful attention.

As I recently wrote, the plunging oil price is a potential catalyst for stock market turmoil and sovereign instability. Venezuela is already circling the drain, and numerous other oil exporters are in deep trouble as they foolishly expanded their national budgets and social programs to match the price of oil; something that is easy to do on the way up and devilishly tricky on the way down.

But consider the impact on Russia. From the Russian point of view, everything from their plunging ruble to bitter sanctions to the falling price of oil are the fault of the US, either directly or indirectly. Whether that is fair or not is irrelevant; that's the view of the Russians right now. So no surprise,  it doesn't dispose them towards much in the way of good-will towards the West generally, and the US specifically.

The fall in the price of oil is creating serious difficulties economically and financially for Russia. We'll get to those facets in a minute. But right now, I want to focus on the continued belligerence of the US towards Russia -- some of which is overt and some of which, you can be certain, is covert -- which could very well end up provoking a more kinetic and dangerous response than the West is prepared for.

Russia Forced To Act

Before anyone jumps in to say "Why are you defending Putin? He's a bad man", let me just say that I have been closely analyzing each move by Russia and the West since then President of Ukraine Yanukovych declined to sign the European Association Agreement back in November of 2013. 

Based on the preponderance of evidence, its' clear to me that the West/US deserve the lion's share of the blame for the conflict that now rages with Ukraine and between Russia and the western world.

It was the West that supported the unsavory assortment of thugs, neo-Nazis, and ultra-nationalists that seized power in a coup from the democratically-elected Yanukovych.  We can argue all we want about whether he was a good boy or not, but that's irrelevant and plays into the hands of those at the US State Department who would like to deflect attention away from the very non-democratic events (shaped behind the scenes by our influence) that led to his overthrow.

The US did the same thing with Saddam, if you recall. It's a simple deflection: away from the actions of the US, and towards the character of the person standing in the line of fire from those actions.

In my view, if Yanukovych had not been violently deposed, Ukraine would be peaceful right now, Russia would not have had to intervene, and there would be no civil war in Ukraine and far reduced tensions between the West and Russia.

So ham-handed were those efforts to intervene in Ukraine on the part of the Obama State department that no less an historically loathsome creature than Henry Kissinger even called the US's actions a 'fatal mistake':

Kissinger warns of West’s ‘fatal mistake’ that may lead to new Cold War

Nov 10, 2014

Former US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger has given a chilling assessment of a new geopolitical situation taking shape amid the Ukrainian crisis, warning of a possible new Cold War and calling the West’s approach to the crisis a “fatal mistake.”

The 91-year-old diplomat characterized the tense relations as exhibiting the danger of “another Cold War.”

“This danger does exist and we can't ignore it,” Kissinger said. He warned that ignoring this danger any further may result in a “tragedy,” he told Germany’s Der Spiegel.

(Source)

When even Henry Kissinger thinks you've been too reckless in the application of raw power, you've over done it.

So given the timeline of the events that have led to the frostiest US-Russian relations since the depths of the cold war, I am of the view that Russia has been actually quite restrained and has not over reacted to any of the numerous provocations.

Despite the lull in front page reporting of the Russian situation, there remains a careful program of steady anti-Russian propaganda running through the western press.

It Takes Two To Tango

prop·a·gan·da

ˌpräpəˈɡandə/

Noun  - derogatory

Information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view.

For propaganda to work well, there needs to be tight coordination between the State and the press.  The role of the press is to first publish the propaganda, and second, to neglect to look into it or report on anything that might call it into question. Sins of omission and commission are both required.

The good news is that the internet is a great equalizing force and we can readily unearth inconvenient facts with a little digging that blunt the propaganda. The bad news is that a lot of people still get all their news from so-called 'official' sources.

At any rate, here's a first-rate piece of unadulterated propaganda courtesy of Bloomberg.  Note that it was printed on Dec 31, one of several very quiet news days where little debate is likely to happen:

Inside Obama’s Secret Outreach to Russia

Dec 31, 2014

President Barack Obama's administration has been working behind the scenes for months to forge a new working relationship with Russia, despite the fact that Russian President Vladimir Putin has shown little interest in repairing relations with Washington or halting his aggression in neighboring Ukraine.

In several conversations with Lavrov, Kerry has floated an offer to Russia that would pave the way for a partial release of some of the most onerous economic sanctions. Kerry’s conditions included Russia adhering to September's Minsk agreement and ceasing direct military support for the Ukrainian separatists. 

(Source)

The tenor of this piece is set. It's the US that is trying to be reasonable, but Russia has shown little interest in repairing relations. That's one assertion.

Another is that Russia has been providing direct military support for the separatists in neighboring Ukraine. And yet another that Putin himself has shown little interest in halting his aggression. 

That's the main narrative that the US wants to put forward. Putin is a bad guy. Like Saddam...remember him?  The US is the one being reasonable here, according to this piece, and it'is Russia that has been fomenting the troubles.

The US narrative goes further, repeatedly claiming that Russia has been supplying major arms to the separatists, as we see here from early December 2014:

U.S. Says Russia Arms Ukraine Rebels, OSCE Wary on Truce

Dec 2, 2014

North Atlantic Treaty Organization Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg accused Russia of sending tanks, advanced air-defense systems and other heavy weapons across the border to Ukrainian rebels. 

Russia denies involvement in the conflict.

“Since the Sept. 5 Minsk cease-fire agreement, Russia has funneled several hundred” tanks, armed personnel carriers, and other military vehicles directly to pro-Russian separatists in Ukraine, Kerry said.

Russian military forces still operate inside eastern Ukraine where they provide “command and control” for the separatists they back, he added.

(Source)

The charge from the Secretary General of NATO and from John Kerry of the US State department is that Russia has military forces inside Ukraine, and that they've funneled hundreds of tanks, APCs, and other military vehicles numbering in the hundreds.

As with the MH-17 disaster, we have to call this another case of the dog that did not bark.

Where are the pictures? 

The sorts of weaponry being claimed here are impossible to conceal from the air.

Snapping high resolution photos of such things is child's play for today's military satellites, and even civilian ones, too.

Accusing a major world power of action this brash should require at least some demonstration of proof. Especially after the WMD warning fiasco that played out at the UN leading up to the Bush II Iraq invasion. The least you could do is provide a few pictures of said military vehicles and heavy weaponry.

But there are none.  And the reason none have been offered is because none exist.  If they did, you can be 100% certain they'd be released and replayed over and over again on CNN until everybody and their uncle could distinguish a T-72 tank outline from a Russian made APC.

About Those 'Unwilling' Russians

Let's look more closely at the reasons why Russia may not exactly be in a conciliatory mood towards the US at this moment in time.

With just our short-term memories, we can recall that the US Congress passed a serious piece of anti-Russian resolution last month that can easily be seen as a declaration of war by a reasonable person.

This unfortunate piece of legislation, H.Res. 758, was passed on December 4, 2014 and is titled "Strongly condemning the actions of the Russian Federation, under President Vladimir Putin, which has carried out a policy of aggression against neighboring countries aimed at political and economic domination."

Ron Paul expressed the problems with this resolution very well:

Reckless Congress 'Declares War' on Russia

Dec 4, 2014

These are the kinds of resolutions I have always watched closely in Congress, as what are billed as “harmless” statements of opinion often lead to sanctions and war. I remember in 1998 arguing strongly against the Iraq Liberation Act because, as I said at the time, I knew it would lead to war. I did not oppose the Act because I was an admirer of Saddam Hussein – just as now I am not an admirer of Putin or any foreign political leader – but rather because I knew then that another war against Iraq would not solve the problems and would probably make things worse. We all know what happened next.

That is why I can hardly believe they are getting away with it again, and this time with even higher stakes: provoking a war with Russia that could result in total destruction!

If anyone thinks I am exaggerating about how bad this resolution really is, let me just offer a few examples from the legislation itself:

The resolution (paragraph 3) accuses Russia of an invasion of Ukraine and condemns Russia’s violation of Ukrainian sovereignty. The statement is offered without any proof of such a thing. Surely with our sophisticated satellites that can read a license plate from space we should have video and pictures of this Russian invasion. None have been offered.

As to Russia’s violation of Ukrainian sovereignty, why isn’t it a violation of Ukraine’s sovereignty for the US to participate in the overthrow of that country’s elected government as it did in February? We have all heard the tapes of State Department officials plotting with the US Ambassador in Ukraine to overthrow the government. We heard US Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland bragging that the US spent $5 billion on regime change in Ukraine. Why is that OK? 

The resolution (paragraph 11) accuses the people in east Ukraine of holding “fraudulent and illegal elections” in November. Why is it that every time elections do not produce the results desired by the US government they are called “illegal” and “fraudulent”? Aren’t the people of eastern Ukraine allowed self-determination? Isn’t that a basic human right?

The resolution (paragraph 13) demands a withdrawal of Russia forces from Ukraine even though the US government has provided no evidence the Russian army was ever in Ukraine. This paragraph also urges the government in Kiev to resume military operations against the eastern regions seeking independence.

(Source)

If the tables were turned, and it was the Russian lawmakers passing a resolution condemning the US for a variety of illegal activities for which exactly zero proof was offered, I think we all know just how ablaze with indignity the US political leadership would be.

Think of this from Russia's perspective.  They know perfectly well all of the things the Honorable Ron Paul speaks of are true.  There was an illegal coup followed by legal elections.  The US recognizes the former as legitimate but the latter as illegal, and then speaks loudly about the importance of spreading democracy.

Worse, the US keeps mandating that a key condition of lifting its anti-Russian sanctions is for Russia to leave Ukraine militarily and to stop shipping lots of heavy armaments there. But it has, as of today, provided exactly zero pieces of hard evidence to support those accusations.

As bad as this legislation was, the US Senate upped the ante just one week later on Dec 11, 2014 with Act, S.2828 The Ukraine Freedom Support Act of 2014:

US-NATO Delivering Arms to Ukraine. The Planning of Aggression against Russia

Dec 15, 2014

The Ukraine Freedom Support Act (UFSA) of 2014 authorizes lethal and non-lethal aid. Besides what’s already being supplied.

Including communications equipment. Body armor. Night vision goggles. Humvees. Radar. Counter-mortar detection units. Binoculars. Small boats. Various other gear.

Sniper and assault rifles. Hand grenade launchers. Mortars and shells. Stingers. Anti-tank missiles. What’s known may be the tip of the iceberg.

UFSA legislation “authoriz(ing) (Obama) to provide defense articles, defense services, and training to the Government of Ukraine for the purpose of countering offensive weapons and reestablishing the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine…”

“(I)ncluding anti-tank and anti-armor weapons, crew weapons and ammunition, counter-artillery radars to identify and target artillery batteries, fire control, range finder, and optical and guidance and control equipment, tactical troop-operated surveillance drones, and secure command and communications equipment.”

(Source)

After chiding Russia for supplying military aid, for which the US has provided no solid evidence in support of that claim, the US has passed an Act designed to funnel all sorts of military aid to the ruling powers in Kiev. 

This could just as easily have been labeled the "Do As We Say, Not As We Do" Act.  For some reason, the Russians are not too impressed with that approach.

Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Alexander Lukashevich said in response:

“Both houses of the US Congress have approved the Ukraine Freedom Support Act bypassing debates and proper voting. The overtly confrontational message of the new law cannot but evoke profound regret.”

“Once again Washington is leveling baseless sweeping accusations against Russia and threatening more sanctions. At the same time it is muddling together the Ukrainian and Syrian conflicts, which the United States has been instrumental in inflating. It even refers to the INF Treaty although American compliance with it is questionable, to put it mildly.

At the same time, it promises to Kiev to arm its military operation in Donbass and openly admits that it intends to use NGOs for an impact on Russia’s domestic processes.”

“Though it appears that major challenges to international security demand pooled Russian and American efforts, US legislators follow President Obama’s administration destroying the very foundation of partnership. Bilateral relations are being torpedoed no less powerfully than by the notorious Jackson-Vanik amendment, endorsed in 1974 to obstruct cooperation for several decades. We cannot but conclude that, blinded by outdated phobias, the United States is anxious to reverse time. As the US Congress instigates anti-Russian sanctions, it should part with the illusion of their effect. Russia will not be intimidated into giving up its interests and tolerating interference in its internal affairs.”

(Source)

The really bizarre part of this story is that I cannot yet find any credible analysis or commentary explaining exactly what the US's compelling interests are in Ukraine, nor what the end goal might be. It's all something of a mystery, compounded substantially by the fact that Russia can be a very powerful ally or enemy to have.  Why not choose ally? Why choose enemy?

On the flip side, we have lots of compelling evidence that the US has a serious plan in place to weaken and destabilize Russia. The tactics we're using would certainly be considered acts of war by the US were the circumstances reversed.

As one Russian observer put it:

Both US Assistant-Secretary of State Victoria Nuland — the wife of the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) co-founder and neo-conservative advocate for empire Robert Kagan — and US Assistant-Secretary of the Treasury Daniel Glaser told the Foreign Affairs Committee of the US House of Representatives in May 2014 that the objectives of the US economic sanctions strategy against the Russian Federation was not only to damage the trade ties and business between Russia and the EU, but to also bring about economic instability in Russia and to create currency instability and inflation. [5] In other words, the US government was targeting the Russian ruble for devaluation and the Russian economy for inflation since at least May 2014.

The United States is waging a fully fledged economic war against the Russian Federations and its national economy. Ultimately, all Russians are collectively the target. The economic sanctions are nothing more than economic warfare. If the crisis in Ukraine did not happen, another pretext would have been found for assaulting Russia.

Both US Assistant-Secretary of State Victoria Nuland and US Assistant-Secretary of the Treasury Daniel Glaser even told the Foreign Affairs Committee of the US House of Representatives in May 2014 that the ultimate objectives of the US economic sanctions against Russia are to make the Russian population so miserable and desperate that they would eventually demand that the Kremlin surrender to the US and bring about "political change". "Political change" can mean many things, but what it most probably implies here is regime change in Moscow.

In fact, the aims of the US do not even appear to be geared at coercing the Russian government to change its foreign policy, but to incite regime change in Moscow and to cripple the Russian Federation entirely through the instigation of internal divisions. 

This is why maps of a divided Russia are being circulated by Radio Free Europe. [17]

(Source)

We Not On A Road To War, We've Already Arrived

If it looks like a war, acts like a war and smells like a war, it may just be a war.  The US has been waging economic, financial, trade, political and even kinetic war-by-proxy against Russia.  The only question is why?

From the perspective of Russians it seems clear that neocons are driving the US ship of state, and that they are simply not the sort of people with whom you negotiate in good faith or whom you trust.  The neocons believe they have the upper hand, they are part of the most powerful country on earth, and they never negotiate preferring to dictate.

The only problem is, the US is rapidly losing allies and friends the world over and it's not nearly as powerful as it used to be, thanks to a profound failure to invest in itself (education, infrastructure, etc)

In Part 2: Why No One Should Want This To Devolve Further, we analyze the most likely responses the West's bear-baiting will generate from Russia. The short story is this: in none of the outcomes will there be clear victors.

There is simply no good rationale for the geo-political risks being taken right now. Leaving us with the critical question: Why are we willing to let our leaders play nuclear "Russian roulette", for stakes we don't agree with?

Credit to peakprosperity.com