JoNova

A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).


The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper


Advertising

Australian Environment Conference Oct 20 2012


micropace


GoldNerds

The nerds have the numbers on precious metals investments on the ASX



In 2002 Ron Paul saw the next ten years coming

Ron Paul is painted as fringe by the Establishment. (If you’re not part of the establishment then you must be “fringe”, right?).

Ten years ago Ron Paul made long series of detailed economic and foreign policy predictions that he hoped he would be proven wrong on.  It was a year before the US started action in Iraq. Five years before the housing bubble busted. Six years before the Global Financial Crisis. Nine years before the Arab Spring.  (At least he was wrong on the US “draft”. So far).

How many mainstream politicians can point to a speech like this?  How many presidential candidates saw it coming?

“Let it not he said that no one cared,

that no one objected once its realized that our liberties and wealth are in jeopardy”

Ron Paul

Ron Paul 2002 April 24th.

 

There’s a copy of the video of the speech without newspaper overlays, and background music, for those who prefer the uncluttered view.

“He saw these things coming because he reveres liberty above all else and when you cherish liberty you can see the things that threaten it. “  John Carey

I have transcribed parts, but not all of his rapid fire delivery of specific point after point. The video above shows recent headlines to match the predictions as he made them. (The full transcript is here.)

I predict US taxpayers will pay to rebuild Palestine, Gaza, Afghanistan.

Peace will be short lived in the middle east. There will be big promises of US money…

US troops will be used to monitor peace. In time an oil boycott will be imposed with oil prices soaring…

Current Isreali policies will solidify muslim nations against the US

Some of our moderate arab allies will be overthrown by muslim fundamentalists

china will sell weapons to Arab nations.

Harmid Karzai government will fail.

An international dollar crisis will dramatically boost interest rates in the US. Price inflation with a major economic downturn will decimate federal US government finances and exploding deficits with uncontrolled government spending.

Massive credit expansion will make the dollar crisis worse.

Gold will be seen as an alternative to paper money as it returns to it’s historic role as money…

Many Americans will be killed in the coming conflict.

We will not lose the war, but neither will we win…

Policy changes could undo all of this, but that will not happen.

The congress and president will shift radically towards expanding the size and scope of the fed government. This will satisfy both the liberals and conservatives. Military and police powers will grow, satisfying the conservatives. The welfare state will expand satisfying the liberals. Both sides will endorse military adventurism overseas.

In due course the constitution will be steadily undermined, and the American republic weakened… during the next decade the American people will become steadily poorer while they become less free…. they will become more dependent on the government for economic security. The war will become divisive… class warfare will divide us domestically…

July 2002: Ron Paul predicts the housing bubble will burst and wipe out home equity

This video compilation of other Paul predictions is also interesting — comparing his predictions to statements from Hilary Clinton, Barney Frank, John McCain, George Bush… see the first video on this page.

I am uncomfortable with his foreign policy, with the isolationist non-interventionist* view. But at the moment it seems the greatest threats to the US  come from within. Ron Paul may not be the President for every era, but he seems relevant now. Will he get people to talk about the benefits of small government, real money, and real freedom?

 

*Edited, thanks to Tom and D Bonson

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 8.9/10 (82 votes cast)
In 2002 Ron Paul saw the next ten years coming, 8.9 out of 10 based on 82 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/7c2cnok

180 comments to In 2002 Ron Paul saw the next ten years coming

  • #
    warcroft

    He was right. 100% correct.
    Id like to hear his predictions for the next ten years.


    Report this

    00

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      He is not quite 100% correct, but he has several extremely good analysts on his staff, he knows how to use them, and he knows how to best use the intelligence he receives.

      In my humble opinion, he is the only viable Republican candidate for the upcoming election, but because he is inevitably right. But he is disliked, and won’t get the nomination, giving the election to Obama by default.

      You have only to look how the American media avoid mentioning his name at all, if they can get away with it, to understand how the other nominees and the media fear and loath him.

      But if he can attain the White House, it will be a massive game changer for the west.


      Report this

      00

      • #

        Ron Paul makes more sense than the other Republican candidates, . . . but he may have to leave the Republican Party to have any chance of bringing about the changes needed in our economic policies.

        I know little of economics, but a trusted friend in economics said: Our economy WAS stable and highly productive for a generation or more. “Western economies” started collapsing after they became less western. The “collapse” can be directly tracked to the REMOVAL of the very sound rules of the past. In essence, communism, socialism, and ‘redistributive justice’ are all just forms of coveting. As we moved from a capitalist model toward a socialist model and removed safeguards learned during the Great Depression, we have had the same sort of ‘collapse’ again. The taproot (sin/greed/power) is the same.

        The only way to ‘fix it’ is to put back the rules that were removed and rescind the laws that placed ‘social justice’ ahead of property rights:

        1) Restore Glass-Steagall legislation; remove Dodd-Frank legislation.

        2) Restore the “Uptick Rule” that had been in place from 1938 to 2007.

        3) Repeal the “CRA” (Community Reinvestment Act) a triumph of Social Justice that caused the mortgage crises by FORCING banks to make bad loans.

        4) Remove social engineering (Fanny Mae and Freddy Max) from the mortgage market.

        5) Restore the wall that separated Investment Banking, Insurance, and Commercial Banking and prevented banks from passing off bad mortgages to Investment Banks that then packaged them up and sold them with “insurance” without meeting the insurance laws requiring enough capital to cover the loss.

        Once Investment Banking, Insurance, and Commercial Banking were cross connected we had eliminated essentially all of “the rules” learned the hard way in The Great Depression.


        Report this

        00

    • #
      Rick Bradford

      His first prediction for the next 10 years will be that he has no chance of becoming President, or even getting his party’s nomination. More’s the pity.

      The self-anointed elites on both sides of politics will make sure that no maverick who wants to roll back government powers will be allowed near a seat of power.


      Report this

      00

      • #
        brc

        He might not get the presidency – in fact it’s extremely unlikely.

        But he already has, and will continue to set the course for political debate in non-left politics (ie, the rest of us).

        Already other republican candidates are talking about the Federal Reserve as something to be at least suspicious of, something that was unthinkable even 4 years ago.

        He continues to ask whether Gold is money or not, and by asking the question, you force people to think about the answer and what that means.

        But most importantly, most of Ron Paul’s support and money comes predominantly from young people. And, as the old cliche goes, young people are the future. I would guess that more young people are listening to this message than are listening to the tired old messages from failed marxists and the techno-enviro-scientific-academic blancmange that puts up candidates like Obama and probably Romney as well.

        The thing is, when you talk about basic freedoms and the right of the individual to be free from excessive influence of the state, you cannot be proven wrong, because it is a fundamental right. It’s not a hard message to sell to young people, and even a few occutards are probably listening.


        Report this

        00

        • #
          wes george

          In agree with brc,

          Ron Paul is helping direct the public discourse among Republican towards a libertarian agenda and that’s a good thing. Republicans are just like the LIberal/National Coalition in Australia…they aren’t reliable defenders of smaller, less intrusive government, transparent markets and lower taxes or even common sense. Ron Paul helps focus the Grand Old Party on these basic demands of the majority of Americans.

          When I read article like this:

          http://www.huffingtonpost.com/laura-trice/ron-paul-11-point-plan_b_947832.html

          I cheer on his entire platform. So why am so I uneasy with Ron Paul, the man? He’s a weirdo.

          It’s the same reason I’m uncomfortable with Newt Gingrinch, these guys are loose cannons, but in different ways. Newt’s an out-of-control egomaniac with a Kevin Rudd-size personality. He could blow up at any moment.

          Ron Paul stands for so many complex and conflicted rationales that it’s impossible to know which ones he’ll actually focus on as President, or if he’ll discover a new moral urgency of our age once he gets there.

          I don’t like Mitt Romney either, but I agree with Peggy Noonan’s quip:

          People don’t embrace Mr. Romney, they circle back to him. They consider him, shop around for something better, decide the first product they looked at will last longest and give value, and buy.

          I think Jo is wrong about Paul being a straight shooter, he’s attached his name to so many strange causes over the decades, I don’t trust that he’s just a stolid libertarian conservative, he’s got a whole basement full of Ron Paul Newsletters from the 1980′s and 90′s full of crackpot ideas.

          Rob Long of the National Review describes Paul’s, uh, problem…

          “In other words, there’s Ron Paul, and there’s the Ron Paul newsletters, and you cannot have one without the other. One, in fact, leads inexorably to the other. First you start talking about sane, grounded stuff — sound money; harmful central banking — and then, eventually, you start suggesting how it might have been the Israeli Mossad that bombed the World Trade Center in 1993, or how the AIDS virus is quite possibly a product of secret government research gone awry.

          The Ron Paul newsletters — published in the 1980s and 1990s under various hilariously pompous titles, such as “Ron Paul’s Freedom Report” and “The Ron Paul Survival Report” — are filled with a nutty blend of libertarian boilerplate and conspiracy fruitcakery. Take the first part away, and what you have left is basically interchangeable in tone and idiocy with any left-wing rag you can get your hands on. Oh, sure, you’ll have to substitute some words — “corporate fat cats” for “urban blacks” — but you’ll find that the writers of both the “Ron Paul” oeuvre and your standard lefty scandal rag have saved the phrase “Jewish bankers” on a macro.”

          …Ron Paul the candidate occupies an interesting and useful place in the race. He’s a principled weirdo, the unlikable old coot down the street, the guy you have to respect for his stubborn adherence to the rulebook of the great American experiment. And that’s what most voters see in him, too. “Really admire the point of view,” they say. “Too bad he’s too weird to be president.”

          Most Australians first heard about Paul in the last few months missed his decades long incubation in local Texas politics. I remember the last time the US elected a president who hung out with strange preachers who thought AIDS was a government plot and befriended 911 Truthers. We know how well that worked out.


          Report this

          00

          • #
            Crakar24

            What the?

            Are you the one who is nuts Wes?

            Here are some of Pauls crackpot ideas

            1) Stop wars of conquest
            2) Remove all troops from foreign lands
            3) Shut down all military bases in foreign lands
            4) Stop protecting Israeli agression at the UN by right of Veto at security council
            5) Remove the federal reserve banking system
            6) End all military aid to foreign countries.

            There are many more crazy ideas like this of course.

            There is one good reason why Paul will never become President and that is because “they” wont let him. Of the 4 previous presidents that wanted to end the federal reserve banking system all 4 are now dead…..shot dead that is.


            Report this

            00

          • #
            wes george

            There is one good reason why Paul will never become President and that is because “they” wont let him. Of the 4 previous presidents that wanted to end the federal reserve banking system all 4 are now dead…..shot dead that is.

            The US Federal Reserve wasn’t established in 1913 and 3 of the 4 assassinated US Presidents – Garfield, Lincoln and McKinley – all died before the Federal Reserve was created.

            John F. Kennedy, the only president assassinated after the Federal Reserve existed had no plan to end the federal reserve.

            Thanks for popping in with that wonderful example of exactly the sort of tinfoil hat stuff Ron Paul supporters are so famous for injection into what might have otherwise been a sane political discussion.

            Btw, at least have the decency to fact check your conspiracy theory first.


            Report this

            00

          • #
            Crakar24

            Wes,

            Dont be a jerk, you sit there and bag the crap out of the poor old AGW believers, you claim they are blinded by their faith but in fact you are no different to them.

            Now i will give you the facts but i dare say you will not listen and continue to beleive in what it is you want to beleive.

            First a bit of a history lesson:

            Part One

            Way back when the US was still only 13 colonies the colonies issued there own currency and the system worked quite well as opposed to the situation in Europe which used the private banking system.

            The Bank of England lobbied King George III to impose the Currency Act on the colonies, which forbade the colonies to use their own money and required them to borrow their lawful tender from the Bank of England, at interest.

            It took only a few years for this scheme to reduce the formerly prosperous and productive colonies down to the poverty and unemployment typical of London at the same time period. This was the real driving force behind the American revolution.

            After the revolution America reverted back to government issued currency and it worked like this, Government issued the public currency and spent it into circulation where it was used by the public free of interest. Then the money was taxed back into the government’s hands, then to be re-spent back into circulation. For each fiscal year the money issued equaled the money collected. Nothing was lost. The dollar was based on a weight measure of silver, which meant the value of a dollar was fixed and not subject to the whims of government or bankers.

            Where Britain’s military might failed, politics succeeded and spurred on by Alexander Hamilton, the first Bank of the United States was granted a 20 year charter in 1791. Almost immediately, the spiraling debt in the government budget, championed as necessary for international commerce by Hamilton, began to drain the livelihood of ordinary Americans.

            “Everything predicted by the enemies of banks, in the beginning, is now coming to pass. We are to be ruined now by the deluge of bank paper. It is cruel that such revolutions in private fortunes should be at the mercy of avaricious adventurers, who, instead of employing their capital, if any they have, in manufactures, commerce, and other useful pursuits, make it an instrument to burden all the interchanges of property with their swindling profits, profits which are the price of no useful industry of theirs.” –Thomas Jefferson

            By 1811, the owners of the First Bank of the United States had become rich while ruining the lives of ordinary Americans. Congress had prudently limited the charter of the bank to 20 years and it expired in 1811. A move to re-charter the bank failed due to public opposition.

            The following year, with the conclusion of Britain’s wars with Napoleon, the Bank of England demanded King George re-invade the United States to force them back into the clutches of private central banking, this time with the Bank of England. Thus was initiated the war of 1812, a war like any other war; created and waged for profit.

            The war of 1812 failed, and again political and monetary pressure succeeded where military force had failed, and in 1816, President Madison chartered a Second Bank of the United States, in part to deal with the expenses created defending the nation from Britain a second time and the runaway inflation caused by private banks issuing their own banknotes without restraint. Like the First Bank of the United States, the second one was granted a 20 year charter. By the time the charter was due to expire, the nation was once again struggling with debt and poverty while the bankers were growing richer every day.


            Report this

            00

          • #
            Crakar24

            Part two

            As a result, Andrew Jackson opposed the renewal of the bank charter and made it a major platform of his campaign in 1832.

            Gentlemen, I have had men watching you for a long time and I am convinced that you have used the funds of the bank to speculate in the breadstuffs of the country. When you won, you divided the profits amongst you, and when you lost, you charged it to the bank. You tell me that if I take the deposits from the bank and annul its charter, I shall ruin ten thousand families. That may be true, gentlemen, but that is your sin! Should I let you go on, you will ruin fifty thousand families, and that would be my sin! You are a den of vipers and thieves. I intend to rout you out, and by the Eternal God, I will rout you out.” — Andrew Jackson

            In 1835, an unemployed painter, Richard Lawrence, attempted to shoot President Jackson twice, with both pistols failing to fire. Lawrence gave as his reason for the attack that with the President dead, money would be more plentiful, an obvious reference to Jackson’s veto of the re-chartering of the Second Bank of the United States. As a footnote, following the loss of its charter, the Second Bank of the United States attempted to continue as an ordinary bank, but went bankrupt in 1841.

            “If the debt which the banking companies owe be a blessing to anybody, it is to themselves alone, who are realizing a solid interest of eight or ten per cent on it. As to the public, these companies have banished all our gold and silver medium, which, before their institution, we had without interest, which never could have perished in our hands, and would have been our salvation now in the hour of war; instead of which they have given us two hundred million of froth and bubble, on which we are to pay them heavy interest, until it shall vanish into air… We are warranted, then, in affirming that this parody on the principle of ‘a public debt being a public blessing,’ and its mutation into the blessing of private instead of public debts, is as ridiculous as the original principle itself. In both cases, the truth is, that capital may be produced by industry, and accumulated by economy; but jugglers only will propose to create it by legerdemain tricks with paper.” –Thomas Jefferson

            We already know they attempted to kill Jackson over the banking system now lets move onto Lincoln

            Then in 1861, the Confederacy broke free of the United States. Abraham Lincoln sought financing from the bankers for the war effort, but balked at the usurious high interest rates the banks demanded. Declaring that he would not enslave the white people to the bankers to free the black people, Abraham Lincoln exercised his Presidential Authority to issue a new government currency; the greenback. There was no convertability and while there was inflation at the time, the government-issued currency, free of interest to a private bank, worked well during the war years, and Abraham Lincoln declared his intention to keep issuing the Greenbacks after the war’s conclusion.

            Following Abraham Lincoln’s assassination, Congress voted to end the Greenbacks, but did not restore convertibility. Banks could issue notes without regard to actual bullion reserves and a period of intense post-war inflation and speculation resulted.


            Report this

            00

          • #
            Crakar24

            Part 3

            MC Kinley

            In 1900 President McKinley kept a campaign promise to bring back convertibility by signing the Gold Standard Act, making the Gold Standard the basis for all US currency, even though much of the coinage issued remained silver. McKinley did this because of the public perception that the US Banking system was weak and corrupted, and because the gold strikes in California, Alaska, and Colorado bolstered the US Treasury’s stock of that metal.

            One year later, President McKinley was assassinated by Leon Czolosz, who explained his attack at his execution saying,”I killed the President because he was the enemy of the good people – the good working people.”

            In 1910, a group of private bankers met at a private island named Jekyll Island to plan the imposition of yet another private central bank on the people of the United States. As part of the ruse, they abandoned the unpopular name “Bank of the United States” and chose the name Federal Reserve to grant themselves the illusion that this was a government agency, when in point of fact it is just another privately owned central bank. Pretenses to the contrary notwithstanding, the Federal Reserve is no more “Federal” than Federal Express. It is a privately owned bank. Three years later, in 1913, Congress voted the Federal Reserve act and President Wilson signed it, redeeming a campaign promise to his financial backers. Six years later, as his Presidency came to a close, Woodrow Wilson wrote.

            “I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is now controlled by its system of credit.We are no longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men.” — Woodrow Wilson 1919

            Kennedy

            The Federal Reserve completed their plan for the economic subjugation of the American people in 1964, one year after the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Silver coin and certificates were still in general use; money that came from the government and was used free of interest. Since the money was something of value and owned by whoever held it, the banks made no profit off of the use of that money and more to the point, could not manipulate its value.

            Then President John F. Kennedy signed Executive Order 11110 on June 4th, 1963. This order authorized the Treasury to issue a new government currency, the US Note, based on silver in Fort Knox, recycled from the huge magnets used in early Uranium enrichment at Oak Ridge. This allowed the Kennedy administration to purchase four billion dollars worth of goods and services without having to borrow the money from the Federal Reserve, and signaled Kennedy’s intention to restore the nations’ economic system to the model used by the Founding Fathers.


            Report this

            00

          • #
            Crakar24

            Now i understand that the 3 comments are going to take you awhile to get through but if i may make a suggestion, the next you try and by rude and abrupt with me you should take a moment and ponder such actions.

            As you can clearly see the facts show there is no conspiracy unless you are talking about the one spiralling around in your empty pea brained head.

            Like i said Wes you are no better than the warmists you belittle so pull your F&^^%g head in.


            Report this

            00

          • #

            Wes – when you say “Garfield, Lincoln and McKinley” all died before the Federal Reserve was created, you are missing their prescience – they knew in advance it was going to be created, and planned to abolish it when it was. Kennedy too, but he hid his plan pretty well, but not well enough for Lee Harvey Oswald, the CIA, the Rothschilds, the Freemasons, the Bilderberg group, and of course the Federal Reserve itself. He was assassinated before he could reveal his plan.


            Report this

            00

          • #
            wes george

            Thanks for that, Rod ;-)

            Crakar had me stumped with his historical survey series there.

            Now I realise he’s talking about those episodes of Dr. Who I missed last season. But I still don’t get who’s behind the conspiracy to fleece Americans of their God-given right to monetary convertibility, the Daleks or the Cybermen?


            Report this

            00

          • #
          • #
            Crakar24

            Is that all you got Wes?

            Thats it?

            You have been proven to be absolutely, comprhensively and completely wrong and you come back with some bullshit about Dr Who.

            You are no better than the warmbots you abuse, you are a pathetic individual Wes absolutely pathetic.

            You should be ashamed of your self.


            Report this

            00

          • #
            wes george

            Crakar,

            You said that 4 presidents were murdered because they wanted to shut down the “Federal Reserve Banking System” I showed that to be an even more insanely impossible conspiracy theory than 911 Trutherism.

            Why?

            Because it took me exactly 2 minutes on Google to discover the US Federal Reserve didn’t exist before 1913 and 3 of the murdered Presidents died well before 1913.

            The only modern president assassinated since then was JFK and he supported the Federal Reserve.

            If you simply had simply slunk away, or God forbid, admitted you were wrong. Fine. But instead you’re here insisting that you were correct?

            The lesson I am taking home from this is that the Internet is a vast, deep and dark sea you never know who you are talking too.


            Report this

            00

          • #
            Crakar24

            Oh for the love of God…………….

            Why do i waste my time with people like you Wes, i get more logical discussion from JB (by the way JB i do use your name often but you should take it as a complement).

            Wes the fed is a PRIVATE BANKING SYSTEM and came into being in 1913 as i stated in my 3 part comment, before 1913 it went by another name BUT IT WAS STILL A PRIVATE BANKING SYSTEM you are such a moron.

            Oh and if Kennedy really did support the PRIVATE BANKING SYSTEM then why did he sign an executive order authorising the printing (yes the US government can print their own money at no interest) of 4 billion and link to all the silver he had?

            Enough with your childish conspiracy theory gibberish Wes. The fact remains of the 5 US presidents that tried to circumnavigate the PRIVATE BANKING SYSTEM 4 were shot dead and the fifth survived due to the flint locks failing to fire.

            In my opinion this is not coincedent but if you disagree then so be it good luck with your upcoming election and i hope the warmonger of your choice gets elected.


            Report this

            00

          • #
            wes george

            Here’s what YOU said Crackar:

            There is one good reason why Paul will never become President and that is because “they” wont let him. Of the 4 previous presidents that wanted to end the FEDERAL RESERVE BANKING SYSTEM all 4 are now dead…..shot dead that is.

            That’s an utterly impossible conspiracy theory and I call you on it.

            The US Federal Reserve wasn’t established until 1913 and 3 of the 4 assassinated US Presidents – Garfield, Lincoln and McKinley – all died before the Federal Reserve was created.

            John F. Kennedy, the only president assassinated after the Federal Reserve existed had no plan to end the Fed. On contrary, all the evidence suggest Kennedy’s plan was to work within the existing structure of the Federal Reserve.

            Wes the fed is a PRIVATE BANKING SYSTEM and came into being in 1913 as i stated in my 3 part comment, before 1913 it went by another name BUT IT WAS STILL A PRIVATE BANKING SYSTEM you are such a moron.

            If you would now like to change what you said from FEDERAL RESEVE BANKING SYSTEM and pretend that American private banking in all its vast variety going back to KIng George is synonymous with the FEDERAL RESERVE BANKING ACT of 1913 then you’re being disingenuous. It’s nonsense to suggest the Fed is the same as the 200 chaotic years of independent banking mess which preceded the Fed’s creation.

            You should admit you totally mis-stated your original whacko conspiracy theory and then defend your new amended theory, which at least doesn’t require Time Travel in order to be even remotely conceivable.

            Enough with your childish conspiracy theory gibberish Wes. The fact remains of the 5 US presidents that tried to circumnavigate the PRIVATE BANKING SYSTEM 4 were shot dead and the fifth survived due to the flint locks failing to fire.

            MY conspiracy theory glibberish? Hello?

            You’re not being honest and you’ve not submitted any evidence other than your opinion that Lincoln and McKinley assassination were linked to monetary policy.

            Nor didn’t you even mention Garfield’s assassination or link Oswald to the conspiracy either. Epic fail.

            Try harder.

            You seem to be arguing that the history of monetary policy is a conspiracy spanning hundreds of years. Please explain how far back this conspiracy goes? How did the conspiracy to enslave us begin?

            How are those in control today linked to the past generations of conspirators? By family? Or is it a secret cult?

            Does Ron Paul believe in this conspiracy too?

            Here’s a visual explanation of the Fed, which I know is going to FREAK YOU OUT.

            Or you can go with this somewhat more paranoid version of reality.

            The truths you choose will define your existence independent of how accurately they describe reality.


            Report this

            00

          • #
            Crakar24

            Wes,

            Lets first discuss the difference between a private bank issuing money on behalf of the government and government issued money.

            When a government issues money it is generally tied to the amount of gold and or silver they have in their possession therefore the money has some intrinsic value.

            When a private bank issues money on behalf of a government it is created out of thin air, it has no intrinsic value.

            When a private bank issues money on behalf of a government the government not only has to repay the private bank that money but also the interest that goes with it.

            For example if a private bank prints 1 billion dollars and gives it to the government the government owes the private bank 1 billion dollars and as this 1 billion dollars is created out of thin air the only cost to the private bank is the price of running the printing press, paper and ink suffice to say it costs the private bank nothing.

            The private bank then charge the government interest, an interest that can never be repaid, it can never be repaid because the money required to repay it does not exist. The only way the government can repay the interest is by asking the private bank to print off some more money to repay the interest which will of course accrue even more interest and so the cycle of debt continues until you go broke which is about now of course.

            The more paper money you print that has no intrinsic value the less it is worth, therefore the more you print the higher the inflation, you still with me Wes?

            On the otherhand government issued money comes with no interest which means the money owed equals the money created furthermore the money is tied to the wealth of the country not speculators on the stock market.

            The original banking system employed in the USA was government based system and the money was tied to wealth (gold or silver) this monetary system had been used since the Roman empire.

            Over the last 200 odd years the US has fluctuated between the private and government banking systems every president that threatened or actaully did get rid of the private banking system was shot or in Jacksons case attempted to shoot them.

            Now this could be a coincedence?

            Just for clarification the Fed reserve is a private bank nothing more nothing less, yes the name may have changed from the bank of America to the Bank of England to the Fed reserve but they are all private banks, they all operate the same way, they all enslave you to debt.

            But let me ask you this, if the USA is so broke and Obama cant help himself and just needs to keep spending money why does he not simply print up his own? He could do what Lincoln did and not worry about using a standard (gold or silver for convertability) as your inflation is already through the roof but he would not have to worry about interest rates would he.

            So tell me why does Obama continually turn to the Fed instead of printing his own money?


            Report this

            00

          • #
            wes george

            Lets first discuss the difference between a private bank issuing money on behalf of the government and government issued money.

            That’s the “Hey Look There Goes A Squirrel” style of argument.

            Not so fast Crakar, we have never resolved your very first comment on the topic here:

            There is one good reason why Paul will never become President and that is because “they” wont let him. Of the 4 previous presidents that wanted to end the FEDERAL RESERVE BANKING SYSTEM all 4 are now dead…..shot dead that is.

            This thread is about Ron Paul not an in depth analysis of the slippery, ever morphing, conspiracy theories of his followers.

            In other past threads you have made your disdain for conservative policies and leadership apparent. You are a person of the far left, are you not?

            What is a person of the far left doing following a Republican political leader like Ron Paul?

            My point is that Ron Paul for all his good ideas and intelligence is really something other than he seems or Ron Paul wouldn’t have far left moonbats hanging on to– and elaborating on — the old demagogic themes upon which he built his career over the years.

            In fact, it’s fringe-dwellers like you, Crakar, that doomed Ron Paul’s run for the Republican nomination. The chickens came home to roost, so to speak, a bit sooner than they did with Barrack.

            Meanwhile, you still have not answered to a single question I put to you in my last post.


            Report this

            00

          • #
            Crakar24

            Your not all there in the head are you wes.

            Some may say you are one can short of a 6 pack but i would disagree, i say you have all 6 cans but are simply missing the plastic ring thingy keeping it all together.

            Once again we must cover old ground because you cant keep up.

            You said

            Meanwhile, you still have not answered to a single question I put to you in my last post.

            This stupid statement was in reference to

            The US Federal Reserve wasn’t established until 1913 and 3 of the 4 assassinated US Presidents – Garfield, Lincoln and McKinley – all died before the Federal Reserve was created.

            You appeared to be confused between a private banking system and the federal reserve bank, in my last post i merely tried to educate you on what a private bank is and that the fed and a private bank are one of the same.

            Yes “the fed” by name was created in 1913 but the fed is still a private bank it is no different to any other private bank……the bank of england is a private bank the bank of america is a private bank. Before 1913 you had a private bank after 1913 you still had a private bank….its name may have changed but it is still a private bank.

            Your fixation on this very minor detail is either a sign of your stupidity or a sign that you have no point on which to argue so rather than concede defeat you simply wish to argue over symantics.

            Which is it Wes?

            In aneffort to answer all your questions i would not consider myself to be of the far, far left as you seem to beleive.

            I am Australian so i doubt very much that i played are part in any down fall of Paul as you seem to think.

            I see a once great nation being destroyed by its leaders, the people of the USA have had all their rights stripped away, they have had there economy systematically destroyed intentionally by policies, i see this nation as nothing more than a dictatorship thrashing around in the water as it slowly drowns.

            The home of the free and land of the brave has now become the home of the poor and the land of the slave and you only have yourselves to blame for that. You voted for incompetent fools, you allowed these fools to intentionally do what they have done.

            But you still have a choice you can either elect another fool that does not give a shit about you and things get worse or you can elect someone who wants to change things.

            End the fed
            End foreign wars
            Reinstate personnal liberties etc

            The choice is yours but you better hurry up because this is the last chance you get……..remember the choice is yours.

            Actaully before i go does the NDAA legislation scare the crap out of you? Well Romney loves, obviously Obama loves it but Paul hates like i said the choice is yours.


            Report this

            00

          • #
            Kevin Moore

            Who is running the U.S.A.?

            http://www.barefootsworld.net/usfraud.html

            Did you ever hear of the Independent Treasury Act of 1920? No, you say…. Hmmmmmmm….?

            The Independent Treasury Act of 1920 suspended the de jure (meaning “by right of legal establishment”) Treasury Department of the United States government. Our Congress turned the treasury department over to a private corporation, which when seen in its true light, is a fascist monopolistic cartel, the Federal Reserve and their agents. The bulk of the ownership of the Federal Reserve System, a very well kept secret from the American Citizen, is held by these banking interests, and NONE is held by the United States Treasury:

            Rothschild Bank of London
            Rothschild Bank of Berlin
            Warburg Bank of Hamburg
            Warburg Bank of Amsterdam
            Lazard Brothers of Paris
            Israel Moses Seif Banks of Italy
            Chase Manhattan Bank of New York
            Goldman, Sachs of New York
            Lehman Brothers of New York
            Kuhn Loeb Bank of New York

            The Federal Reserve is at the root of most of our present statutory regulations, “laws”, in the control and regulation of virtually all aspects of human activity in the United States, through successively socialistic constructions laid upon the Commerce clause of the Constitution. Basically, the Federal Reserve is the “STATE” of the United States.

            See “Our Enemy, The STATE” by Albert J. Nock – 1935, his Classic Critique Distinguishing “Government” from the “STATE.”

            See Also Charts in Text Format of Interlocking Directorships and Family Linkages taken from “Federal Reserve Directors: A Study of Corporate and Banking Influence. Staff Report, Committee on Banking, Currency and Housing, House of Representatives, 94th Congress, 2nd Session, August 1976.”

            See Also Secrets of the Federal Reserve by Eustace Mullins.


            Report this

            00

          • #
            wes george

            i would not consider myself to be of the far, far left as you seem to beleive.

            I am Australian so i doubt very much that i played are part in any down fall of Paul as you seem to think.

            I’m an Australian too who has interests in the success and prosperity of both nation, mate.

            So you’re a not a far lefty. Just a good old Aussie Lefty? That, comrade, makes you a far lefty in American terms. And in Texan terms, the place Ron Paul represents, makes you a far, far, far lefty.

            In fact, Crakar, you’re so far left you’ve waltzed round the clock to the far right, which is where you and Ron Paul’s rhetoric intersect.

            … i see this nation as nothing more than a dictatorship thrashing around in the water as it slowly drowns…

            The home of the free and land of the brave has now become the home of the poor and the land of the slave and you only have yourselves to blame for that. You voted for incompetent fools, you allowed these fools to intentionally do what they have done.

            Sounds like you should visit the states and read The Drum less. Reports of the death of America have been greatly exaggerated. Aussie dollar makes Dallas on Qantas cheap as chips. If you knew anything about America you could never say it was a dictatorship of poor slaves drowning.

            I don’t think you really wish the yanks well, do you?

            * * *

            There is a rarely commented upon fact about extremism…. Extremist ideas both left and right are much closer, often even interchangeable between their alliances, than with the vast mob in the middle ground.

            What extremists of all stripes are forever in opposition to is the middle, the moderate, the reasonable, the evil of political compromising… For it is reason that both the extreme right and left stand against. The same is true between extreme, irrational faiths, such as eco-catastrophism and creationism. They both utilise the same modus operandi, and thus have more in common with each other then the rational scrutiny by the skeptics they both face.

            The most dangerous times of all is when seemingly conflicting extremists find common cause against those who remain reasonable in middle.

            Uniting extreme POVs is Ron Paul special talent. After all what could be more conflicted than a creationist who is a climate skeptic?


            Report this

            00

          • #
            Kevin Moore

            US Presidents Murdered by the Banking Cartel -

            http://www.rense.com/general86/pres.htm


            Report this

            00

          • #
            Kevin Moore

            http://www.libertyforlife.com/banking/federal_reserve_bank.html

            The Federal Reserve Bank is a consortium of twelve private banks which are not part of the United States Government.
            These private banks purchase paper notes from the U.S. mint for printing cost or simply enter digital money into their computer then lend back the money plus interest to the people through member banks. The profits go into the share holders of the bank’s pocket’s, the U.S. public receives no benefit.

            The Primary Owners of the Federal Reserve Bank Are:
            1. Rothschild’s of London and Berlin
            2. Lazard Brothers of Paris
            3. Israel Moses Seaf of Italy
            4. Kuhn, Loeb & Co. of Germany and New York
            5. Warburg & Company of Hamburg, Germany
            6. Lehman Brothers of New York
            7. Goldman, Sachs of New York
            8. Rockefeller Brothers of New York
            All the primary owners are branches of European establishments. Foreigners, [snip], control the United States Money supply. They literally own exclusive rights to the dollar and simply enter dollars into their banks books to make money which they then lend back to us at a profit. For them money does not grow on trees, it is simply a data entry into their account. Clearly the private ownership of the U.S. Dollar is by far The Greatest Crime of the Century. The owners of this bank have been responsible for instigating all the major wars and depressions in the last 100 years. They own the bank, they own the dollar and they own all the major media channels, the military industrial complex and most politicians, judges and cops.

            Sometimes the bank pays an arbitrary ‘franchise fee’ to the U.S. government to keep the politicians paid off.

            The first two private National Banking Systems lasted about 20 years before being eliminated. The current Federal Reserve Bank private National Bank has lasted nearly 100 years.

            In Producer Aaron Russo’s must see Movie “AMERICA: Freedom to Fascism”, when interviewing Congressman Ron Paul, Aaron asks: “So the Federal Reserve is actually an illegal entity functioning within the Federal Government?” Ron Paul’s response: “It’s illegal. And what we have given to this so-called agency is the authority to counterfeit money.”

            The cost of this system to the U.S. public is hundreds of billions of dollars every year while holding the nation and people in a constant state of debt.

            There have been assassination attempts on every President who attempted to eliminate these private National Banks. The privately held Federal Reserve Bank has not once been audited and never pays any income tax on their astonishing income.

            The bank is supposed to bring stability to the economy, however, almost every major marked crash and war can be attributed to the Federal Reserve Bank, including the Great Depression, WW I, WW II, the Gulf War etc.

            In 1913 in exchange for paying for his Presidential campaign, President Woodrow Wilson signed the Federal Reserve Act handing over the U.S. currency to twelve regional private banks. In 1933 Roosevelt confiscated citizens gold and handed it to these private banks…..


            Report this

            00

          • #
            Kevin Moore

            http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-2755

            H.R. 2755: Federal Reserve Board Abolition Act
            110th Congress: 2007-2008

            To abolish the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Federal reserve banks, to repeal the Federal Reserve Act, and for other purposes.

            Sponsor: Rep. Ronald Paul [R-TX14]

            This bill never became law. This bill was proposed in a previous session of Congress. Sessions of Congress last two years, and at the end of each session all proposed bills and resolutions that haven’t passed are cleared from the books. Members often reintroduce bills that did not come up for debate under a new number in the next session.


            Report this

            00

          • #
            wes george

            In Producer Aaron Russo’s must see Movie “AMERICA: Freedom to Fascism”, when interviewing Congressman Ron Paul, Aaron asks: “So the Federal Reserve is actually an illegal entity functioning within the Federal Government?” Ron Paul’s response: “It’s illegal. And what we have given to this so-called agency is the authority to counterfeit money.”

            Thanks for that lagniappe Kevin. Jo asked why the media has painted Ron Paul as on the fringe. Answer: They didn’t have to try very hard.

            Foreigners, almost entirely Jewish, control the United States Money supply.

            Saying Ron Paul should be the Republican nominee for president is like supporting Pauline Hansen as Liberal leader. Not only is it ideologically suspect, it’s just plain political suicide. In fact, the left leaning media would love Ron Paul for president because they would have a bottomless trove of nutjob conspiracy theories to spend the next 10 months deconstructing live on air interview evangelicals like Kevin and Crakar eager to reveal the plot.

            There have been assassination attempts on every President who attempted to eliminate these private National Banks.

            The only thing the media wants to “paint” is that Ron Paul’s weirdest ideas represents what the Tea Party and the Republicans mainstream really are all about. And that would be a catastrophe for both the conservative movement in the states and the nation as a whole.

            My Question to Kevin is: Aren’t you afraid?

            I mean if they’ll deep six the leader of the free world, what do they do to powerless punks who snitch on their secret cabal?


            Report this

            00

          • #
            Kevin Moore

            My Question to Kevin is: Aren’t you afraid?

            I mean if they’ll deep six the leader of the free world, what do they do to powerless punks who snitch on their secret cabal?

            Wes,

            That’s a risk you take if you have the courage to tell the truth. To know the truth and conceal it would be cowardice.I have a greater hope which goes beyond this life.

            “My friends,stop being afraid of those killing the body,and after these things are not able to do anything more.” Luke 12:4


            Report this

            00

          • #
            wes george

            Kevin, Don’t worry, mate, you’re in no danger because there is no secret cabal of Jews that control the global economy.

            If you and Crakar were rational, serious people you wouldn’t have begun your argument by soiling it with nonsensical conspiracy theory and xenophobic bile.

            There is a rational economic argument to be made for why we all might all be better off without central bank monetary controls. Likewise there is a strong argument for centralised shepherding of national currency value, interest rates, etc to ameliorate the business cycle of boom and bust.

            But neither of you has presented an honest economic argument.

            You should be ashamed of your comments here.


            Report this

            00

          • #
            Kevin Moore

            http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=412_1238532107

            The Federal Reserve – List of Jewish Private Bankers

            Napoleon said: When a government is dependent for money upon the bankers, they and not the government leaders control the nation. This is because the hand that gives is above the hand that takes. Financiers are without patriotism and without decency.

            Jews own and run the Federal Reserve Bank that the US government continually borrows from…and is in debt to.

            The Federal Reserve Bank is a consortium of 9 Jewish-owned & associated banks with the Rothschilds at the head:

            $1. Rothschild Banks of London and Berlin.

            $2. Lazard Brothers Banks of Paris.

            $3. Israel Moses Seif Banks of Italy.

            $4. Warburg Bank of Hamburg and Amsterdam.

            $5. Lehman Brothers of NY.

            $6. Kuhn, Loeb Bank of NY (Now Shearson American Express).

            $7. Goldman, Sachs of NY.

            $8. National Bank of Commerce NY/Morgan Guaranty Trust (J. P. Morgan Bank – Equitable Life – Levi P. Morton are principal shareholders).

            $9. Hanover Trust of NY (William and David Rockefeller & Chase National Bank NY are principal shareholders).

            TIME LINE OF THE JEW-OWNED FEDERAL RESERVE BANK

            1791-1811: Rothschilds’ First Bank of the United States.

            1816-1836: Rothschilds’ Second Bank of the United States.

            1837-1862: Free Banking Era – no formal Central Bank through the efforts of President Andrew Jackson.

            1862-1913: System of National Banks through the efforts of President Andrew Jackson.

            1913-Current: Federal Reserve Act effects a consortium of privately held Jewish & associated banks called the Federal Reserve Bank. The largest shareholders of the Federal Reserve Bank are the Rothschilds of London holding 57% of the stock which is not available for public trading.

            On May 23 1933, Congressman Louis T. McFadden brought impeachment charges against the members of the Federal Reserve Bank. A smear campaign against McFadden ensued and he was poisoned 3 years later.

            JEWS RUN THE BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE BANK

            Here are the Jews that control the government of America:

            1) Ben Shalom Bernanke: Chairman of the Board of Governors of Federal Reserve. Term ends 2020.

            2) Donald L. Kohn: Vice Chairman of the Board of Governors of Federal Reserve. Term ends 2016.

            3) Randall S. Kroszner: Member of Board of Governors of Federal Reserve.

            4) Frederic S. Mishkin: Member of Board of Governors of Federal Reserve. Term ends 2014.

            5) Alan Greenspan: Advisor to Board of Governors of Federal Reserve. Recent Chairman.

            HOW THE FEDERAL RESERVE BANK WORKS

            JEWISH BANKERS PRINT MONEY at heavily-armed & guarded Federal Reserve Bank buildings throughout the US. Then these Jewish bankers of the Federal Reserve Bank *loan* the money to the US government at *interest.*

            Since the Federal Reserve Bank is privately owned, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York (and all the others) is listed in Dun & Bradstreet. But according to Article I, Section 8 of the U. S. Constitution, only Congress has the right to issue money and regulate its value.

            Thus it is *illegal* for private interests to issue US money. But because influential Jews like Paul Warburg and Jacob Schiff bribed into enactment the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, the stockholders of the Federal Reserve Bank were to be kept a secret. Only recently have the Jewish stockholders of the Federal Reserve Bank come to light.

            International cooperation with the Jew-owned Federal Reserve Bank has been intense to coordinate currency. In 1985, officials from the JP Morgan Bank of NY met with the Credit Lyonnais Bank of France. They established the European Currency Unit Banking Association (ECUBA) to get world cooperation for a unified currency.

            In October 1987, the Association for the Monetary Union of Europe (AMUE), secretly met and recommended that the ECU (European Currency Unit) replace existing national currencies and that all European Central Banks be combined into one and issue the ECU as the official unified currency. This occurred in 1999 with the issuing of the Euro.

            The plan of the international Jewish banking cabal is to have only 3 central banks in the world: The Federal Reserve Bank, the European Central Bank, and the Central Bank of Japan. All of these banks are headed by the Rothschilds.

            And Next To Come Will Be The One World Government Run By Anti-Christian Jews.

            Related Articles

            Pick-Pocketing the People: The ruling elite planned the global economic downturn. They timed the implementation and orchestration while controlling media coverage of it.

            http://thomaspainereturns.blogspot.com/2009/03/pick-pocketing-people.html

            The Takeover of America, Republic Becomes Oligarchy: America has become an oligarchy (a government ruled by a powerful few) versus a Republic (a government limited by law) as the banking and Wall Street Masters of the Universe continue their tyranny.

            http://blogs.salon.com/0002255/2009/03/23.html

            P.S. Hey, we have to be slaves and not complain about it. Otherwise we’d be “anti-Semitic.” It’s “anti-Semitic” to notice what’s happening and who’s in charge, and it’s “anti-Semitic” to complain about it. The FEMA camps will be full of “anti-Semites” otherwise known as “terrorists.”

            By Rense.com


            Report this

            00

  • #
    belfast

    Yeah, sure.
    Use shotgun predictions and some birds are bound to fall.
    He is just anti-Israeli, and Israel’s determination to survive is what unites the Muslim states.
    How many wars of survival have they had to fight?


    Report this

    00

    • #
      Truthseeker

      His hit rate seems to be a lot higher than the predictions of the Global Climate Models …

      Without costing the taxpayer billions of dollars as well …


      Report this

      00

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      Use shotgun predictions and some birds are bound to fall.

      Some possibly, but not 90%, which is his hit rate in the predictions he made ten years ago. Show me another politician with as good a grasp of geopolitics as Paul – that is a challenge.

      And, he is not anti-Israel. He is a realist and a pragmatist, and he is just saying as it is. It might not agree with your world view, but the past ten years have shown that he is pretty much on the money.


      Report this

      00

    • #
      brc

      He isn’t anti-Israel at all. He’s anti-interventionist. Israel can handle itself quite well, if it needs to, and is allowed to.

      Don’t misrepresent positions.

      You forgot to put in some racism slurs if you’re going to put out false statements.


      Report this

      00

  • #
    Glen Michel

    Ron Paul’s prescience is not unique it seems.Make of it what you will but it is all underscored by U.S ineptness in its foreign policy.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Llew Jones

    Gold? I guess he means in a government regulated market.

    If you bought an ounce on 06/09/2011 for $1900 you would get about $1600 if you sold it now. That seems a bit riskier than the paper stuff over that time frame.


    Report this

    00

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      Yes Llew, I agree.

      The gold price varies wildly, and it is a brave person (or a lunatic) who hopes to make a fortune as a bullion trader.

      But when a currency collapses (as we will see with the Euro over the next couple of years), gold will continue retain its premium compared to the value of paper money. The value of gold may actually increase as people “flee to gold”, or it may decrease. But relative to paper, it will be quids ahead (pun intended). ;-)


      Report this

      00

      • #
        MadJak

        Agreed – in exceptional times, Gold is at least a partial store of wealth. It will allways be worth something.

        On the other hand, fiat currencies can only be a partial store of wealth if they’re made double ply, extra soft and absorbant. ;)


        Report this

        00

        • #
          Llew Jones

          MJ

          An aunt bought a house in 1960 in West Essendon (almost in the land of the mighty bombers) for the equivalent of $8,000 (4000 pounds) she left it to my two brothers and me in the 1980s. We sold it several years ago for $1,150,000.

          In 1960 the price of gold was USD $35 per ounce. To make gold look better let us assume the Aussie pound was worth 2 USD thus we could with the house purchase price have bought, 8000/35 = 229 ozs gold.

          If we sold that back on 06/09/2011 we would have got 229 x 1900 = $435,100 or about 40% of the price for a house sold after holding both for about the same period of time. From memory there was about an average rental income over say 20 years of $200 per week that’s an extra $208,000 pocket money.

          I’ve watched gold over the years and have never thought of it as an attrative investment. Back in the 1980s I had a farmer friend who bought about $20,000 of the stuff. He hung on to it looking for the promised spike, which never eventuated though there were small rises and falls and eventually sold it after five years with a few thousand dollar loss. Plus interest lost on the $20,000.

          My half educated guess is that it has run too hard over the last few years and is unlikely to have any great upwards movements in the short to medium term. But I’m not an investment adviser.

          My understanding is that its price these days, apart from the big speculators, is supported largely by the Indian and China jewellery makers and their markets.

          All this of course has nothing to do with a gold standard in which the price of gold is regulated.


          Report this

          00

          • #
            MadJak

            Llew,

            I agree that gold is a poor investment. It is a store of wealth because it will always be worth something. Interestingly the gold bugs I follow anticipate a correction in gold this year as the speculators leave before it climbs again.

            Of course, as we have governments buying their own bonds, it makes some fiat currencies a murky unpredictable roulette game. If that continues, then yes, gold would be an excellent investment. People have always moved to gold in the absence of any other store of value because it will always be worth something.

            Of course, reserve banks around the world can’t seem to get enough of the stuff these days.


            Report this

            00

          • #
            bananabender

            The gold price was artificially fixed at USD35 from 1933 to 1970. Once the gold price was was deregulated in 1970 the price skyrocketed to over USD600 by 1980.

            It was illegal to own gold (except jewellery and coins) in Australia until the late 1970s.


            Report this

            00

          • #
            Llew Jones

            I notice there are a few fervent believers in the mystical value of gold. I’m a skeptic and view gold as just a commodity like any other metal. Supply and demand regulates its price. If the jewellery makers in India think it is too highly priced and stop buying the price drops. That has happened in the past

            If you look at its price since it was deregulated you will find the following approximations on a Kitco chart listing its price in US dollars from 1975 to 2012:

            1975 to 1978 its low was about 100USD.

            1978 to 1982 it peaked at about 850USD (from chart that happened 79 to 80).

            About 1981 it dropped to 350USD.

            1982 to 1986 it peaked at 500USD with a low of about 300USD

            Then from 1990 to 2003 it nudged 400USD once with the lowest being about 250USD in 2001.

            It can be seen that the price of gold in the period 1975 to 2003 was up and down like a Yo yo or in more polite language all over the place like a mad dog’s shit, indicating that its price is regulated as any other commodity is by supply and demand.

            Since then its price has rocketed up. Why? At least 50% (some sources say up to 80%) of gold goes into making jewellery and while that demand stays strong the price will be relatively stable.

            The gold price leap since 2003 however has been mostly driven by investment demand mainly reflected in the increasing quantities of gold held by exchange-traded funds (ETFs), which physically hold the yellow metal. Since 2003, these ETFs have recorded steady inflows of investors’ money and almost no outflows, suggesting that it is mainly longer-term investors who are investing in the gold market That it seems is because of low real yields and the fear of the contraction of the world economy that will ensure that situation continues for some time. Especially while interest rates remain low those holding gold are not losing much in terms of returns.

            Here’s a bit of blasphemy from the NYT, put your hand over your eyes true believers:

            “But like paper money, gold is worth only what people believe it is worth, and because of this, it is sometimes referred to as the barbarous relic. You can’t eat gold. Its industrial uses are limited. If someone else doesn’t assign the same value to gold that you do, you are out of luck. For those who predict it will be valuable if society completely collapses, guns and canned goods might come in handier.

            Gold’s relative uselessness has helped spur talk of a bubble. The problem for regulators is whether this speculation is natural, prudent hedging or people irrationally piling ever more into a bubbly asset………”

            http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2011/08/30/how-to-deflate-a-gold-bubble-that-might-not-even-exist/


            Report this

            00

      • #
        Mark D.

        There are other factors with gold that make it tricky. Mining is a pretty stable source of new gold on the markets and barring strikes or disasters one can predict how much gold comes into the market from mining. However, another example “stored” gold (other than bullion) is gold jewelry that for months is being turned in for scrap at an astounding rate. Does anyone know just how much gold is reserved in the worldwide private jewelry collections? Does anyone know how much gold has come out of that reserve in the last year?

        Be wary of steep curves! If industrial or manufacturing uses do not pick up and if people do not start buying new jewelry (unlikely in poor economies and high prices). Supply of gold is likely to exceed demand. Of course there is the fear factor and people wanting to hedge against inflation.

        Buying at the peak of prices as a hedge against inflation is probably going to end badly.

        If the average person is really worried about surviving some up and coming bad times they would do well to by long term storage food, be sure they have access to water or store some (a lot), and then focus on what they can buy that will have significant value in their LOCAL market for barter.


        Report this

        00

    • #
      warcroft

      But if you bought it at $300 ten years ago. . .


      Report this

      00

      • #
        Llew Jones

        Here’s a gold price graph (1975 to 2012) to indicate that gold was a bit of a flat liner until it did the old hockey stick trick. Maybe this graph inspired Mann.

        Or in a stock traders lingo behaving like a penny dreadful stock.

        http://www.kitco.com/scripts/hist_charts/yearly_graphs.plx


        Report this

        00

        • #
          Llew Jones

          Notice that URL takes you to the right site but has an error msg. Click gold on Historical Charts then scroll down to Multi Year Gold and click 1975 to 2012.

          Seems Kitco don’t like their info gettng pasted up on skeptic’s sites.


          Report this

          00

          • #
            warcroft

            Do the same for Silver.


            Report this

            00

          • #
            Kevin Moore

            Who controls or Fixes the price of Gold -

            http://www.gwb.com.au/gwb/news/banking/rothchild.html

            The Rothschilds and the LBMA: The World’s Central Bank?

            Consider the Rothschild’s profound position of influence in the London Bullion Market Association and the transaction fees they are earning on each and every transaction of treasuries and 42 million ounces of gold transactions DAILY (recently reported volumes of physical, leased, forward sales). . The Rothschild business earns income from “transactions” (including transfers, calls, puts, trades, leases) and one can only begin to imagine the transaction costs associated with last reported trading of over 42 million ounces of gold per day through the LBMA (more than twice South Africa’s annual gold production).

            Also consider their involvement and influence over monetary policies exercised by the Bank of England and the Bank of France (and possibly the US Federal Reserve System) and in Geneva. Consider the world’s above ground gold reserves is roughly 120,000 tons — with roughly 40,000 tons or 33% held by central banks. How is the remaining “private” gold holdings distributed? Does anyone have such an account? Certainly not the World Gold Council and their statistics. If a single private owner held 5% of world’s remaining gold, would that not constitute majority share holdings? If any player could have accumulated, and could afford a 5% holding of the world’s gold supply over the last 200 years, it would be the Rothschilds. Could it be that the Rothschilds through their involvement in daily London gold trades are quietly amasing more of the precious metals in their private vaults, while the confidence game of the Central Banks tries desperately to avoid what Soros calls “unsustainable” fiat currency built on unsustainable debt? It was Mayer Amschel Rothschild who kept a secret subterranean vault full of gold beneath the House of Rothschild in Frankfurt in the 1770s (Morton, 1962) .

            While the world is led to believe that gold is a barbaric relic of the past, a huge confidence game is being played out in fiat currency markets, illustrated by the events in Asia. In order to maintain confidence in inherently unsustainable fiat currencies and unsustainable debt, confidence in gold must be depressed, given that it is the only alternative store of value. The increasing volume of gold transacted through LBMA reflects the crescendo this confidence game has reached. These large volumes also suggest that gold is trading as currency and not as a barbaric commodity, as the press is apt to suggest. Could it be that the LBMA is being used as a testing ground for the establishment of a new gold-backed world currency system? If so, the Rothschilds are in a position of enormous influence over such a genesis process…”


            Report this

            00

    • #
      MadJak

      Llew – of course if you bought gold in 2001 when it was under $300USD/ounce, that would be a different story.

      I do wonder what Gordon Brown has to say about his decision to Dump the UK Gold on the market in the late 90s. I understand it was called the Brown bottom.

      A bit of a miscalculation, maybe?

      Of course, we don’t have real journos in existence any more to actually find this out. Shame really.


      Report this

      00

    • #
      brc

      Gold isn’t an investment any more than cash is an investment. The difference is that Gold can’t be devalued by a particular central bank deciding to print up more of it. The only reason gold goes up is because the bits of paper in your wallet lose value.

      Gold is a store of value, a safe place to put your wealth. It is not a debt to anyone, and is controlled by no government. If you stop comparing it to speculative investments, and start comparing it to other stores of wealth, then it starts to make sense.


      Report this

      00

    • #
      Crakar24

      Hi Llew,

      Firstly to bad you dont live closer to the mighty cats….but thats another story for another time.

      In regards to Paul and gold its not quiet like that, remember it is a GOLD STANDARD. In other words rather than using fiat money that has no true value the money you use is refered back to the price of gold so your money has real value.

      When banks lend you money they can leverage up to 100 times the money they actually have because as i said it has no value they just create it out of thin air however all inter banking transactions (thats when banks lend money from each other ect) it is based on the GOLD STANDARD now why do you think they do that?


      Report this

      00

      • #
        Llew Jones

        I’m much more concerned about whether the next US president is a warmist or a thorough going CAGW skeptic. Paul would be OK on that score. Obama is certainly suspect and may do a Gillard if he gets re elected. That would be a worry.

        On the Gold Standard thing not one country in the world is on it now which probably indicates that it has its drawbacks. I think the Poms tried to re-establish it after dropping it to finance WW1 but it did not work out as after the war a more strongly unionised work force meant the Brits couldn’t compete with exporters from cheap labour countries. Amongst other consequent negatives unemployment and interest rates skyrocketed and they were forced off their attempt at restoring the GS.

        It seems that if a nation is on a fair dinkum GS then the only way a nation can grow its money supply and produce economic growth is by selling exports to build up gold reserves. Who would be pinching all the gold from other nations today. How about China? Maybe that is one reason the US is in trouble but surely it would be in even more strife if China was getting paid in US gold and the US couldn’t print any of the paper stuff. Maybe that’s why there is not one country agitating to get back on it?

        Interesting concept but probably not a suitable proposition in a globalised world with its rapidly expanding population so I guess I’d settle for fiat money if the governments would only balance their budgets.

        On a more serious note I don’t mind the Cats but hate Collingwood and Carlton and Hawthorn is not much behind them.


        Report this

        00

  • #
    wes george

    I am uncomfortable with his foreign policy, with the isolationist view.

    So am I.

    btw, how’s your Mandarin?


    Report this

    00

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      My Mandarin is excellent. It is those Chinese fellow who can’t understand it. :-)

      Actually, I agree. He is isolationist, but perhaps that is what America needs after a period of adventurism. Of more concern to me is that he is a Creationist, which does not bode well for investment in science.


      Report this

      00

      • #

        I too don’t like the isolationism nor creationism but as far as “investment” in science is concerned, a government cannot invest. All a government can do is transfer wealth from those who created it to those who did not. They do it by using force rather than trading value for value. Thus even if the government succeeds in choosing a winner, it is the wrong thing to do. It represents the government violating individual rights thereby doing the thing that it is supposed to prevent.

        It would actually be a good thing if the government got out of the business of “investing” in science. We just might be able to get back to doing some real science for a change.


        Report this

        00

        • #
          Rereke Whakaaro

          That’s a good point. And you are right to point out that I am getting lax with my choice of words – my bad.


          Report this

          00

        • #
          Lawrie

          Lionell,

          As usual you are correct. It is only government science that has given us the great scam. It is government science that has debased the BoM and the CSIRO. When industry fund research they do so to solve a problem or create a better widget. They don’t fund creation of a problem. I do sometimes wonder at pharmaceutical coys who make a chemical then try and find a use for it by convincing the public that it’s necessary for their longevity.

          The old CSIRO was funded by government but they spent their time making better strains of wheat or developing new products and procedures.


          Report this

          00

        • #
          Manfred

          The last 25 years have in fact been a spectacular illustration of successful “investment” by successive, elected governments and their legions of bureaucrats in the “science” of AGW. It has yielded them unprecedented control and taxation revenue, and it has generated a new primitivising theology. It is a superb example of “identifying” a “problem” and “providing a solution” in one breath. The resultant melange may be unassailable.


          Report this

          00

      • #
        Oblong

        “…which does not bode well for investment in science.”

        That presumes it’s the government’s business to “invest” in science.


        Report this

        00

      • #
        Louis Hissink

        Rereke,

        Not really – what we recognise as “science” is heavily biased to our western worldview that is Christian based. The distinction between a creationist and evolutionist is one of chronological time – a short versus a long time between Creation (short version) and The Big Bang followed, logically, by evolution, to the present. A belief or disbelief in Creation does not affect one’s use of the scientific method until that method encroaches on areas concerning religion, and then, unsurprisingly, the scientific method can’t anyway, because the historical past is not amenable to scientific testing.

        This leads to the distinction between those who practice the scientific method, and those who do science, and the difference is stark. Those who do science are no different to Creationists – both arre guided by dogmas that cannot be subject to the scientific method by definition.

        So Ron Paul does not frighten me. What does are the silly comments criticising him from the fog of incomprehension.


        Report this

        00

    • #
      wes george

      You’re scaring the crap out me, Rereke. I forgot about that!

      If Ron Paul is still a creationist and an isolationist that kind of outweighs much of his other clearly good ideas. Btw, most of Paul’s good ideas are not unique to him, other candidates are running on similar ideas.

      My own experience with Ron Paul followers in the states years ago is that they were a rag-tag bunch of outcasts prone to whacko ideas, such as 911 Trutherism. (I checked just now and Ron Paul is not a truther, but I clearly remember many of his followers in Austin, Texas were.) They were all pretty much “true believer” types similar in modus operandi to the Warmists we deal with here, although they didn’t have a simple one-line dogma like AGW to rally around. They were more like a Star Wars convention. A lot of intellectual diversity, but the one thing they had in common was they all saw whatever they wanted in Ron Paul’s flag.

      Since the 1990′s I gather Ron Paul has toned down a lot of his rhetoric and apparently gone mainstream. Not having travelled to the states recently I can’t say how his entourage is travelling today. But I would submit to you from the distance shores of Australia that Ron Paul looks a lot less eccentric than he does up close.

      For instance, I found this snippet about illegal immigration in the US in, like, two minutes of searching:

      “Every time you think about this toughness on the border and ID cards and real IDs, think it’s a penalty against the American people too. I think this fence business is designed and may well be used against us and keep us in. In economic turmoil, the people want to leave with their capital and there’s capital controls and there’s people controls. Every time you think about the fence being used to keep all those bad people out, think about the fences being used against us, keeping us in.”

      –Ron Paul, in a TV debate, Sept 7, 2011

      Yeah, right, civil control of immigration is just like the Iron Curtain. Godwin’s law, yadda, yadda…

      It’s like a Lee Rhiannon rant.


      Report this

      00

      • #
        brc

        Take a look at the capital and tax controls the US government imposes on US citizens.

        Australia is like a beacon of free capital movements in comparison.

        Look at it in that view and realise what he is talking about. I don’t think he literally means keeping people in the country ala Berlin Wall.

        As for the creationist ideas – that worries me as well. But I would balance that in the point that he wants to reduce the amount of control over education, not increase it. If there is much less executive control, then it doesn’t matter what nutty ideas a president has.

        As for the followers – all outcasts pick up the weirdo crowd first (see: Pauline Hanson). It’s their ability to control these weirdos that decides whether they make it into the mainstream or not. I personally thought that after 2008 he had run his race but I am surprised to see that this time he has a lot more mainstream support. Getting nearly 25% of votes in NH means it’s a much bigger band of people than the nutters, truthers and muttering conspiracy theorists.


        Report this

        00

  • #

    Re China will sell arms to Arab nations.

    I find the thoughts expressed in non western media to be enlightening -

    http://www.pakalertpress.com/2011/12/22/how-far-is-world-war-iii/

    “…On Friday, December 16, 2011, Lieutenant General Sergey Karakev, commander of Russian missile troops, has stated that the Russian nuclear missiles can be reprogrammed and promptly targeted at any destination. This includes the missile sites set up in Europe by the Americans. On the other hand, Professor Chossudovsky wrote on December 4, 2011: “The launching of an outright war using nuclear warheads against Iran has been on the active drawing board of the Pentagon since 2005. If such a war were to be launched, the entire Middle East and Central Asian region would flare up. Humanity would be precipitated in World War III scenario.”

    It may be recalled that it was in May 2011, that the Chinese authorities had stated that an attack on Pakistan will be construed as an attack on China. An unprovoked and deliberate attack killing 24 Pakistani soldiers by US-Nato forces has led to unprecedented public protest resulting in a suspension of all military and other supplies to their troops in Afghanistan. It was reported on December 17 on a website that the US soldiers in Afghanistan are no longer getting fried chicken owing to this suspension! As time passes, the effects of the suspension of supplies will become more significant. A number of oil tankers carrying oil to troops in Afghanistan have been attacked and burnt in Pakistan and the public wants all American saboteurs, i.e. CIA agents and Blackwater mercenaries, out of this country. It also wants an end to all US bases on Pakistani soil.

    The elite is intent on setting up a ‘one world government’ under its control through a world war. The ‘one world government’ will be a tyranny of a kind never seen before in the world….”


    Report this

    00

  • #
    unhappy constiuent

    I didn’t see anything that remarkable in his predictions, anyone in his position with access to good analysts and information within Government should have been able to see most of that coming. In my opinion his biggest obstacle to the nomination and election, is that he’s a bit of a rightwing ideologue and either from the right or left ideologues tend to be incapable of seeing anything outside their beliefs and can be at best difficult to work with and at worst downright dangerous.


    Report this

    00

    • #
      Mark D.

      either from the right or left ideologues tend to be incapable of seeing anything outside their beliefs and can be at best difficult to work with and at worst downright dangerous.

      hmm where have I heard this before…….from the British around 1776?


      Report this

      00

  • #
    tom

    Dr. Paul is a non-interventionist, not an isolationist. The distinction is very important. “isolationist” has been a slur since the term was coined.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Paul R

    They™ must be a little bit worried about having a “conspiracy theorist” gain such a large amount of support. Google Ron Paul and you will see almost 1 billion returns as opposed to Mitt’s 46 million or so.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    D Bonson

    Ron Paul’s policy is not isolationist, it is non-interventionist.

    The mainstream media are the ones labeling him an “isolationist” and we all know that the mainstream media do not have any hidden agendas, much like their “unbiased” reporting of climate related stories.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    crosspatch

    He’s still a nut.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    warcroft

    Off topic but. . .

    Rising carbon dioxide levels could turn fish into drunken daredevils.

    http://io9.com/5876263/rising-carbon-dioxide-levels-could-turn-fish-into-drunken-daredevils


    Report this

    00

    • #
      Bruce of Newcastle

      I for one would welcome our new piscine masters except the lizards would complain.

      Also there are now more charging points in the UK than there are electric vehicles to use them. So I welcome our new charge point masters also, just in case.


      Report this

      00

  • #
    wes george

    Another thing about Ron Paul that could be a plus or a negative depending on how you look at it, but would never be tolerated by our parliamentary system, is that he basically has no party loyalty. The Republicans greatest fear is that he might run as a third party spoiler candidate and thus destroy any chance for them to win the election in November 2012.

    Ben Alder, a slimy journolister reports…

    When I asked Paul’s campaign manager Jesse Benton on Saturday night if Paul would endorse the Republican nominee, Benton said, “That’s not a definite. We’ll have to have a conversation about that. We’re open to a discussion. It depends on who the nominee is and it depends what they say.”

    If that’s more than just a bargaining position, it tantamount to political treachery. But it rings true to Paul’s whole identity, which is that he’s not a team player.

    The fact is that the Republicans are odds on for losing the Presidential election in 2012. If Paul gets the nomination, the Republican have no more chance of winning the election than hell freezing over.

    The way the US electoral college is so aligned demographically is that Obama will probably win. What you need to win a presidential election is NOT popular votes, but 270 electoral votes and the Democrats already have the so-called blue states, those with huge urban populations, in their pocket. Electoral votes are awarded proportionally with population. So if you carry left-leaning big states like California, MIchigan and New York, the Republicans can win the rest of the country and even the popular vote and still lose!

    Right now Obama has a hard-core base of 18 states that all fell to the Democrats in the last 5 election, plus the District of Colombia, which gives him about 245 electoral votes, only about 25 shy of what he needs to win and that’s before he even begins to cut lose his billion dollar Democrat war machine loose on the Republicans who are under-funded and under-organised, if highly motivated.

    So Obama doesn’t even have to fight in places like Texas, Kansas, Wyoming, the Dakotas or Oklahoma, the deep south or a dozen other red-states. Nor does he have to worry much about swing-states like Florida with its 27 electoral votes. Rumour is he’s going to spend over $500 million dollars in just five wobbling blue states, New Mexico, Nevada, Ohio, New Hampshire and Iowa which if he carries all five will give him 37 electoral votes on top of the 245 he already has in his pocket. More than he needs.

    Obama has all the tactical options on his side, picking and choosing his battles, while the Republicans have to wage a 100% spot on battle every where at once, taking all the red states and upsetting a whole slice of the blues their way. It looks like an impossible task, particular with the country so irrationally entrenched along partisan lines. Of course, anything could happen. Obama is the weakest President since Carter, but Ron Paul isn’t Reagan and neither is Mitt Romney. Plus, the latest leading US economic indicators point towards solid growth this year, which Obama will triumph as the success of his socialist crony capitalist approach come November.


    Report this

    00

    • #
      brc

      It’s a fair analysis but leaves out the wildcard – which is turnout. I would think it’s fair to say that Obama’s side will have a lot of trouble getting the vote out. While he got a lot of people out voting in 2008, I think the mediocre support will mean a lot of dem-voters who aren’t hardcore will stay at home.

      I think the repub nomination has plenty of time left to run before getting into the hardcore campaigning. November seems close but it’s a lot of media cycles away. What is currently said and done right now will be almost completely forgotten by the time the election comes.

      I also don’t think Ron Paul has got what it takes, but he does attract a lot of younger dem-voters which would be interesting in places like California. I would like to see it happen just for the popcorn potential. Whether Obama returns or not I think will ultimately mean very little as the damage looks too far gone to me.


      Report this

      00

      • #
        Rereke Whakaaro

        Wes, and brc,

        Hat tip to you both.

        There is another wild card though, which may be significant. Wes, you say, ” … the latest leading US economic indicators point towards solid growth this year …”, and you may be right.

        But the sense I have is that many of these indicators are predicated on the stimulus packages continuing though 2012, and are based on hype, and wishful thinking and not on solid market fundamentals.

        I question how long the US feels it can keep on taxing the productive sector in order to bump start those parts of the economy that are terminally moribund. My economist friends are even starting to mention “deflation” in quiet terms, and with a lower-case “d”, and only in private, but they are mentioning it. Even twelve months ago, that would not have happened.


        Report this

        00

    • #
      Mark D.

      All good points. Add to them these observations:

      The Tea Party states-those that turned out big anti-democrat results in a number of traditionally blue states. Both parties would like everyone to think that Tea Party types and sentiments are no longer a force. I don’t believe this to be true. Instead they are quietly watching and waiting to see what is coming next. The “center” States are well aware of the population areas (East and Left coasts) dictating which politicians they’ll have to live with and it seems to me these are the same states that have seen the most successful Tea Party operations.

      It may appear that Ron Paul is guilty of “political treachery” but in US politics nominating procedures have usually been that way. Our flavor of Democracy probably depends on it. Look at what Lincoln and his supporters managed to do to secure his nomination. Much of the Republican party platform will be firmed up during the nominating convention. A candidate like Paul will have opportunity to leverage his popularity to get “planks” in the platform. He could trade for consideration for some kind of cabinet position, or even added to someone’s Vice President list.

      You are right though, it will be a tough race to beat Obama. The party needs to be particularly careful to build a strong platform, select the best candidate, and run a flawless campaign.

      I have a special place in my heart on the “recent news on the economy”. I told my wife and kids to watch carefully how the news stories change on the economy. That was 6 months or more ago and then I predicted that right around the New Year the stories would begin to turn positive. Care to guess when I heard my first “good news” since then care to guess if I have heard any “bad news” since Jan. 1? This has everything to do with political timing and little to do with real positive movement in our economy.

      So the propaganda machine is on full throttle. There will be a “correct spin” on almost any story that could mess things up for Obama. There will also be a “correct spin” on ANYTHING the Republicans say or do.

      That is true political treachery……


      Report this

      00

  • #
    Mike

    If you understand how credit works it becomes obvious. The leaders needed something to offset the recession after the internet bubble burst. They needed people to spend money so that business would produce things and therefore people would have jobs. Instead, of reducing taxes and getting rid of rules and regulations they decided to encourage everyone to get into debt. That can only ever go so far.

    It will happen here too. The oz housing bubble has burst.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    bananabender

    What would happen if Ron Paul’s ideas were implemented?

    -Iran and Russia would control 90% of the world’s conventional oil within a decade.

    -Israel would cease to exist.

    -Afghanistan would be carved up by Iran, Russia, China and Pakistan.

    -An arms race would occur between China, Japan, India, Taiwan.

    -South Korea would be at risk of invasion by North Korea.

    -Australia would be totally defenceless.

    -The US bankers and financiers would be totally deregulated resulting in even more extreme boom and bust scenarios.


    Report this

    00

    • #
      brc

      What a stupid thing to post.

      Being non-interventionist doesn’t mean not defending countries like Australia.

      It means stopping picking fights and wasting money on military adventures.

      What will happen if Ron Paul isn’t voted in (which is most likely):
      - a complete dollar collapse at some point
      - a severe downgrade of American credit rating

      The thing is, it’s all very well to say that the USA should still be the worlds police force but the plain simple fact is that they can’t afford it anymore. So they will have to pull back from those places at some point, either by presidential decision or bankruptcy. The big kerfuffle about extending the credit limit only bought them a year or so, then the same problem comes up all over again. All the proposed spending cuts are far off into the future and aren’t even in the ballpark of what needs to be done.

      Israel can defend itself just fine if need be. Has done in the past, will do so in the future. All it needs is access to American military hardware, which I don’t think anyone is planning on stopping.


      Report this

      00

      • #
        bananabender

        The US is not going to go broke, neither is Spain, Greece, Italy or anywhere else. The idea that they will is based on a ludicrous idea of economics that equates household savings to national economies. Argentina is the only first world country that has ever had a sustained substantial drop in prosperity – they have only managed that by a total refusal to make any meaningful reforms over the past 50 years.


        Report this

        00

        • #

          I agree, they are not going broke. They are already broke.

          They, including the US, have spent themselves into oblivion. The national mortgages will soon come due and payable. We have nothing left to use as payment except more debt based upon worthless pieces of paper ironically called “money”.


          Report this

          00

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      Bananabender, I usually enjoy reading your comments, but this one … ? Not so much …

      -Iran and Russia would control 90% of the world’s conventional oil within a decade.

      I am not sure how you define “conventional oil”. But given the vast untapped oil reserves in southern Russia, we are probably already at the 90% mark. It is still there because of the cost transporting it eastwards. That problem is currently being solved by the construction of a pipeline to Vladivostok, with a spur pipeline into northern China.

      -Israel would cease to exist.

      Which implies that it currently only exists “at the pleasure” of the United States Executive. I find that hard to believe.

      -Afghanistan would be carved up by Iran, Russia, China and Pakistan.

      Which is going to happen anyway, it is only a matter of time. Although I would leave Russia out of the equation. Russia has become geographically and geopolitically isolated from Afghanistan.

      -An arms race would occur between China, Japan, India, Taiwan.

      Which is going to happen anyway, over the rich submarine reserves in the South China Sea. The US today is doing little to discourage the current posturing between China and India, because they can’t.

      -South Korea would be at risk of invasion by North Korea.

      And has had that risk since the 1950′s. Did you know that North Korea still considers itself to be at war with South Korea?

      -Australia would be totally defenceless.

      No change there then. With the amount of coastline per capita of people ready, trained and willing to defend it, it has never been defensible.

      -The US bankers and financiers would be totally deregulated resulting in even more extreme boom and bust scenarios.

      There, and Americans like to refer to it as a “free market” economy.

      But we get the message – you don’t think much of Ron Paul. Fair enough.


      Report this

      00

  • #
    JuergS

    Thank you Jo for supporting Ron Paul! He really deserves it.

    Concerning the next years a speech of retired general Wesley Clark in 2007 might be helpful.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ha1rEhovONU

    Listen to him and then look what is happening in Syria.

    See also

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S0_pTTfsB4k
    and
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A7D1VxNY1mE

    Greetings from Switzerland


    Report this

    00

    • #
      wes george

      ~~~~groan~~~~

      Here’s my story board for a youtube campaign ad…cue ominously sinister music….

      Barrack… Hussein… Obama… should never have been elected because his past revealed who he is.

      A Loser.

      He hung out at a church where “his spiritual advisor” preached anti-American hate, preached AIDS was a government plot and tolerated 911 truthers. Obama forced his young daughters to sit through this indoctrination during their most impressionable years and when he was called to answer for it said he never really listened to the sermons…

      Uh huh…

      Obama befriended an unrepentant American terrorist who killed a cop…in cold blood… and wrote a book with him, then he stole his first nomination to a seat in Congress through a dirty trick. That’s enough to know he’s unfit for public office.

      Ron… Paul…should never be elected president because his past reveals who he is.

      A Weirdo.

      He hung out at a church in Texas where he befriended racists, including taking political donation from a white suprematist and he’s a proud creationist. Paul used demagoguery about an AIDS conspiracy, this time started by the UN and tolerated 911 truthers. He published the “RON PAUL SURVIVAL NEWSLETTER” which earned him a large income while canvasing all sorts of weird ideas. When Paul was finally called out answer for it he said he never really read his own newsletter.

      Riiiight…

      That’s enough to make him unfit for public office. It doesn’t matter that his campaign platform also has inspiring bits.

      Barrack Obama and Ron Paul. Different generation, Different ideology. Cut from the same cloth.

      —spoken by Daniel Slug, this ad has been approved by the Mitt Romney for President Political Action Committee


      Report this

      00

  • #

    Ron Paul is an old man, who would simply look tired on the world stage, and encourage our enemies by that image alone. Newt Gingrich is also old, in a different sense: a man of the failed, all-too-recent past (although his much-ballyhooed intelligence somehow fails to inform him of this). Romney will beat Obama handily, if the Republicans can all get behind him soon (Obama will not win the states he barely won in 2008, when independents voted for him, because they won’t do so again). If Obama wins re-election, it will only be because the conservative Republicans prefer to lose, rather than compromise any of their beliefs (which the independents, critical to the Republicans’ chances, don’t share). Bush should not have been re-elected, but he was, so that the 2008 election was really all about revenge against him (the real “change” everyone was voting for then, almost mindlessly). Obama should not be re-elected either, and if he is, it will only weaken the US that much more, and that much more quickly. It is all too likely to make little difference to the next generation or two, however, since the world seems determined to go into a third World War before too long, say before the middle of the 21st century (perhaps even as the Baby Boomer generation — my generation — passes from the scene). There is too much false dogma dragging down human progress now, especially in science, as well illustrated in (but by no means limited to) the climate debates.


    Report this

    00

    • #
      banz

      Interesting comment about RP looking tired. He is the one candidate who would actually bring significant change to the USA. He is the one candidate that has caught the attention of the younger generation in the USA. He receives RECORD levels of donations from ex vets.

      Also an interesting comment “encourage our enemies”, what enemies? Would they be the middle easterners? You create your own enemies as a general rule, certainly this applies to the USA.

      Who are these other republican conservatives running for nominee? I just don’t see any other than Ron Paul. Heres the thing, STOP listening to what people SAY, and WATCH what they DO. The only conservative is Dr Paul. The rest of them are clones, their voting records do not support a conservative view, however they will tell you exactly what you want to hear :)

      Hell, Romney is ex Goldman Sachs, Like Turnbull and others, they are a spreading disease :)
      Gingrich is just plain immoral, I would say the same for Santorum, but they will tell you what YOU WANT TO HEAR :)

      They don’t represent change, the represent the status quo, we all know how well thats been working the last 30 years :) .

      Romney will not beat Obama, Obama will serve 3 or 4 terms, they have their dictator, there are not 2 parties, their is only 1 party with 2 heads, the game is over, our turn will come next.


      Report this

      00

      • #
        Ripper

        Yep. Ron Paul is the only candidate that doesn’t talk in “sound bites” .

        Of interest to me is the fact that there is 100x more paper gold (and Silver) in the world than physical.

        I would advise everyone to allocate ~ 10% or more of there savings to physical gold or silver and take posession of it.
        It will be one of the few ways to recapitalize when (not if) the fiat system crashes . Everyone who had their wealth in Zimbabwe dollars lost all of it.


        Report this

        00

  • #
    MadJak

    My current thinking on the GFC/greater depression/recession.

    As with the last economic depression, consumers that stop consuming become an economic deadweight. If production outstrips demand, prices fall – as we are seeing with some manufacturers actually making a loss per unit produced. Of course, in China one of the main concerns is keeping people employed over and above profit margins.

    Unless peoples debt levels diminish to a reasonable level and consumers start consuming again – with money they have rather than money they might have one day – the manufacturers will need something else to produce to prevent employment levels plummeting. Historically this has been armaments.

    I think the reason many depressions are ended with wars is because it wipes out consumers who aren’t consuming, and ensures the manufacturers are able to continue manufacturing – i.e. one part of the supply demand equation – the consumers- is artificially reduced while the other side – supply – is maintained to at least some level. This clears the deck for the next cycle.

    Is this an overly simplistic ramble? Probably.


    Report this

    00

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      … the manufacturers will need something else to produce to prevent employment levels plummeting. Historically this has been armaments.

      Governments need to borrow money in order to fight a war.

      Yes, building armaments does stimulate the economy, and yes, it does eventually result in full employment, and yes, I does provide the means for people to get themselves out of personal debt.

      But all it really does (apart from reducing the population somewhat, and depleting the resources of the country somewhat) is to transfer personal debt into national debt, which is just a way of redistributing the debt across to whole (now reduced) population.

      It is only ever has a short-term affect.


      Report this

      00

      • #
        wes george

        Rereke and MadJak,

        I’ve been looking into the US economic situation recently and I don’t think they are counting on more stimulus packages but continued political deadlock. Most economists and financial types seem to be punting on an Obama victory with the Republicans taking control of both the house and the senate, thus Obama’s last four years are going to be spent vetoing bills rather than signing them. Nothing is going to get done. Counterintuitively, this is just fine for the business climate. Government deadlocks mean econo-political certainty.

        US household debt has fallen to levels not seen since 1995. Ironically, government and personal debt is NOT the problem with the US economy. That’s not to say that gov debt was spent wisely at all or that the US is not squandering its long term future, unless things turn around. But it is to say the debt in and of itself is about as catastrophic as CO2 is to the climate. Debt, after all, is often plant fertiliser as they say. ;-)

        Here’s why I think a new US economic upswing has already begun:

        1. Retail sales are strongly positive and rising and have been since late 2009, moreover they have recently past the levels they were at before the 2008 GFC, meaning they are breaking out on the upside after the worse crash since the 1980′s. The US, like Australia, is primarily driven by consumer spending and confidence.

        2. Core Capital Goods Orders have also come all the way back after the 2008 GFC collapse. Capital goods ordered are a leading indicator of where millions of businesses are planning to be later in the year. Seems they’re mostly thinking about ramping up sales.

        3. If you look at the “MSCI world total return with net dividends” there’s a crash that occurred starting in July 2011 even while corporate revenues and earnings are strongly growing. This dissonance was caused by all the dour news in the second half of last year–waiting for the other shoe to fall in the EU, Obama’s economic and political ineptitude, Arab Spring and Iranian threats to oil supplies and thus prices, continued under-employment in the US combined with the unknowns of a Presidential election year. But now that bearishness is fading as all those issues are, if not resolving themselves, don’t seem to be going to explode. And what’s left is the obvious, growing revenues and earning.

        4. S&P 500 PE ratios are the lowest since 1990. But earnings and revenue growth are strong. Same as above. Irrational unexuberance.

        5. Interest rates are in most developed nations near historic low. Stock dividend yields are often now higher than yields on 10-treasury notes. Combined with depressed equity values both growth and income seeking investors will be attracted to the markets. A rise in equity value means business has more capital to expand or increase productivity without borrowing.

        6. The EU isn’t going to collapse catastrophically as many investors feared last year. Slow decline, sure, but that can be dealt with. There are also signs that they might slowly be learning from past mistakes and over the next decade work things out. EU will be the sick man on the block for years to come, but the crisis has been largely adverted.

        7. US household debt has fallen to levels not seen since 1995. Again the debt boogie boogie man is highly overrated.

        8. US government debt while a huge political liability actually has little effect on the economy, unless Obama could raise taxes and he can’t. There are all sorts of good reason why US debt is too high and a total waste, but it won’t dramatically effect prospects for economic growth in the private economy. Furthermore, if the Republicans gained control of the government, the debt might be dealt with.

        9. Employment is a laggin indicator. We might expect higher unemployment levels going forward as Obama knocked people out of the job market permanently and then provided incentives to stay out.

        10. Note that a weak US dollar is great for US exports.

        11. I didn’t mention the hi-tech new oil and gas boom that is trying to get off the ground in the US and Canada is providing more economic activity, jobs and ultimately cheaper energy which will feed into growth as well.

        Conclusion…. By Nov 2012 the US economy and consumer confidence will be roaring back just in time for the only poll that counts.


        Report this

        00

        • #
          MadJak

          Hi Wes,

          Thanks for that synopsis – I agree that it would appear that the american economy is getting tired of being depressed. The concerns I have remain though, namely:

          1) The US debt levels have effectively been nationalised. The US national debt levels are at far too high a level for my liking. Yes, people have been paying down debt (as has been the case everywhere else), and this is a good thing. The concerns I have is whether the debt levels will be down low enough in time to stimulate a real upturn and when will the US Govt really make headway with it’s $15t debt.

          2) The US may be starting to see the end of the tunnel, but to a casual uninformed observer, could that light be one of the following trains?:
          a) The EU meltdown
          b) The chinese Real Estate bubble popping

          I hate to be the negative one (I prefer to be a cynic), but I would hate to see the average joe get up from the GFC kick in the guts to get another thumping.

          My concern is timing. Each one of these issues in themselves is surmountable, but for all three to be occurring in such quick succession has got me (and I think many other consumers) very concerned.

          Until I see real solutions to these very real problems (and no – having another EU talkfest or Julia Guilleard trying to talk economics ain’t conna cut it), my confidence isn’t going to come back.

          On this topic, I most sincerely hope I am wrong, I might add.


          Report this

          00

        • #
          banz

          No offence, but really, where does one start.

          There already is qe3, how on earth do you think Bernanke can guarantee interest rates to remain low till 2013, he is BUYING US bonds & treasuries, he is providing swap lines with Europe so there reserve and investment banks can buy european sovereign debt.

          Consumption is not production, thats not how you increase GDP, they will increase China’s GDP though :)

          Debt is what creates the bubbles, leverage, cheap rates, bail outs ensure there is NO RISK so what the hell, do what you want :)

          Retail investors are fleeing the markets, over 100 billion left the US alone last year, its bots trading bots, and if you are not inside, then you are outside ;) good luck with that. Don’t worry, they want your money in the markets, so they can take it. Running out of choices where to put it with interest rates so low…funny that.

          A weak US dollar is good for exports, sure, now tell the folks here why the balance of payments is still in deficit between 40 – 50 billion dollars a month.

          The US debt cant be dealt with, loo at social security and medicaid, its going to get worse, much worse.

          BTW, what about the 47 million on food stamps?

          What about the REAL unemployment rate of 11.4% and getting worse?

          Household debt reduction? Heard of foreclosure :)

          Retail sales rising, but margin collapsing, watch it get worse, look at sears.

          Stop reading the propaganda.


          Report this

          00

  • #
    John from France

    Thanks for the uncluttered view.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Rereke Whakaaro

    … the world seems determined to go into a third World War before too long …

    What makes you think that we are not already there?

    It does not have to be a ‘hot’ war, to be a war. It can be a war of ideas – a propaganda war – or it can be a war over the control of resources – an economic war – or any number of other “non-violent” actions.

    But if the end game is the subjugation of a people, or a class of people, and a removal of personal freedoms, then it is a war none the less.

    I was at a conference in 2010 where one of the speakers said, “When the Berlin wall came down, and the Communists escaped, … “. You see, it is all a matter of perspective.


    Report this

    00

    • #
      Robert of Ottawa

      It is WWIV. The third one was the “cold” war which was a series of proxy “hot” wars around the world.

      WWIV is, in fact 1400 years old, an ongoing slog that the West never seems to pay enough attention too, and the enemy are slowly chipping away.


      Report this

      00

  • #
    Rereke Whakaaro

    My #20 was in response to Harry Dale Huffman at #17.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    pat

    there is so much mis/disinfo on Ron Paul. am amused when those who claim to be conservatives, incl many in the media, people who endlessly criticise big govt and reckless deficit spending, come out for Romney! u have to laugh.

    Romney headed the private equity firm, Bain Capital (in which he is still invested) which is heavily contributing to his campaign. Bain received Govt bailouts amounting to $50m. Reuters also reported recently that a steel company taken over by Bain Capital went bankrupt and received another big handout from the government. After the Missouri mill’s approximately 750 employees were fired, a federal insurance agency had to bail out its underfunded pension plan to the tune of almost $45 million. Romney also boasted in 2005 that Massachusetts was “the first and only state to set CO2 emissions limits on power plants.”

    Not only does Romney have the TV stations backing him, Bain owns Clear Channel, with 850 radio stations across the US, including mostly-Romney-loving syndicated talk show hosts like Limbaugh, Savage, Hannity, Beck. TV and print have made Romney a household name, while virtually irgnoring Ron Paul, proving they love big-spending govt as much as the next debt-addicted fool. yet…

    9 Jan: CBS: Poll: Among GOP hopefuls, Romney fares best against Obama
    CBS News Poll analysis by the CBS News Polling Unit: Sarah Dutton, Jennifer De Pinto, Fred Backus and Anthony Salvanto.
    Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney holds a two-point lead against President Obama in a potential general election matchup, according to a new CBS News poll.
    The survey found that Romney is the only GOP candidate to hold a lead over the president in a hypothetical head-to-head matchup, though Texas Rep. Ron Paul trails by just one point.
    ***Both Romney’s lead over Mr. Obama – 47 percent to 45 percent – and Mr. Obama’s lead over Paul – 46 percent to 45 percent – are within the survey’s three percentage point margin of error…
    Romney and Paul’s relatively strong showings are driven by support from independent voters. Romney leads Mr. Obama by six points among independent voters, 45 percent to 59 percent, and Paul leads the president by seven points among independents, 47 percent to 40 percent…
    This poll was conducted by telephone from January 4-8, 2012 among 1,413 adults nationwide, including 1,247 interviews were conducted with registered voters…
    http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57355518-503544/poll-among-gop-hopefuls-romney-fares-best-against-obama/

    16 Jan: Hilton Head Island Packet, Sth Carolina: Sen. Tom Davis endorses Ron Paul in GOP race
    GOP presidential hopefuls have been courting the Beaufort Republican and tea party favorite for his support in South Carolina’s first-in-the-South primary.
    Many of the top-tier candidates for the Republican presidential nomination have met with Davis privately. In July 2011, Davis was named by Politico as one of “50 politicos to watch,” the other GOP hopefuls have said a Davis endorsement could change the race for the nomination.
    One of Paul’s rivals, Rick Santorum, told The Island Packet earlier in the campaign season that “to get an endorsement from someone like Tom Davis is a big deal. It would speak volumes to folks and make them take notice and give us a look.”
    Paul’s campaign referred to the endorsement as “game-changing” in a news release announcing the event…
    Davis said Paul gives the Republican Party the best chance at defeating President Barack Obama in November, noting what he called Paul’s decades-long commitment to tea party principles such as cutting taxes and government spending.
    “Ron Paul’s record matches his rhetoric, his fiscal plan matches the fiscal challenges that our nation is facing and his movement represents the taxpayers whose interests have been ignored in the political process for far too long,” Davis said in his endorsement speech.
    “We have a choice: We can keep electing candidates who talk about change only during political campaigns as a way to get elected, or we can finally elect a candidate who will walk the walk and make that change a reality — restoring our bottom line, our individual liberties and our national pride in the process.”
    http://www.islandpacket.com/2012/01/16/1929302/sen-tom-davis-endorses-ron-paul.html

    16 Jan: CNN BLOG: Paul scores sought-after endorsement in South Carolina
    Six days before South Carolina’s presidential primary, Ron Paul scored one of the most sought-after political blessings in the state…
    “At the end of the day, when I sat down, I realized there were a lot of good people running for this race,” Davis said. “But there’s only one person, there’s only one person speaking to what I believe is the core problem of our country today. The biggest threat to our liberty comes from debt.”
    “There is only one candidate that is talking about this problem to the degree, at the scale and with the scope that it needs to be talked about. You can’t nibble around the edges anymore.”
    Davis’ endorsement of Paul could help the Texas congressman ahead of South Carolina’s first-in-the-South presidential primary on January 21. A recent American Research Group survey in the state shows a tight race between former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, Gingrich and Paul…
    http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/01/15/paul-scores-sought-after-endorsement-in-south-carolina/


    Report this

    00

    • #
      wes george

      there is so much mis/disinfo on Ron Paul…

      For example? please provide links and explanation.

      “…am amused when those who claim to be conservatives, incl many in the media, people who endlessly criticise big govt and reckless deficit spending, come out for Romney! u have to laugh.”

      Why do you think this is the case? I don’t remember Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh, Savage, Hannity being weasel word softies last time I was in the states.

      Thanks in advance.

      w


      Report this

      00

  • #
    pat

    13 Jan: VIDEO: CBS: Tax dollars backing some “risky” energy projects
    Solar panel maker Solyndra received a $528 million Energy Department loan in 2009 – and went bankrupt last year. The government’s risky investment strategy didn’t stop there, as a CBS News investigation has uncovered a pattern of cases of the government pouring your tax dollars into clean energy…
    http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505263_162-57358484/tax-dollars-backing-some-risky-energy-projects/


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Robert of Ottawa

    I am uncomfortable with his foreign policy, with the isolationist non-interventionist* view.

    Me too; this is my ONE problem with him.

    But at the moment it seems the greatest threats to the US come from within.

    Yes, he’s 100% correct there.

    Will he get people to talk about the benefits of small government, real money, and real freedom?

    No, the American people are satisified with bread and circuses.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    pat

    15 Jan: Atlanta Journal Constitution: Ga. failure not the only ethanol misadventure
    Ethanol ventures backed by billionaire entrepreneur Vinod Khosla — including Range 
Fuels, which built a failed factory in Georgia — were given the green light for an estimated $600 million in federal and state subsidies, according to an analysis by The Atlanta Journal- Constitution.
    Yet none of the dozen or so companies financed or controlled by Khosla over the last decade has produced commercially viable ethanol…
    Government spokesmen said the science behind Khosla’s companies was vetted and deemed plausible.
    “USDA’s loan decisions are based on commercial viability and grant decisions are based on scientific merit,” said spokesman Justin DeJong. 
“USDA is committed to providing oversight on loans and grants to safeguard federal investments.”…
    http://www.ajc.com/news/ga-failure-not-the-1302706.html


    Report this

    00

  • #
    banz

    Robert, the US is broke, think about that.

    “..isolationist non interventionist view” No, its purely non interventionist, when you say isolationist, what you really mean is that the US will not attack or invade other countries, mind their own business, stop killing civilians, you get my drift.

    America is finished, its a banana republic with nukes and aircraft carriers, REAL unemployment is continuing to grow (don’t fall for the decrease the labor particpation rate trick, please)its unfunded debt is in the 100 of trillions. Its federal reserve owns the largest amount of US bonds in the world, debt monetisation, pure and simple. 47 million on food stamps(kids dont count) thats about 1 in 5 or 6.

    This is the outcome of a welfare/war based state. This is what happens when you need to feel “safe”, taken care of from cradle to grave. When the education level declines sharply.

    The party is over, watch this nation become more and more facist(with a velvet glove) over the next 5 years, homeland security, Tsa, patriot act, NDAA, their constitution is no loner relevent. The people are now dependent on the government when it should be the other way around.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    janama

    OT _ That Bogus Greenhouse Gas Whatchamacallit Effect

    http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/9799-that-bogus-greenhouse-gas-whatchamacallit-effect

    Red-faced global warming policymakers are now back tracking as independent experts increasingly discredit the cornerstone of climatology: the greenhouse gas effect (GHE).

    One such whistleblower is Dr. Pierre R Latour who explains adroitly below how his NASA colleague, septuagenarian Dr. James Hansen, concocted a mythical 33°C [91.4°F] atmospheric greenhouse gas global warming phenomenon.


    Report this

    00

    • #
      Len

      Hi Janama
      The propaganda has started in ernest with the Fairfax Farm Online today with an article on how the renewable energy sector has grown so much in Australia in 2011.


      Report this

      00

  • #
    janama

    Pierre R Latour, PhD, Houston, January 15, 2012

    GHG Theory was invented to explain a so-called 33C atmospheric greenhouse gas global warming effect. In 1981 James Hanson1, 2 stated the average thermal T at Earth’s surface is 15C (ok) and Earth radiates to space at -18C (ok). Then he declared the difference 15 – (-18) = 33C (arithmetic ok) is the famous greenhouse gas effect. This is not ok because there is no physics to connect these two dissimilar numbers. The 33C are whatchamacallits. This greenhouse gas effect does not exist.

    Here is the science for what is happening. Thermal T is a point property of matter, a scalar measure of its kinetic energy of atomic and molecular motion. It is measured by thermometers. It decreases with altitude. The rate of thermal energy transfer by conduction or convection between hot Th and cold Tc is proportional to (Th – Tc).

    Radiation t is a point property of massless radiation, EMR, a directional vector measure of its energy transmission rate per area or intensity, w/m2, according to the Stefan-Boltzmann law. It is measured by pyrometers and spectrometers. Solar radiation t increases with altitude. Black bodies are defined to be those that absorb and radiate with the same intensity and corresponding t. Real, colorful bodies reflect, scatter, absorb, convert and emit radiant energy according to the nature of the incident radiation direction, spectrum and body matter reflectivity, absorptivity, emissivity and view factors. The rate of EMR energy transfer from a hot body, th, is Q, w = 5.67Ae(th + 273)4, where A is radiating area and e is emissivity fraction. But it may not be absorbed by all bodies that intercept it, as GHG theory assumes. In particular, hotter radiating bodies do not absorb colder incident radiation and reemit it more intensely, as GHG back-radiation theory assumes.

    Above Earth’s stratosphere, thin air T is rather cold, about -80C. Yet solar radiation t is rather hot, about 120C. So spacesuits have thermal insulation and radiant reflection. The difference, 200C, is meaningless. On a cold, clear, winter day on snowcapped mountains, dry air T = -10C and radiation t = 50C. I can feel them both.

    Much of GHG theory fails to make clear distinctions between these two different kinds of temperature, T and t. One temperature, t, is analogous to velocity, 34 km/hour north; the other, T, is analogous to density, 1 kg/liter. So 34 km/hour – 1 kg/liter is indeed 33 whatchamacallits by arithmetic, but nobody will ever know what a whatchamacallit is because velocity and density are not connected by nature.

    To clarify this enormous intellectual flaw, take boiling point of water is 100C (true) and freezing point is 32F (true), subtract 100 – 32 = 68 (correct arithmetic) and declare atmospheric pressure is 68 psia. The declaration is false because a) the difference between C and F has no meaning, b) there is no physics to connect 68 to pressure, psia, and c) atmospheric pressure is actually 14.7 psia. That 33C greenhouse gas effect that has everybody so upset and is researched ad nausea to death is not an effect, merely an easily explained pair of facts.

    Therefore, it is quite true the 33C greenhouse gas effect defined by James Hanson in 1981 as thermal T = 15C at surface minus radiant t = -18C to space is whatchamacallit nonsense. Everybody knows you can’t compare apples to eggs; except perhaps Greenhouse Gas theorists. Since this is irrefutable logic, no experiment is called for. Logic trumps nonsense; that is why humans invented it around 400bc. No one needs to prove or disprove the existence of whatchamacallits. They are not even imaginary. There is no greenhouse in the sky.

    Planetary atmospheres reflect, scatter, transmit, absorb, emit and diminish stellar radiation intensity at the surface according to Beer-Lambert Law, 121C incident to Earth’s stratosphere to 15C at surface. Thermal T of atmospheres increase as gravity compresses gas and converts potential energy to kinetic energy closer to the surface, -80C in stratosphere to 14.5C at surface. Therefore atmospheres cause the surface to be colder than it would be if atmosphere were thinner or non-existent. The more O2 is exchanged for higher heat capacity CO2, the colder the surface radiation intensity temperature. Atmospheres are refrigerators, not blankets.

    GHG theory postulates back-radiation from cold atmospheric CO2 is absorbed by the surface, heating it more. This violates Second Law of thermodynamics (energy can only be transferred from hot to cold bodies), leading to creation of energy, a violation of the First Law of thermodynamics (energy conservation), and the impossible perpetual motion machine AGW promoters need to cause eternal global warming.

    CO2 does not trap radiation; like all molecules, it absorbs some incident radiation according to its absorption spectrum and promptly emits it according to its emission spectrum. CO2 is not a pollutant; it is inert green plant food. CO2 should not be curtailed, starving Earth’s flora. Minor solar driven global warming from 1974 to 1998 has stabilized through 2011. CO2 has nothing to do with global warming; it actually cools Earth. Arctic ice does not melt because of global warming, increasing T; it melts when the average T > 0, at rate proportional to T, no matter whether T is increasing or decreasing.

    This essay has seven scientific facts (33C whatchamacallit, no blanket, no back-radiation, CO2 no trap, CO2 inert food, no AGW, ice melts), each of which refute GHG and AGW. It has not been peer reviewed because it is well known to professional physicists and engineers; it does not merit a research paper, or research, or experiments. Logic just needs clear definitions and common sense, not government spending and regulation.

    Hansen, J, Johnson D, Lacis A, Lebedeff S, Lee P, Rind D & Russell G, “Climate Impact of Increasing Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide”, Science, Vol 213, n 4511, pp 957 – 966, August 28, 1981.
    Hansen, J, Fung I, Lacis A, Rind D, Lebedeff S, Ruedy R & Russell G, “Global Climate Changes as Forecast by Goddard Institute for Space Studies Three-Dimensional Model”, Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol 93, n D8, pg 9341 – 9364, August 20, 1988.


    Report this

    00

    • #
      Louis Hissink

      In other words there is no such thing as a greenhouse gas effect, but then what we physical scientists and engineers know? A bit more about physical matter than erudite mathematicians and/or mathematical physicists who, believe it or not, don’t seem to comprehend the salient differences between intensive and extensive variables either.

      What Latour omitted to mention was that Hansen was a student of Carl Sagan who invoked a runawau greenhouse effect on Venus to explain its measured temperature. That nonsense was never refuted at the time and since has come back to haunt us as AGW.

      The whole AGW phenomenon is the result of post modern “science”, if such an abomination is possible.


      Report this

      00

      • #
        bananabender

        The Moon’s surface, despite having no atmosphere, is much hotter than the Earth’s surface. Go figure.


        Report this

        00

      • #
        bananabender

        Ron Paul is way off the mark on gold. It is just another commodity that rises and falls as demand changes.

        By far the largest demand for gold (~80%) is from the Indian jewellery trade. This demand is highly elastic.

        Back around 1981 everyone was melting down their old coins and estate jewellery as the gold price topped USD800 (and plummeted not long after) .

        Gold is hyper-abundant in low grade grade ores and even in sea water.

        Gold is byproduct of copper and uranium mining.

        Countries sell their reserves when prices are high and buy back when prices are low.

        Rolex has a couple of tonnes of the stuff in the safe. They buy it when prices are low and sell it when prices are high.


        Report this

        00

        • #
          banz

          RP is wrong on Gold? Really, have you seen his portfolio by any chance? He has made a bundle from Gold.

          Central Banks are now buying gold hand over fist, thats right, at 1600 dollars an ounce.

          Do you understand the concept of reserves? Allow me to explain the EU, when it initially kicked of, its reserves consisted of 65% foreign currencies and 35% Gold, currently its reserves now consist of 65% Gold and 35% foreign currencies. Thats asset revaluation for you.

          I would suggest you follow in the footsteps of Giants(central banks). they know what the future holds.

          They will print money until there are no more trees left, they have no choice.


          Report this

          00

      • #
        Manfred

        Sagan also banged on about the ‘Nuclear Winter’, unknowable nonsense framed in pseudoscience, and still held enshrined in unfalsifiable belief by most, particularly Hollywood.

        GHG theory, AGW are all destined in remain substantial matters of doctrine in the Green Church for some time, and in politics for the foreseeable future. Provided the ‘group-think’ remains engaged in the belief, science is relegated to denialism or skepticism.

        The War that is presently being waged is one for hearts and minds. The usual goal: outright control. It is age-old. The endless tension between individual freedom and the Ministry-of-We-Know-Best.

        The Lincolnian adage:
        “You may fool all the people some of the time, you can even fool some of the people all of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all the time” remains the shrewd observation of human wit, one of many things the Ministry-of-We-Know-Best overlooked in their vulgar haste to dominate.


        Report this

        00

  • #
    Alice Thermopolis

    RON PAUL, SAN FRANCISCO ’83

    Congressman Ron Paul knows his lines. He’s been a Gold Bug for a long time. In 1981 and 1982, he served on the US Gold Commission, which studied the role of gold in the US monetary system. He had written a few books on the subject even then: eg “The Case for Gold”, Ten Myths about Paper Money”. He also was a member of the House Committee on Banking, Finance and Urban Affairs.

    I met him briefly on Saturday July 23, 1983 at the Fifth Annual “Summer Location” International Investment and Tax Strategy Conference, for “discriminating and sophisticated investors seeking the best available investment counsel”, who turned out to be mainly penny stock investors, commodity promoters, precious metal types, gold bugs, etc.

    It was in the Italian Foyer of SF’s St Francis Hotel. Still have the signed copy of his little book, “Gold, Peace and Prosperity.” He presented on “Gold, Inflation and the Banking Crisis” at 12.45pm, just before lunch and just after John W O’Donnell’s talk: “JOJOBA: The Best Investment for the 1980s”. Not sure about jojoba, but as others have noted here, gold went south for the next couple of decades and then north.

    My favourite talk was by a charting guru. “Gold”, he said to the hushed audience,”will go up or down, but not necessarily in that order.”

    So now you know….

    Alice


    Report this

    00

  • #
    KeithH

    Jo. OT but I’m desperate. A heartfelt appeal to you to try and get a world-wide campaign rolling by doing a post on the devastation about to happen at Musselroe Bay, one of the most fragile environments in Tasmania encompassing some of the most beautiful places on Earth.

    The hypocritical Labor/Green Government has given the go-ahead for arguably the most useless, unnecessary and environmentally destructive project in Tasmanian history in the Musselroe Bay Conservation area right next to Mt.William National Park, home to many native animals, endangered raptors and other species.

    Hydro Tasmania has the gall to show beautiful photos of the area which will be severely impacted by the development. See them while you are still able at

    http://www.hydro.com.au/energy/musselroe-wind-farm

    There is a documented template of what is about to happen recorded by those locals who unsuccessfully opposed the Cefn Croes wind development, the largest onshore windfarm in Wales. They made a photographic record of the whole environmentally disastrous venture and I defy any person, AGW believer or not, “clean green wind energy” supporter or not, to view their photo gallery and not be appalled by what was done.

    http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/-hills/cc/index.htm
    (Important.If this link doesn’t work, Google Cefn Croes and go to the campaign website)

    Also note that Cefn Croes had 39 1.5mw Turbines. Musselroe is to have 56 3mw Turbines.

    I would ask, or in fact plead for our international visitors to this website to please help by publicising this travesty as widely as possible in their own countries. The insanity has to be stopped.

    The huge irony is that Tasmania has the dubious “honour” of being the current home of both Bob Brown and Christine Milne, the palpably hypocritical Leader and Deputy Leader of the Australian Greens, champions of the environment(?) (apart from Musselroe Bay) and chief doomsayers in the CAGW scare campaign.

    Jo. Thank you for all you have done, but please help in this!


    Report this

    00

    • #
      KinkyKeith

      Hi KeithH

      looked at the Cefn Croes construction photos – what an environmental disaster.

      They will be off line and useless in a few years because of enormous upkeep costs and then there will be no money to demolish and restore.

      Politics is an ugly business.


      Report this

      00

    • #
      Louis Hissink

      KeithH

      I think you might discover that the environment is more robust than you believe – it might appear fragile now, but all of life is fragile, when you step back.

      My own reaction is to allow this monstrosity and, perhaps, then others might, finally, wake up and join you in your efforts.


      Report this

      00

      • #
        KeithH

        Believe me Louis, it is fragile. I’ve camped there several times and the beauty and fragility of some of those coastal areas is breathtaking. Did you have a look at the photos on the Hydro website? You can already see the scar of the concrete batch plant!

        This is just a part list of some of what’s going to be done:

        The civil works include:

        construction of the control building
        completion of the 38km road network
        completion of all on site drainage
        construction of 56 hardstands adjacent to the wind turbines (presumably for blade assembly and the necessary cranes to assemble the monstrous towers
        construction of 56 concrete bases for the wind turbines – about 430m3 of concrete and 40T of reinforcing in each. Even when the 20-year Turbine life span passes, those bases will stay.

        Massive ditching will have to be done for the underground connection cabling between turbines plus the necessary 50kms of overhead powerlines with pylons and their concrete bases.

        I can’t believe that the majority of Tasmanians have a clue about what is actually involved and once we’ve lost this little bit of paradise, we’ll never get it back. I have to try!


        Report this

        00

        • #
          Dave

          Hi KeithH

          With reference to the concrete bases I think you’ll find that depending on soil reports and engineering factors – some of these bases are closer to 1,200 cubic meters of concrete each. Here also is the link to the Vesta Site with LCA of the V90-3.0 MW.

          The actual LCA is good publicity for the wind turbine industry – but they forget to include the bases for these wind mills – along with the fact that nearly 4,000 tonnes of product will be shipped from around the world (great for their footprint??) plus all the cabling involved.

          The last thing their LCA does not address is the rare earth minerals used in these things – probably one of the most environmentally dirty extraction methods around (most from China).

          Amazing how the ENVIRONMENT has been forgotten and now only CO2 pollution is raised.

          Musselroe may well end up Napoleon Bob Browns Waterloo!


          Report this

          00

    • #
      Paul S

      KeithH, thank you for the heads up. Have just emailed Hydro Tas expressing my concern via the link on their site. Can I suggest as a start that others do the same? Maybe you can send it to Andrew Bolt, as he seems to be the only one in the general media willing to bring attention to insanities such as this.


      Report this

      00

      • #
        KeithH

        Thanks Paul S. I did do a post to Andrew Bolt today but it was unfortunately edited and they omitted the link to the Hydro website and between us fouled up the Cefn Croes link.
        I have also put it on WUWT as a Tip to Anthony. Hopefully he will pick it up. I appreciate any help or suggestions as our MSM in Tasmania is just as biased and rabidly warmist as on the mainland. It’s almost impossible to get an alternative point of view heard and while they’ll faithfully print every green or environmental warmist alarmist handout, I don’t think they’ve ever heard of investigative journalism!


        Report this

        00

        • #

          That’s odd!

          I would have thought that to take advantage of that enormous wind potential of those blasting Roaring Forties, then this Wind Plant would, er, be on the other side of Tasmania, not on the North EASTERN corner.

          Even so, the power delivered is only marginal at best.

          Tony.

          (Keith, I’ll have something for you later today 18Jan2012)


          Report this

          00

          • #

            I’ll tell you what’s odd Tony.
            For centuries we had windpower doing everything for us. From sailing ships to grinding grains and pumping water.

            But along came durdy oil barons and conned us into durdy fuels causing mankind to forget about the wonderfully efficient power of the wind. /sarc off


            Report this

            00

          • #
            KeithH

            Thanks Tony. There are two wind farms on the Woolnorth Property on the far North West tip and these are involved in the financing of Musselroe.

            “the project (Musselroe) will be funded on Hydro Tasmania’s balance sheet pending the outcome of the divestment process of Woolnorth wind farm assets, announced by Hydro Tasmania in September.”

            Even more stupidity is mooted as evidenced by this:
            “Musselroe will be eclipsed in size if the $500 million, 100-turbine Cattle Hill wind farm, near Lake Echo in the state’s Central Highlands, is approved.”

            Whilst vital services in our state diminish and patients are either dying or waiting in agony for a bed through underfunding of our hospitals and poor budget management by government, the AGW carpet-baggers are making an absolute fortune off the backs of Australian taxpayer funded subsidies.

            It appears Labor/Green/Liberal politicians, the local Council and all the various environmental and bird/wildlife, Aboriginal Heritage and other preservation groups are selling their souls by apparently standing idly by and allowing the Musselroe Bay desecration to proceed. One can only speculate on what inducements were offered to gain such apparently widespread support, silence or apathy!

            Again, Cefn Croes provides some answers on the tactics used by pushers of uneconomic wind power and how such usually avid environmentalists can be seduced into being so selective in what they oppose!


            Report this

            00

          • #

            KeithH,

            I have some analysis on this Wind Plant at the link at the bottom of this Comment.

            Interestingly, we can complain about the ‘blot on the landscape’ aspect, the bird life aspect etc, and probably get nowhere.

            What needs to be really highlighted is the fact that a Plant like this fails to deliver what it says it will, reliable electricity on a steady basis.

            This Plant will only deliver its power for around 7 hours a day on a year long basis.

            The Proposal uses artful descriptions of power delivery, that very few people understand, hence giving the impression that the Plant is actually achieving something.

            For instance, they tell us that this Plant will fill the needs for 50,000 homes, clever use of data to say one thing and mean another.

            Using that same incorrect way of saying things, then Bayswater Power Plant supplies the needs for Two MILLION homes.

            Bob Brown led the campaign in the 80′s against destruction of pristine Tasmanian landscape when he protested on the Franklin. He won’t be protesting this similar situation in his home State.

            Wind Power Australia – The Musselroe Wind Farm Travesty In Tasmania

            Tony.


            Report this

            00

          • #
            KeithH

            Tony, that is brilliant and just what I wanted. My intention is to make up information kits to distribute to pollies, news media, environmental groups etc., highlighting some relevant links countering the myth of ‘clean green’ wind energy.

            Yours will be at the top, the Cefn Croes link, Baotou pollution (rare earth mining and processing neodymium etc.) and any others I think will assist in arousing awareness and bringing people face to face with the reality that all that is touted as ‘clean, green’ and environmentally friedly is not necessarily so!

            I agree we may get nowhere with ‘blot on landscape, birdlife aspect’ etc., but there is a shame factor I’m hoping to prick. On the whole, the environmental lobby down here really prides itself on their self-image of being extra clean and green and if I can demonstrate how, in the eyes of others round the world, their silence or actual support of this project makes them appear to be politically selective in their environmentalism, their pride willl really be wounded and may trigger a change of heart in some.

            Thank you once again for your effort and thanks also to Jo for allowing me to ‘hijack’ part of this thread!


            Report this

            00

          • #
            KeithH

            Tony. I’ve just picked up one thing, which although it doesn’t alter the whole thrust of your great article, “nitpickers” may try to make capital out of it. It’s this statement:

            “It could also be said that because this Wind Plant is supplying that electricity to the grid, then there would be a saving of CO2 emissions from Plants that do supply the grid, in this case Natural gas fired power plants,……..”

            Our main electricity supply is still hydro-electric and an industry spokesman today was saying how well hydro and the wind energy would fit together (even though that in itself makes a joke of them saying there would be CO2 savings).

            I’m finding it hard to track down what the situation is in relation to gasfired. Of course we have Basslink and do get power from the mainland when required and we had/have (?) the ‘peaking station’ at Bell Bay which back in 2007 was going to be sold to Alinta who were also going to build a another new one in Northern Tasmania, but I honestly don’t know what’s going on there.

            What are your thoughts on the point I’ve raised?


            Report this

            00

          • #

            Keith,
            your comment highlights the point I am attempting to make.

            Proposals like this use clever ways of saying things to make people think that a Plant of this nature is in fact achieving something.

            The CO2 emissions savings that they quote are in fact an illusion.

            Think of like this.

            If we construct a coal fired plant with the same ‘up front’ Nameplate Capacity, then the CO2 emissions will be (X) tons.

            Instead, because we are constructing a Wind plant, then we will not be emitting CO2, hence they can claim that they are in fact saving CO2 emissions in the amount of (X) tons.

            It’s a similar one to the extra line that they have recently started dropping from proposals like this which goes along these lines.

            This (X) tons of CO2 emissions we are saving is the equivalent of removing (Y) number of cars from Australian roads, again, an illusion, because no cars will be removed from the road by constructing a wind power plant.

            It’s for comparison purposes only, in the same manner as those CO2 savings are.

            An artful way of saying something that sounds great, but no one understands what it means, if you can see that point.

            Tony.


            Report this

            00

          • #
            KeithH

            Thanks again Tony. I totally understood your point but was being a ‘devils advocate’ triggered when I heard the hydro/wind power cosyfit comment mentioned.

            I’m putting the link on as many sites as I can (started with “chiefio” but WUWT was part of the web outage protest) and would appreciate other posters here doing the same as my IT skills are very low!

            We may not stop this desecration but at least they’ll have their hypocrisy you so eloquently exposed, laid out for all to see in the glare of wider world scrutiny.

            Is it OK for me to print your article to distribute?

            This proud but frustrated seventh generation Tasmanian “senior” citizen can’t thank you enough for empowering me by giving me a voice and the ammunition to fight a significant rearguard action. We may lose the battle but it could be a big step forward towards winning the war.
            RAAF forever!


            Report this

            00

          • #

            Keith H,
            you may use the information however you wish.

            I wanted to find an image that showed the scale of the size of the towers used for this Tasmanian Wind Plant, but none I could find really showed it at its best, and the best of those was from that Plant in Texas.

            However, the image below at the first link does graphically show the scale, even if the tower is of a different variety, and this image is of a tower in Esperance WA.

            That image is from a Post of mine from August of 2009, where I explain how Wind Power ‘works’, and there is an image at that Post showing an exploded view of the inside of a Nacelle with the operating parts shown.

            With each of the images, just click on then again when they open and they will appear in a new and larger window.

            Image of Wind Tower

            Post: The Limitations Of Renewable Power (Wind)

            Tony.


            Report this

            00

          • #
            KeithH

            Hi Tony. This morning I posted links on http://yes2renewables.org/the/soapbox/ under ‘For Conversations about Wind Energy, please check here.’

            A reply from a David Osmond queries the CF and I’ve suggested he post on your site. If you want to have a look go to the site I’ve linked above. I’ve had a busy morning posting and writing Letters to the Editor. Be interesting to see if they’re published. Please let me know anytime if I’m starting to bug you.

            BTW. I’m still having trouble with WordPress and can’t Login to your site yet but strangely I have no trouble at the above site. It’s beyond my very limited IT expertise but is probably something very simple I’m either not doing or doing wrong!


            Report this

            00

          • #

            KeithH,

            The Post you linked to with all the Comments just shows that people who support Wind Power, and all other Renewables will make any excuse they can to make those renewables ‘seem’ like they are doing something ‘good’.

            I like to read them, just to see what their opinions are, but I’ll never leave a Comment at their sites, not from any fear of being ‘flamed’, (water off a duck’s back here) but I’m never going to change any of their opinions, NEVER, no matter what facts I use.

            Of course the plant is delivering power for most of the day.

            Large scale coal fired power delivers its maximum at all times while running, 24 hours a day, other than scheduled maintenance periods. They deliver their maximum.

            Wind Plants deliver part of their power for part of the day. The figures I use (industry standard) equate to maximum power delivery, so even though they deliver part of the power part of the time, that equates to its full power for those 7 hours a day.

            I do not ever need to pad any of the data I use, because even using their hoped for maximum theoretical totals still place them into the ‘ridiculous’ category. All this data that they use at their own sites is worded in a way that the average person cannot understand, and my task is to put it in a way that can be understood.

            I get ‘flamed’ from every direction when I explain the very same data that quote back at me.

            It’s a clever trick these proposals use to hide the truth in plain sight.

            Don’t get sucked into arguing with them.

            They always know best.

            Yeah! Right!

            Tony.


            Report this

            00

          • #

            KeithH,
            well who would have believed it. Someone, most probably from the site you linked to, did in fact come in and leave a Comment.

            I urge you to go and read what he had to say, and also read my reply to him.

            What it does most effectively highlight is the fact that people will believe what they want to believe, and no amount of fact will change their opinions.

            Link to Post. Comments at the bottom of that Post.

            Tony.


            Report this

            00

          • #
            KeithH

            It’s a different post name but it sounds like the same fellow Tony. Hope it hasn’t caused you too much time and trouble. I’m sure he sees your point but will never admit it.

            Noticed your comment at Andrew Bolt. I’ve managed to get it all mentioned there as well and I notice another commenter linked to your article. I did a post today at Jennifer Marohasy and she has just emailed me to say she’s made it a separate blog post, which is far more than I could have hoped for. If I’d known it was going to be featured I might have done a better job but it’s all good publicity.

            I’ve been needling local ABC presenters and producers with text messages making them personally aware of your article, Cefn Croes and the whole situation so they won’t be able to claim they didn’t know. I’ll start on the pollies next week but I’m so slow! I wish I had better IT skills!

            Googling your article title : Wind Power Australia – The Musselroe Wind Farm Travesty in Tasmania is bringing up increasing hits and PA Pundits has been a big help there. Thanks to you mainly, the ripples are spreading!


            Report this

            00

          • #
            Dave

            Even more interesting is an ex-ABC chief hits out at Wind Farms.

            Just a shame that all the opponents of wind farms have to wait until retirement!
            This Musselroe one is going to be their downfall.

            P.S. Tony – in your article at PA Pundits – you state that if this is operating 24/7 it would produce 14,727GWH of power (is this correct?) as 420GWH is not 28% of 14,727 GWH? Is it just me or my maths?


            Report this

            00

          • #

            Dave,
            thanks for pointing out that error to me.

            That was a mistake in pressing the buttons on the ‘plastic brain’, and I missed by one factor of ten.
            The total should read 1,472.7GWH.

            Again, thanks.

            Tony.


            Report this

            00

  • #
    John

    http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/288256/ron-paul-left-field-dennis-prager

    “And, here, it is clear that blacks are actually underrepresented in executions.

    According to the Death Penalty Information Center, an anti-death-penalty organization, between 1976 and January 2012, 441 blacks (35 percent of the total of convicted murderers) and 717 whites (55 percent of the total) were executed. Given that blacks committed more than half the murders during that time (52 percent vs. 46 percent by whites), if we are to assess racial bias based on proportionality of murderers executed, the system is biased against whites, not blacks.”


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Manfred

    The Green machine is in overdrive presently. The train derailed near Katherine NT was alleged to have been transporting uranium that was leaked into the water ways as the result of the derailment.

    The present facts do not support this, yet the simpleton ‘media’ were manipulated easily over Christmas / New year in the absence of information by ‘envirothugs’, happy to stir the pot for a few more dollars of scaremongering revenue. They collectively got clean away with spuriously fostering, dramatising and capitalising upon ‘nuclear’ fear.

    It really might be a step in the direction of institutional honesty were a meaningful measure of personal accountability extended to weigh upon individuals in office, in print or in the TV media with respect to their utterances, writings and transmissions. One might view this as similar to the law that ensures people tread warily around the potential for personal defamation.

    Checking sources and critical journalism are passe. However, ‘personal accountability’ is definitely consistent with new age mantras.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    pat

    this is unbelievable, except for the fact i turned to fox for about one minute during the tennis to see if they were talking about the debate and found the news ticker going on and on about every individual in the debate….EXCEPT RON PAUL…so, even if they got caught out as per the following, the news ticker would have been repeated endlessly for hours, without Paul being mentioned:

    12160.info: VIDEO: Fox News Caught Completely Excluding Ron Paul From Post Debate Coverage
    by Steve Watson
    http://12160.info/group/ronpaulforpresident2012/forum/topics/fox-news-ron-paul-debate


    Report this

    00

  • #
    pat

    C-Span fail. when u open this page, the summary ends:
    ” Mr. Kristol in his remarks said that he believes it would be better .. Read More”

    only when u click “read more” do you get the final few telling neocon words in this summary!

    17 Jan: C-Span: South Carolina Republican Presidential Primary Field
    William Kristol reviewed the previous night’s South Carolina Republican presidential debate. He also responded to telephone calls and electronic communications. Mr. Kristol in his remarks said that he believes it would be better for the Republican Party if Representative (R-TX) and presidential candidate Ron Paul left the party.
    http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/PrimaryFie/start/2492/stop/2611

    what is truly amazing is how well Ron Paul is doing despite the MSM.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    pat

    CNN confirms CBS poll:

    16 Jan: CNN: CNN Poll: Obama tied with Romney & Paul in November showdowns
    But according to the poll, the president is doing better against two other Republican presidential candidates. If Rick Santorum were the GOP nominee, Obama would hold a 51%-45% advantage over the former senator from Pennsylvania. And if Newt Gingrich faced off against the president, Obama would lead the former House speaker 52%-43%…
    http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/01/16/cnn-poll-obama-tied-with-romney-paul-in-november-showdowns/

    yet who would know this from the MSM coverage?


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Crakar24

    Not bad for a redneck nut job hey.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    D Bonson

    Thank you Jo for listening to Tom and myself regarding Ron Paul’s views as being non-interventionist.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    pat

    a not insignificant achievement, tho we shouldn’t read too much into it. however, how come the MSM has never even reported this?

    12 Jan: DemocratsForRonPaul.com: Ron Paul #2 in NH … Democratic Primary!
    Everybody already knows that Ron Paul placed second in the New Hampshire 2012 Republican Presidental Primary. But, at 7 o’clock tonight, the New Hampshire Secretary of State published the full results of the primary, including write-ins, and Ron Paul also won the #2 spot in the Democratic Primary.
    To be sure, sitting President Barack Obama bested Paul with a 49,480 to 2,273 tally, but that Ron Paul placed so highly in rank tells us a few things. First, nearly twenty-three hundred New Hampshire voters got out and drove to a polling station, knowing they were going to cast a write-in vote, knowing that it was in a primary where no delegates could be assigned to write-in votes, but as a straight protest vote…
    Dr. Paul’s media enemies like to call him ‘unelectable’ but the New Hampshire voters have belied their assessment.
    http://www.democratsforronpaul.com/2012/01/12/ron-paul-2-in-nh-democratic-primary/

    i know some Ralph Nader fundraisers and they need to listen to him now and help break the fake left/right paradigm once and for all. oh happy day!

    1 Oct 2011: DemocratsForRonPaul: Ralph Nader to Progressives on Ron Paul – Foundational Convergence
    Ralph Nader says of Ron Paul:
    “Libertarians like Ron Paul are on our side on civil liberties. They’re on our side against the military-industrial complex. They’re on our side against Wall Street. They’re on our side for investor rights. That’s a foundational convergence”, he exhorts. “It’s not just itty-bitty stuff.” …
    Progressives who will be voting in 2012 need to decide if they’re voting for party or voting for principle…
    http://www.democratsforronpaul.com/2011/10/01/ralph-nader-to-progressives-on-ron-paul-foundational-convergence/

    28 Sept: The American Conservative: Ralph Nader’s Grand Alliance
    Share| Progressives find hope—in Ron Paul.
    By Michael Tracey
    http://www.theamericanconservative.com/blog/ralph-naders-grand-alliance/


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Crakar24

    Thank you Jo for listening to Tom and myself regarding Ron Paul’s views as being non-interventionist.

    I think everyone interested in the US debates should take the time to look at the last one conducted (warning you will feel sick to your stomach).

    When it came to foreign policy 4 candidates fell over each other trying to sound like the big tough guy which was met with raucous applause then Paul explained that we should treat others how we want to be treated (or words to that effect) and we should not simply bomb the crap out of other countries he was met with boos from the crowd.

    Watch the whole thing as it highlights the mental state of mind of some people that is truly disturbing.


    Report this

    00

  • #

    I’ll say the only thing that needs to be said. Ron Paul would have allowed Japan to take over Australia in the 1940′s, He would have allowed Germany to take over all of europed in the 1940′s. He would have allowed the USSR to take over as much of the rest of the world as it could have. He would have surrendered to the USSR in fact when it became evident that with the rest of the world under USSR influence we could no longer survive as a nation. Now that USSR is out of the picture, I put it to you that if the United States becomes as isolationist as Ron Paul says it should be, within 15 years, long before your children are cold and in the grave, Australia will once again be under an attack they would not be able to defend against and no one left in the world will come to their rescue.

    Feel free to allow a serial prognosticator to make you feel all warm and fuzzy at night, those nights under his influence would be short lived.


    Report this

    00

    • #
      Kevin Moore

      The American dream – you have to be asleep to believe it.

      10 False Flag Operations That Shaped Our World -

      http://kennysideshow.blogspot.com/2008/12/10-false-flags-operations-that-shaped.html


      Report this

      00

      • #
        Crakar24

        astonerii,

        Not sure i follow you re Paul and the 1940′s but i will say this:

        Patriot act
        TSA
        NDAA
        Targetted assassinations
        Gitmo
        Afghanistan
        Iraq
        Libya
        Iran (potentially)

        All your rights and civil liberties have been taken so now you live in a dictatorship, a dictatorship that has run out of money and you want to vote for someone that offers you nothing but more of the same.

        Fine its your vote my only concern is that as the American empire begins to collapse how much damage is all that thrashing around going to felt here in Australia.

        You say

        Feel free to allow a serial prognosticator to make you feel all warm and fuzzy at night, those nights under his influence would be short lived.

        Strangely having a serial psychopathic murderer in charge does not make me feel warm and fuzzy at night, remember the only country in the world to use weapons of mass destruction against others is the USA……..never forget that.


        Report this

        00

        • #

          I do not see how Gitmo, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya or Iran have anything to do with whether we are a republic or a dictatorship.

          The other arguments you have made I do see them as a threat and have spoken out about them.

          My argument is that in the 1940′s if we followed Ron Paul’s foreign policy, Australia would be owned by Japan, along with a large chunk of China, the Philippines and so forth.


          Report this

          00

          • #
          • #
            Crakar24

            astonerii,

            That may be true but you must understand policies are formed at the time. In other words If paul was pres in a time of war his policies would reflect this as would any other leaders policies.

            This is much far removed from the current day, let us assume for a moment that Bin laden is solely responsible for 911 what would your foreign policy be?

            firstly you would want to understand why the attack was carried out and no the old “they hate us because we are free” wont fly anymore.

            So we go and blow the shit out of Afghanistan, then we go and blow the shit out of Iraq now Libya, then we threaten Iran, Syria and Nth Korea we even find the time to piss the Russians and the Chinese off. We have done all we can to kick off a war with Pakistan we are meddling in many countries in Africa(Africom). One must ask the question “why”?

            Only one result can come from this, if you walk up to a stranger and punch him in the face what do you think his reaction will be?

            Note: As an Australian i say “we” because our stupid gob=vernment will follow the Americas everywhere like the good little lapdogs we are.


            Report this

            00

  • #
    Andrew McRae

    Hey ABC, you biased much?
    ABC rhetorically asks “Is Mitt Romney THE MAN?” and mentions Ron Paul in only one sentence:

    (Ron Paul can be largely eliminated from the equation as it’s widely understood he’s running to position the party platform closer to his brand of libertarianism than realistically seeking the presidency).

    So we have the promo video from Ron Paul’s team containing all his correct predictions and closing with a quick picture of Ron Paul sitting behind the President’s desk in the oval office, and his own official web site describes him as:

    2012 Republican Presidential candidate Ron Paul is in Washington today

    …and yet this bankster tabloid schmuck Barron is so desperate as to pretend Ron Paul is not even seriously running for president.

    It’s not an opinion piece, it’s part of an official series with ABC’s correspondent covering the USA election. They couldn’t bare to mention Paul more than once, and even then it had to be in parentheses.
    One may question whether this goes beyond bias and into the realm of government control.


    Report this

    00

  • #

    [...] JoNova and In 2002 Ron Paul saw the next ten years coming. [...]


    Report this

    00

  • #
    pat

    for the record:

    17 Jan: BlackBoxVoting: Bev Harris: THE TRAGIC TALE OF EDWARD TRUE AND JAMES FALSE
    The actual Iowa winner may “never be known”, and one of the “dead” voters in New Hampshire has now shown up — alive.
    It matters, and it’s called journalistic malpractice. TV networks announced that Romney won Iowa, and newspapers pronounced his 1-2 “wins” as “historic.” Candidates dropped out, donors dried up or rushed to send cash to the reported “winner”.
    Now we are being told that the Iowa results “don’t matter.” They matter, regardless of any rent-an-expert who shows up in the press. Misreported results manipulated the candidate field from which the rest of America can choose.
    The Des Moines Register is now reporting an even greater malfeasance: that the final, certified Iowa result may “never be known.” There were several typos, they say. Some precincts will never be reported, they claim.
    That we got a heads up at all about bogus media results was due to an alert Iowa citizen, Edward True, who captured evidence of the 20-vote misreport in his Appanoose County precinct…
    http://www.blackboxvoting.org/


    Report this

    00

  • #
    John

    I think crakar24 said this:

    “Strangely having a serial psychopathic murderer in charge does not make me feel warm and fuzzy at night, remember the only country in the world to use weapons of mass destruction against others is the USA……..never forget that.”

    Strangley, that is a lie.


    Report this

    00

    • #
      Mark D.

      Crackar24 hates the USA. It is that simple. According to him we’ve done nothing right since who knows when.


      Report this

      00

      • #
        Crakar24

        Hi Mark,

        So many comments to respond to i will ignore most of them but i do wish to respond to you on what you said.

        Just to be clear i do not hate the people of the USA in fact i have worked with quite a few over the years…in fact i work with a couple right now and they are not much different to us (Australians) really. So no i do not hate the USA in that regard.

        However i do hate the way your government behaves on the world stage.

        You cannot invade countries they way it does, you cannot simply bombared a city with depleted uranium weapons and cause birth defects like they have, you cannot bomb a group of people via drones only to find out later it was innocent women and children and say “oh well”.

        I remember one time the USA bombed a wedding ceremony and killed dozens of people and the very next day they bombed the funeral procession killing another dozen or so.

        One time they ransacked the wrong house killed 8 innocent people riddled a heavily pregnant women with bullets…….she survived but her unborn did not.

        You use cluster bombs which are banned by the geneva convention, you use torture which is also banned, you have secret torture prisons all over the world.

        The occupying force cannot deprive the people of basic human rights like sanitized water, electricity and food, you cannot drag them out of their beds in the dead of night and beat them to death, you cannot do these things unless you walk away from all the human rights treaties you have ever signed.

        I could go on but suffice to say the actions of your government are despicable and a majority of the people of the world view your government as the biggest terrorist state on the planet…………..simply because they are.

        Now i understand that this is not your fault, how were you to know that Bush and Obama would turn out to be two of the greatest tyrants the world has ever known? But you can do something about it.

        I see Perry has pulled the pin so that leaves the following:

        1) Romney……….well if you like what Obama has done then vote for Romney

        2) Gingrich………this guy cant keep his dick in his pants, left one of his four wives as she was undergoing treatment for cancer, he is a nut job and wants to bomb, bomb, bomb Iran to keep Israel safe (tip: You need a guy who puts the people of the USA first, second and third do you want this guy as the next Prez?)

        3) the only other option you have is Ron Paul……….so if you want to be able to go to an airport without having to stand their and suffer the indignation of watching your wife being fondled or for that matter getting blasted with cancer causing x rays then vote for Paul.

        If you are sick and tired of being broke so Obama can keep killing innocent people in a foreign land then vote for Paul.

        If the thought that the NDAA means you can be arrested without charge and stripped of your citizenship and locked uo forever scares teh crap out of you then vote for Paul.

        If you are sick and tired of being a debt slave to foreign banksters then vote for Paul.

        Of course according to one poorly informed Australian my views mean i am a far, far, far left moonbat but i will just ignore him from now on.

        This is your (people of the USA) chance to change things for the better, however i doubt you will see this chance before it is too late and Romney/Obama willget re elected. Sure you could protest and get a flash bang granade to the head from your local police officer but with NDAA you will never see the light of day again.

        PS: Rand Paul claims the NDAA means that if you have more than a weeks supply of food in your house you could be considered a terrorist, stripped of citizenship and locked up for good. I am yet to check the veracity of this statement maybe you should?

        Cheers


        Report this

        00

      • #
        Llew Jones

        Though I agree with Crakar on the CAGW issue I’m surprised by his political views. Essentially they are the views of the American Left as expressed say in The Nation or in Huffington Post or Counterpunch as well as the worldwide hard left. Incidentally I noticed an article in the Nation praising Ron Paul’s foreign policy but criticising his policy on abortion and a few other non-left ideas.

        Since he certainly doesn’t hold the centre to hard left view on CAGW is he expressing an extreme right wing neo-Nazi position? Never taken any interest in what they believe so I wouldn’t know but his obvious distaste for the Zionists (which is possibly code for Jews) is interesting.

        Confession or elucidation please Crakar.

        I’d be happy to be called a right winger and I think America has been a bulwark against oppressive regimes, at least since WW2 when it came of age on the international stage.

        Though the US was instrumental in the formation of the UN it, unlike some of the European nations (excluding Britain of course), has been willing to by-pass that organisation as it did in Iraq because, I suggest, that was a moral cause in which America had nothing to gain. We may argue about its implementation but there are those on the other hand suggesting that the “Arab Spring” has in part been inspired by the post March 2003 Iraqi political ethos, if not its too sectarian politics

        In arguing on the net with American Lefties I referred them to the Iraq Liberation Act 1998 as the real motivation for March 2003 and not Iraq’s oil which it could have paid Saddam off for a lot cheaper than any projection of the cost of removing that murderous regime.

        “H.R.4655 — Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 (Enrolled Bill [Final as Passed Both House and Senate] – ENR)

        One Hundred Fifth Congress

        of the

        United States of America

        AT THE SECOND SESSION
        Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,

        the twenty-seventh day of January, one thousand nine hundred and ninety-eight

        An Act

        To establish a program to support a transition to democracy in Iraq.

        Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
        SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

        This Act may be cited as the `Iraq Liberation Act of 1998′.
        SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

        The Congress makes the following findings:
        (1) On September 22, 1980, Iraq invaded Iran, starting an 8 year war in which Iraq employed chemical weapons against Iranian troops and ballistic missiles against Iranian cities.

        (2) In February 1988, Iraq forcibly relocated Kurdish civilians from their home villages in the Anfal campaign, killing an estimated 50,000 to 180,000 Kurds.

        (3) On March 16, 1988, Iraq used chemical weapons against Iraqi Kurdish civilian opponents in the town of Halabja, killing an estimated 5,000 Kurds and causing numerous birth defects that affect the town today.

        (4) On August 2, 1990, Iraq invaded and began a 7 month occupation of Kuwait, killing and committing numerous abuses against Kuwaiti civilians, and setting Kuwait’s oil wells ablaze upon retreat.

        (5) Hostilities in Operation Desert Storm ended on February 28, 1991, and Iraq subsequently accepted the ceasefire conditions specified in United Nations Security Council Resolution 687 (April 3, 1991) requiring Iraq, among other things, to disclose fully and permit the dismantlement of its weapons of mass destruction programs and submit to long-term monitoring and verification of such dismantlement.

        (6) In April 1993, Iraq orchestrated a failed plot to assassinate former President George Bush during his April 14-16, 1993, visit to Kuwait.

        (7) In October 1994, Iraq moved 80,000 troops to areas near the border with Kuwait, posing an imminent threat of a renewed invasion of or attack against Kuwait.

        (8) On August 31, 1996, Iraq suppressed many of its opponents by helping one Kurdish faction capture Irbil, the seat of the Kurdish regional government.

        (9) Since March 1996, Iraq has systematically sought to deny weapons inspectors from the United Nations Special Commission on Iraq (UNSCOM) access to key facilities and documents, has on several occasions endangered the safe operation of UNSCOM helicopters transporting UNSCOM personnel in Iraq, and has persisted in a pattern of deception and concealment regarding the history of its weapons of mass destruction programs.

        (10) On August 5, 1998, Iraq ceased all cooperation with UNSCOM, and subsequently threatened to end long-term monitoring activities by the International Atomic Energy Agency and UNSCOM.

        (11) On August 14, 1998, President Clinton signed Public Law 105-235, which declared that `the Government of Iraq is in material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations’ and urged the President `to take appropriate action, in accordance with the Constitution and relevant laws of the United States, to bring Iraq into compliance with its international obligations.’.

        (12) On May 1, 1998, President Clinton signed Public Law 105-174, which made $5,000,000 available for assistance to the Iraqi democratic opposition for such activities as organization, training, communication and dissemination of information, developing and implementing agreements among opposition groups, compiling information to support the indictment of Iraqi officials for war crimes, and for related purposes.

        SEC. 3. SENSE OF THE CONGRESS REGARDING UNITED STATES POLICY TOWARD IRAQ.

        It should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove the regime headed by Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq and to promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime.”

        Don’t blame GW Bush for taking Clinton’s legislation seriously. That and not WMD is the only moral and valid reason for March 2003. And in its essence why America, in the view of many conservatives, is “the greatest power for good in the world community”.

        So American friends even our centre-left, carbon taxing, deficit building, knuckle headed ex-unionist PM Gillard also expressed a high view of America’s excercise of power for good when she told your Congress in March last year:

        “You were indispensable in the Cold War and you are indispensable in the new world too”


        Report this

        00

        • #
          Kevin Moore

          A War Crime Or an Act of War?

          By Stephen C. pelletiere,

          “…..This much about the gassing at Halabja we undoubtedly know: it came about in the course of a battle between Iraqis and Iranians. Iraq used chemical weapons to try to kill Iranians who had seized the town, which is in northern Iraq not far from the Iranian border. The Kurdish civilians who died had the misfortune to be caught up in that exchange. But they were not Iraq’s main target.

          And the story gets murkier: immediately after the battle the United States Defense Intelligence Agency investigated and produced a classified report, which it circulated within the intelligence community on a need-to-know basis. That study asserted that it was Iranian gas that killed the Kurds, not Iraqi gas.

          The agency did find that each side used gas against the other in the battle around Halabja. The condition of the dead Kurds’ bodies, however, indicated they had been killed with a blood agent — that is, a cyanide-based gas — which Iran was known to use. The Iraqis, who are thought to have used mustard gas in the battle, are not known to have possessed blood agents at the time.

          These facts have long been in the public domain but, extraordinarily, as often as the Halabja affair is cited, they are rarely mentioned. A much-discussed article in The New Yorker last March did not make reference to the Defense Intelligence Agency report or consider that Iranian gas might have killed the Kurds. On the rare occasions the report is brought up, there is usually speculation, with no proof, that it was skewed out of American political favoritism toward Iraq in its war against Iran.

          I am not trying to rehabilitate the character of Saddam Hussein. He has much to answer for in the area of human rights abuses. But accusing him of gassing his own people at Halabja as an act of genocide is not correct, because as far as the information we have goes, all of the cases where gas was used involved battles. These were tragedies of war. There may be justifications for invading Iraq, but Halabja is not one of them….”

          http://www.sweetliberty.org/issues/war/iraq/kurds.shtml


          Report this

          00

          • #
          • #
            Kevin Moore

            How Bush Tricked Saddam Into Invading Kuwait

            Gulf War 1 – The April Glaspie interview

            http://www.rense.com/general69/41.htm

            According to the book Unholy Babylon by Adel Darwish and Gregory Alexander (Gollancz Paperback 1991):

            The US before the first Gulf War gave Saddam to understand that it would not interfere in its quarrel with Kuwait. US Ambassador April Glaspie conveyed the message to Saddam that the US ‘had no opinion’ on Iraq’s future intentions with regard to Kuwait. (Kuwait as a state separate from Iraq was a creation of the British to protect their oil interests.) The book makes the situation painfully clear: Washington sent many messages to the Iraqi leader, all of them with the same theme. ‘We won’t interfere. We apologise for anything the nasty journalists have written about you, we prefer you to those fanatic Iranians.’ This is the ‘how’ of American diplomacy. The reasons are now clearer..


            Report this

            00

          • #
            Llew Jones

            Kevin, Pellettiere, a CIA political analyst during the 1980s, had never been to Halabja and his evidence has been discredited by a variety of sources.
            Here’s a bit on Pelletiere’ story from wiki:

            A preliminary Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) study at the time reported that it was Iran that was responsible for the attack (on Halabja), an assessment which was used subsequently by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) for much of the early 1990s.

            The CIA’s senior political analyst for the Iran-Iraq war, Stephen C. Pelletiere, co-authored an unclassified analysis of the war[25] which contained a brief summary of the DIA study’s key points.
            Pelletiere claimed that a fact that has not been successfully challenged is that Iraq was not known to have possessed the cyanide-based blood agents determined to have been responsible for the condition of the bodies that were examined,[26] and that blue discolorations around the mouths of the victims and in their extremities,[27] pointed to Iranian-used gas as the culprit.

            Leo Casey writing in Dissent Magazine argued that “None of the authors of these documents … had any expertise in medical and forensic sciences, and their speculation doesn’t stand up to minimal scrutiny.”[28]

            The evidence that hits Pelletiere for a six or if you are not into cricket, a home run, was the testimony of British medical scientist Christine M. Gosden as below:

            Testimony of Dr. Christine M. Gosden
            Before the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Technology, Terrorism and Government and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence on Chemical and Biological Weapons Threats to America Are We Prepared?

            Wednesday, April 22, 1998

            http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/1998_hr/s980422-cg.htm

            This is a definitive must read on Sadaam’s use of chemical/nerve gas weapons and helped set the context for Clinton’s Iraq Liberation Act 1998.

            You will find that in GWs speech to the UN on 12 September 2002 he used the contents of ILA1998 as justification for giving Sadaam the boot if he didn’t smarten himself up on the treatment of his people and the UN inspections.

            Here is an excerpt from her testimony that nails Pelletiere’s CIA inaccuracy:

            “The Attack on Halabja”

            Let me begin by describing the poison gas attack on the Iraqi town of Halabja. This was, let me emphasize, the largest-scale chemical weapons (CW) attack against a civilian population in modern times.

            Halabja was a bustling city in Northern Iraq with a population which was predominantly Kurdish and had sympathised with Iran during the Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s. The population at the time of the attack was about 80,000 people. Troops from the Kurdish Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) entered Halabja on 15th March 1988 amidst heavy resistance from Iraqi security and military forces.

            Halabja fell to the PUK troops (accompanied by Iranian revolutionary guards) four hours later. The Iraqis responded with heavy artillery fire and an early wave of six aircraft bombarded an area near Halabja with ordinary high explosives. The civilians had been prevented from leaving the town by the PUK, hoping that the Iraqis would not attack a town with civilians in it — thus providing a human shield.

            The CW attack began early in the evening of March 16th, when a group of eight aircraft began dropping chemical bombs; the chemical bombardment continued all night. According to Kurdish commanders on the scene, there were 14 aircraft sorties during the night, with seven to eight planes in each group, and they concentrated their attack on the city and all the roads leading out of Halabja.

            The chemical attacks continued until the 19th. Iraqi planes would attack for about 45 minutes and then, after they had gone, another group would appear 15 minutes later.”


            Report this

            00

          • #
            Llew Jones

            Just listened again to Ron Paul’s prophetic address. He claimed war would be waged on Iraq without proper authority. As I’m sure he wouldn’t cede that authority lies exclusively with the UN I think he missed out on the following authority given by the US Congress to GW Bush:

            “The Iraq Resolution or the Iraq War Resolution (formally the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002,[1] Pub.L. 107-243, 116 Stat. 1498, enacted October 16, 2002, H.J.Res. 114) is a joint resolution passed by the United States Congress in October 2002 as Public Law No: 107-243, authorizing military action against Iraq.”

            Oh well someone else can check on the others but I’m sure he’s better at predictions than any climate scientist.


            Report this

            00

        • #
          Crakar24

          Confession or elucidation please Crakar.

          Good that we see eye to eye on AGW, as far as other issues go i dont know if i am left, right or in the middle…….maybe you can tell me. I have never read the newspapers you mentioned, as for policies i doubt that there would ever be a situation where one would accept/like every policy by a politician.

          Do you like every Liberal or Labor policy? I doubt it but you may align yourself with the major ones. There are so many issues you can only focus on important ones for you.

          Since he certainly doesn’t hold the centre to hard left view on CAGW is he expressing an extreme right wing neo-Nazi position? Never taken any interest in what they believe so I wouldn’t know but his obvious distaste for the Zionists (which is possibly code for Jews) is interesting.

          This comment needed reproducing.

          I have a distates for Zionists because of the way they treat the Palestinians and their neighbours and also the way they can board American flagged ships in international waters and murder Turkish and American citizens with impunity (protected at the UN by USA of all people).

          Note: Newt Gingrich claims the Palestinians are an invented people and he just won the SC primary!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

          I have equal distates for the Greens as they try and stop Jewish people earning a living via a coffee shop through BDS.

          I view Jews like Americans, they are nice people but their governments are blood thirsty murdering criminals.

          Did you ask about banks?

          The private banking system is a con, a scam a giant ponzi scheme and you only need grade 1 maths to figure it out so for the last time.

          If all the money in circulation is borrowed from the private banks and i owe interest on that money then there is not enough money in circulation to pay back what i owe. I can never pay the bank back therefore i am a slave to its debt.

          Governments can issue there own currency it can still be a fiat type system but there is no interest to be paid back, if i tie it to a standard, be it gold silver or whatever then it is no longer fiat.

          Is this enough or do you want more clarification?


          Report this

          00

    • #
      Crakar24

      OK John,

      We know the USA dropped two atomic bombs (WMD) on Japan please give details ie times, dates, locations, type WMD used, who used it and who did they use it on.

      If cannot supply this information then i suggest you have a large cup of STFU.


      Report this

      00

  • #
    pat

    for the record:

    remember this “exercise” in US democracy involved a mere 121,503 votes! who knows if romney or santorum even came first and second, in whatever order:

    19 Jan: Desmoines Register: Jennifer Jacobs: 2012 GOP caucus count unresolved
    THE RESULTS: Santorum finished ahead by 34 votes
    MISSING DATA: 8 precincts’ numbers will never be certified
    PARTY VERDICT: GOP official says, ‘It’s a split decision’
    There are too many holes in the certified totals from the Iowa caucuses to know for certain who won, but Rick Santorum wound up with a 34-vote advantage.
    Results from eight precincts are missing — any of which could hold an advantage for Mitt Romney — and will never be recovered and certified, Republican Party of Iowa officials told The Des Moines Register on Wednesday.
    GOP officials discovered inaccuracies in 131 precincts, although not all the changes affected the two leaders. Changes in one precinct alone shifted the vote by 50 — a margin greater than the certified tally…
    2012: Iowa Republican officials moved their tabulating center from party headquarters to an undisclosed location to ward against hackers and protesters. County officials reported the precinct votes by phone with live call-takers or logged in to a security-code-protected website.
    http://caucuses.desmoinesregister.com/2012/01/19/register-exclusive-2012-gop-caucus-count-unresolved/


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Crakar24

    Heres one for Kevin

    “We will have a world government whether you like it or not. The only question is whether that government will be achieved by conquest or consent.”(Jewish Banker James Paul Warburg, February 17, 1950, as he testified before the U.S. Senate).


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Crakar24

    With Perry now gone and Newt getting destroyed by one of his ex wives that only leaves 3 but seeing how Santorum supports SOPA i guess we are down to two.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c5iY5Sll72k


    Report this

    00

    • #
      Llew Jones

      Not so sure C24. Romney’s lead in the saddlebags is his religion in a country where a majority (60 to 75 percent) indentify as “Christian”.

      Is the strong Evangelical wing willingly to accept a RC Gingrich? The following shows, perhaps better than Paul, that he knows how to play politics. The audience seemed to think so:

      NORTH CHARLESTON, S.C. – A debate that featured fierce exchanges among Republican presidential contenders Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum began with an extraordinary rebuke of another figure on stage: moderator John King of CNN.

      In his opening question, King asked Gingrich whether he wanted to respond to allegations by an ex-wife that he had asked her for an “open marriage” that would allow him to continue an affair he was having with a staffer.

      “I think the destructive, vicious, negative nature of much of the news media makes it harder to govern this country, harder to attract decent people to run for office, and I am appalled that you would begin a presidential debate on a topic like that,” the former House speaker replied icily amid cheers from the audience at the North Charleston…”

      http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/story/2012-01-19/republican-debate-charleston-sc/52685970/1


      Report this

      00

  • #
    Kevin Moore

    Ron Paul video information -

    http://www.thepresident.com/


    Report this

    00

  • #
    pat

    for the record:

    22 Jan: WTOC: South Carolina’s Attorney General detects voter fraud during primaries
    South Carolina’s Attorney General, Alan Wilson has notified the U.S. Justice Department of potential voter fraud.
    Wilson says an analysis found 953 ballots cast by voters were people who are listed as dead.
    He has asked the State Law Enforcement Division to investigate.
    http://www.wtoc.com/story/16571904/south-carolinas-attorney-general-detects-voter-fraud-for-primaries

    21 Jan: Denver Conspiracy Examiner: Jeffrey Phelps: Iowa vote fraud official
    Once again the establishment is showing it’s cards in an obvious attempt to defraud Ron Paul from the nomination, as Iowa GOP ‘officials’ purposely disrupt and permanently invalidate the 2012 Iowa Caucus.
    The official Caucus website, in conjunction with the Des Moines Register, had to come forward Thursday to claim the official results can “never be certified” after 8 different precincts turn up invalid results due to “missing votes” and changing stories.
    For the first time in history, the Iowa GOP decided to change the final vote count to a “Secret location” for what was claimed to be “security concerns.” The unprecedented change in venue came as a shock to most Iowans who are used to seeing the final results tallied at State Party Headquarters in Des Moines, in full view of the public…AND MUCH MORE
    http://www.examiner.com/conspiracy-in-denver/iowa-vote-fraud-official

    and this guy’s a winner! LOL.

    20 Jan: WSJ Blog: Danny Yadron: Gingrich Cancels Event After Few Show Up.
    CHARLESTON, S.C. — Newt Gingrich is surging in the polls and garnered standing ovations at last night’s GOP presidential debate, but his campaign canceled his first event Friday at a college stadium here due to poor attendance…
    But the stands were all-but empty about five minutes before the former House speaker was set to speak, and his appearance was called off…
    Shortly afterward, former Rep. Bob Livingston of Louisiana, a Gingrich surrogate, told reporters that Mr. Gingrich canceled due to a scheduling conflict…
    http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2012/01/20/gingrich-cancels-event-after-few-show-up/?mod=google_news_blog


    Report this

    00

  • #
    pat

    good ol US democracy…

    22 Jan: ActivistPost: Brandon Turbeville: Witnesses Document Potential Vote Fraud in S.C. Primaries
    http://www.activistpost.com/2012/01/witnesses-document-potential-vote-fraud.html


    Report this

    00

  • #
    pat

    from the comments on the WSJ blog linked above – u have to expand the comments to find it:

    posted by Anonymous at 10.32am: Meanwhile every mainstream media outlet keeps trying to convince us the idea that “Gingrich is surging in South Carolina”…. Sure thing bud!
    PS: Everybody needs to look at the scam they are trying to pull for this primary process. it’s called BROKERED CONVENTION. it’s the second phase of the Establishment plan, to ensure a Romney nomination and ensure Ron Paul will NOT be the nominee… It works like this. The NEW RULES for this year changed the “winner take all” system for obtaining delegates in the primary states, to “delegates allocated based on % of votes candidate receives” (basically a close 2nd place in that state will earn that candidate almost as many delegates as 1st place.) they did this in EVERY state, except interestingly enough, Florida…. Florida, where Mit Romney is highly favoured will be a “Winner take all primary” The rest will not. Baring Florida from the equation the “% of delegates based on voters” seems fair, right? WRONG That’s where “BROKERED CONVENTION” comes in. Brokered Convention means that a candidate will need 50% of all delegates to earn the nomination. How will only 1 candidate receive 50% of all delegates when there are 4 candidates all relatively close to each other? Simple! Candidates will have to “broker” their delegates to the nominee they WANT to support! In other words, even if Ron Paul ends up winning 40% of all delegates after all votes have counted and he is in first place…. He will NOT be your nominee… Gingrich through “brokered convention” will GIVE his delegates to Romney, putting him over 50% and getting him the nomination! So even if Ron Paul WINS the primary process, he will NOT win the nomination! …Worse yet, if Gingrich’s delegates alone aren’t enough… they will just get Santorum AND Gingrich to give their delegates to Romney, and once again Ron Paul loses, even though the people’s majority chose him. This is The Establishment’s plan. This is literally 3 against 1. This is BROKERED CONVENTION. It takes all the power from the voters and puts it into the hands of The Establishment to “hand pick” whichever candidate they want.
    Please people, wake up… look at this, and get the word out. CNN, MSNBC, Fox won’t mention anything about brokered convention, until they decide to USE it to beat Ron Paul… We need to stop it before they implement it and turn this election process into even more of a joke.
    http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2012/01/20/gingrich-cancels-event-after-few-show-up/tab/comments/


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Llew Jones

    I’ve got a thing about economics and economists that wont go away since I learned that about the only courses, a significant number of the ex-union officials running our country, including the half deranged Conroy (NBN fame), have done is economics.

    So after reading that inane New York Times columnist and Keynesian economist Paul Krugman and in order to exorcise that demon and prove to you Yankee haters that America is still the land of the brave and free I sent this little therapeutic and didactic missile to that hotbed of Leftism the NYT. It published it proving the good ole US is still the LOTBATF or the Editor doesn’t really like the Nobel Laureate Krugman after all:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/23/opinion/krugman-is-our-economy-healing.html

    Llew Jones
    Australia

    One wonders if the real problem with the recent European economic troubles has more to do with those who crafted the economics of the EU. That is are the real culprits the great army of brilliant economists that the various economies depended on? Perhaps rather than rely on what essentially is a branch of the social and hence inexact sciences, Europe and America would be better of using competent accountants and those able to successfully run large businesses to plan the monetary and fiscal side of government.

    Here in Australia our federal treasury’s economists never seem to get their budget predictions right. They are OK on the spending side of things, except the costs are invariably higher than estimates, but have a lot of trouble in estimating adequate tax revenues. That’s why the idea of competent accountants springs to mind.

    Perhaps economists could be retrained in some other discipline in order to be more useful members of society. Alternatively Paul Krugman one day may be able to tell us why economists are needed at all.

    Jan. 24, 2012 at 12:42 a.m.
    Reply
    Recommend2


    Report this

    00