That's what it's all about :(

I was trying to figure it out all this time (the real reason), now I know...

There should be more investigative journalists like these.
 
Interesting piece... with the exception of the black rights activist. I'm not sure if the U.S. government really cares about the skin color, but I can understand the feds getting a little upset about a third world country gaming the system so they (Khadafi) could get rich.
 
The Q is: Is there really any gold in the volts of The Bank Of England...
Anybody seen it?!

As long as a country uses fiat money, a fractional reserve lending system and a "national" bank, it doesn't matter if they have any gold or not.
 
As long as a country uses fiat money, a fractional reserve lending system and a "national" bank, it doesn't matter if they have any gold or not.

As a finance and international business major, you just made me flashback to my uni years.

Funny and typical how what i studied has nothing to do with my work or interests.
 
Gold serves no/little purpose in working capital/cash these days.
Murdock's right about the use of fiat (funny) money, which is based upon labor output or credit lending.

Just because Gaddafi was rallying African oil nations around a gold based "self determination" plan doesn't mean that he was acting in their best interests any more than the pied piper was working in the best interests of the villagers.

The US likely wanted both gold and oil assets secured.
If anything, this is reassuring to me because if the US was interested in sending the world into an economic tailspin to keep emerging nations, especially BRIC, from competitively out-consuming natural resources then ALLOWING Gaddafi to force oil purchasing nations to go back to a gold standard really would have made a mess of the global economy.
By preventing that the US has confirmed that it's actually trying to not f#ck things up, which I'll be the first to propose it is/was up to.
(I'm strangely disappointed, actually).

US just wants to use up everyone else's oil before using up its own.
Plain and simple.

Arguing that payment in gold instead of dollars or euros is retarded.
What do you think anyone was going to buy the gold with? Dollars. Euros. Yen. Yuan.
What do you think Gaddafi or African oil cartels were going to do with mountains of gold? Trade it for what? Buy what with it? From whom? When other nations bought gold with their local currencies what were gold producing nations going to do with those currencies? Purchase gold?
The whole one-step-only argument (quality news reporting, BTW) is just one step shy of being stupid.

And before anyone starts bandying about US political party arguments don't forget this whole oil obsession was validated by the establishment of the Carter Doctrine.

If armchair American politicians wanna get off their fat, lazy assets and get our noses out of everyone's business they should contact their state representatives and provide a sane argument for politically and economically isolating ourselves and begin consuming our own natural resources at a faster rate before anyone else gets hurt.
D@mmit. We have soccer moms to transport and band practices to attend.
 
Last edited:
How did they manage to put us into such a deep coma?! I don't get it...

Here's how: In the late 1600s merchants and other wealthy in medieval Europe began storing money in systems of "banks". At first they were just vaults holding hard currency gold silver gems etc. As the idea of banks grew across Europe bankers started issuing slips of paper to its customers. After realizing that no one withdraw everything at once, they could have less gold on hand than they actually needed. They issued more paper receipts and because people were using the same banks, they started using that as currency when trading. Gradually the banks fell under Rothschild power and by the 1700s they were running all major international banks. The metal currency was being spent out of Europe in the middle east and Asia leaving all the Europeans with paper money which is how that started. Then when the American revolution came around, another large bank functioning on the same lines as the ones in Europe was founded in America. Which is now why the west has little actual gold.


Gaddafi is a nut job though. Are you defending him? He's been in power for forty years his people want him out and he won't leave. He's killing the rebels which will happen when they rise up against their leader who's got military at his fingertips. The US isn't even the strongest force there. France is owning shit with NATO. And the US hasn't need oil since, they helped found Israel in the 1950s and Saudi Arabia has long been a "friend" albeit shady to America.

George Bush's "Shock & Awe" campaign really ruined America's international reputation. Instead of peacekeepers and fighting for freedom and the rights of all humankind, we're seen as warmongering and fixated on other countries assets. This is untrue, because to be honest, with one of the strongest military in the world, we'd be able to conquer Africa in two years, then the middle east in 3. Who could really stop us? We've got atom bombs from WWII stockpiled, and god knows what in development. If we really wanted to, team up with England, Canada and China, then we'd run the world, but we don't. I'm kinda tired of everyone shitting on America when half our national debt is from foreign aid we've given to the same critical countries. We should just mind our own business and wait for the world to call on their superheroes lmao
 
America when half our national debt is from foreign aid we've given to the same critical countries. We should just mind our own business and wait for the world to call on their superheroes lmao

I second this. Its exactly what the founding fathers said, " Do business with everyone. Sign treaties with none." Exactly the opposite has happened since WW2.
 
Back
Top