It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Iraq, bailouts, AGW, Iran, JFK, and the FED... one snake, many heads

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Apr, 18 2010 @ 02:57 PM
How many times on this board have there been references to "The Powers That Be (TPTB)", the "Illuminati", the "Oil Companies"? More than I can count, certainly. But who are these Powers? Is there a face to go with the cryptic names? Yes, there are names, and some of those will be divulged throughout this opener. It all began in the latter half of the 19th century with a man named John D. Rockefeller, creator of a company called Standard Oil. Standard Oil was originally Standard Oil of Ohio and was created to profit from oil reserves found in the Cleveland area. At the time, oil was primarily used for heating and kerosene, and the demand was small enough so that international trade was not required to support the United States consumption.

That all changed, however, with the invention of the automobile assembly plant by Henry Ford way back in 1908. The Model T was cheap enough to make it affordable for many families, and led to great success for Henry's little company. The engine was simple, even primitive compared to today's powerplants, and could run on either gasoline, kerosene, or ethanol. The major product in supply at the time was of course kerosene, as it was typically used for heating and lighting. But when refining kerosene, one gets a lot of other products; one is gasoline. The Model T was instrumental in establishing a market for this 'waste by-product' that was simply too volatile and hazardous to be used for most applications at the time.

Another major player was Royal Dutch Shell (which became Shell Oil), a merger between Royal Dutch Petroleum of the Netherlands and Shell Transport and Trading Company of Britain. The two merged in 1907 in order to compete with the tremendous power of Standard Oil, with the help of an Armenian business man named Calouste Gulbenkian, nicknamed "Mr. Five Percent" due to his regular policy of charging five percent royalty for his services as consultant to mergers.

About the same time, the United States economy was having some problems. In 1907, amidst a recession, a failed attempt to take oer the United Copper company triggered a Wall Street panic similar to the more well-known panic of 1929. Stock prices fell to 50% of their peak and there were large runs on banks. Perhaps 1929 would have come 22 years sooner if not for John Pierpont (J. P.) Morgan. Mr. Morgan held off a total collapse by actually injecting his own capital into the stock market to shore it up during the panic. The collapse was averted, but it caused concern among the businessmen of the country who stood to lose their life's work in the face of such an unforeseeable disaster. A mere three years later, in 1910, the concept of a new central banking banking system was conceived and implemented in another three years, in 1913, as the Federal Reserve. Operating as a non-governmental body, but still (loosely) bound by the government in a unique arrangement of powers, the Federal Reserve was to stabilize the monetary systems of the United States and prevent future panics.

There are those who say that this scare of 1907 which led to the conception of the Federal Reserve also led to another major event that took place in 1911: the breakup of Standard Oil. To be sure, Standard Oil had come under fire many times previously for its monopolistic control of oil in the United States, but it wasn't until the US Supreme Court intervened in 1911 that the breakup occurred. John D. Rockefeller's vast empire was now in pieces. But unlike killing a snake by cutting it into pieces, cutting such a lucrative company into pieces can cause it to regrow to even more vast proportions. And so it did.

Standard Oil Company of New Jersey ("Jersey Standard") was to later be known as Exxon, Standard oil Company of New York ("Socony") became known as Mobil, Standard oil Company of California became Chevron, Standard Oil of Ohio ("Sohio") was bought by British Petroleum ("BP"), and Standard Oil Company of Indiana became Amoco (which later merged with BP), just to name a few.

Outside the USA, other countries also recognized the rising importance of oil as an energy source. It was primarily the British but also other European countries who began development of oil sources in the Middle East, through several different consortiums chartered to deal with the local governments. It was in 1912 that one of these, the Turkish Petroleum Company was formed as a consortium specifically to deal with the Ottoman empire for rights to oil reserves in Iraq. The major shareholder in the deal was Royal Dutch Shell, and the man behind the consortium was none other than Mr. Five Percent. The deal opened up the Middle East for oil exploration and exploitation. in 1927, oil was indeed discovered and suddenly everyone in the industry wanted to be a part of the Turkish Petroleum Company. The following year, four oil companies signed a formal agreement: the Anglo-Persian Oil Company (which later became BP), Royal Dutch Shell, a French oil company called CFP, and an American consortium which included what was left of Standard Oil. This was the break-in point for USA interests in the Middle East, which up until that time had been largely domestic only.

In 1929, the Federal Reserve failed to stop a stock market crash that created a panic in the United States and started the great Depression. As the monetary supply of the United States (like most countries at the time) was tied to a gold standard, the depression spread across currencies and eventually affected the world. Oil production continued as one of the least-affected industries, but growth was still slow. Then came the antidote for the economic ills, a pill that had the side effect of countless lives and rivers of blood: World War II.

War has always relied on massive economic efforts by a populace, but World War II saw this taken to new extremes. The machines of war were faster, more powerful, and needed more fuel than in any war before. Oil was suddenly in massive demand to fuel these instruments of destruction, and work to make the supplies themselves threw the USA from a period of depression into a period of lucracy. When the dust had settled and the soldier came home, they had jobs, money, and a desire for a better life. That better life was fueled by oil, and the oil companies who were already lucrative now grew beyond anyone's wildest dreams. People bought cars, gasoline stations opened up, and all the goods one could want became available... all brought in with the help of that miracle fuel.

As oil profits grew, so did the royalties that the oil companies paid to the countries who owned the oil reserves. Once a nomadic people, jockeying back and forth among stretches of wasteland to find a living, the rulers now could relax in their new-found wealth. They became affluent educated businessmen, skilled themselves in the art of negotiation, and thus improved their lots in the oil industry even more. But the old cultural habits of tribal warfare still ran strong, and many of the leaders saw their best opportunity to retain their lifestyle as lying within friendships with the powerful nations which needed their precious oil. Perhaps the best-known of these is Saudi Arabia, which is ruled by the House of Saud. The patriarch of this house until his death in 2005 was King Fahd. The following is an excerpt from a funeral announcement:

U.S. President George W. Bush, whose father had close ties with Fahd, will send Vice President Dick Cheney and other officials to offer condolences. Former president George Bush sent half a million U.S. troops to Saudi Arabia in 1990 to launch the recapture of Kuwait from Saddam Hussein.

It is common knowledge that there is a bond of friendship between US leaders and the House of Saud. The real question is, where did this bond come from? Strangely enough, the oil-soaked sands of Saudi Arabia were originally dismissed as worthless desert by BP; the following is an excerpt of an analysis by Sir Arnold Wilson, General manager of BP, in 1923:

I personally cannot believe that oil will be found in his reign [that of King ibn-Saud, then coinciding with the most oil-rich region in Saudi Arabia]. As far as I know, there are no superficial oil-shows, and the geological formation does not appear to be particularly favourable from what little we know of it; but in any case no company can afford to put down wells into a formation in these parts (however favourable) unless there is some superficial indication of oil.

This has been called the worst oil assessment in history, and led to an almost complete dismissal of Saudi Arabia by the oil companies involved in exploring and exploiting the Middle East.

Yet, one American company disagreed. In 1933, a concession was granted by Saudi Arabia to Chevron and from 1938 to 1950 oil was continually discovered in sufficient amounts to make Saudi Arabia recognizable as the richest deposit of crude oil on the planet. Dismissed by the British and accepted by the Americans, it was no wonder that this deal also brought a friendship between the House of Saud and the United States. And with oil being so ital to national security interests, it is no wonder that the leaders of the United States would see this friendship as something to be nurtured and cultivated. In 1960, the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries ("OPEC") was formed. As the country with the single largest reserves of oil, Saudi Arabia wielded great power over its direction and policies, placing the friendship between the House of Saud and the United States in a very favorable new light.

A part of OPEC's policy was to 'peg' the oil to the American dollar... in other words, oil would be priced and sold in dollars. If one wished to buy oil with rubles, one could, but only by first having the rubles converted to dollars. In many ways this made perfect sense; the American dollar was the strongest currency presently in large circulation, backed by a huge economy and the Federal Reserve banking consortium. But there was something more sinister at play in this decision. The dollar was quietly having problems. Domestically, America had abandoned the gold standard in 1933 for the silver standard instead, meaning that money was no longer worth a certain amount of gold on demand but rather a certain amount of silver. This freed up the gold reserves to be used for international currency and used silver as the basis for domestic money. In June of 1963, Congress voted to abandon the silver standard as well, but President John F. Kennedy issued a counter attack to maintain a metal basis for the dollar: Executie Order 11110. Its purpose was to continue using the silver standard for as long as possible by demanding that the Treasury continue issuing silver certificates for as much silver as they had on hand.

The situation had been created by an increase in the value of silver on the International market. As prices rose, it became more profitable for International traders and foreign countries to demand redemption of silver rather than to hold on to the dollars themselves. Congress was reacting to banking interests that were causing problems within the Federal Reserve, and of course to a desire by the Federal reserve to have even more control over the monetary system of the United States than they already had. As it were, their power was controlled by the amount of silver on hand; without the silver standard, there would be no such constraints on monetary power.

Of course, we all know what conspired on November 22, 1963 in Dallas, Texas. Lesson learned: don't mess with the Fed.

Even though Executive Order 11110 was not repealed, it of course died off over the rising cost of silver. The Congress, and of course the Federal Reserve, won; the United States monetary supply was now completely fiat. There was nothing to back up the value of the American dollar other than faith in the United States. Or was there? This was only three years after the formation of OPEC, and the good friends of the United States, the House of Saud, was tying the value of oil to the dollar. While there was no oil sitting in tankers ready to be redeemed and no legal basis to force such a redemption, the fact that dollars were needed to buy oil made the dollar still effectively backed by a commodity: oil.

Without this backing, the bankers running the Federal Reserve knew that they had a major job maintaining International as well as domestic faith in the dollar. If the value of the dollar collapsed, so did their power. But tying the dollar directly to a precious commodity stifled their attempts to increase their own wealth and power through manipulation of the economy. This was the perfect solution. There was no direct tie to any commodity to bind their hands, but there was an International demand backed by the one substance that every nation needed desperately.


posted on Apr, 18 2010 @ 02:57 PM

The problem was only that the region was politically unstable and not always friendly to corporate interests. The 1933 agreement between Iran and the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company, for example, was seen by those in Iran as exploitative. In 1951, the democratically-elected prime Minister of Iran, Mohammad Mosaddegh, nationalized the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company, seriously endangering Britain's assets in the region. In response, Britain's Prime Minister William Churchill and US President Dwight Eisenhower orchestrated (allegedly) an overthrow of the Iranian government. In the place of Mohammad Mosaddegh, they instituted a dictatorship under Mohammad-Rezā Shāh Pahlavi, otherwise known as the Shah of Iran. For 25 years this arrangement worked to keep western interests protected until the Shah was overthrown in 1978 by Ayatollah Khomeini in a coup, also taking 53 Americans hostage. This Iranian Hostage Crisis lasted 444 days until then-President Jimmy Carter was replaced by Ronald Reagan. The entire term of office of President Carter was overshadowed by the nightly broadcasts of news - generally news about what was not being done - and no doubt led to his crushing defeat by Reagan.

This set off a period of concern over Iran. The Shah, already in ill health, was whisked away out of country while the religious leaders, the Ayatollahs, took power and set up a new government. In apparent response to the actions taken by Khomeini, tensions began to brew between Iran and the more US-friendly nation of Iraq, Iraq had made a statement as early as 1959 that it considered part of the Iranian territory to belong to Iraq, and tensions built from there. Finally, in 1980, amidst the Iranian Hostage Crisis, war broke out.

The Vice-President of Iraq at the time was an arrogantly proud young man named Saddam Hussein, who was friendly with the USA and the Carter Administration. The Iraq-Iran War lasted until 1988, with the USA becoming overtly involved on the side of Iraq in 1982 (covertly, Reagan was implicated in the Iran-Contra Affair which involved selling arms to Iranian interests during this time). During and after the Iran-Iraq War, Saddam Hussein continued to gain political power, emerging as the ruler of Iraq. After emerging from a long and costly war, Saddam turned his attention to recovering his country from the ravages of the war.

Iraq owed much money to Kuwait, another USA-friendly oil exporter. Saddam approached them to forgive the war debts. Kuwait refused. Saddam then went to OPEC to attempt to get prices raised on oil exports. Kuwait was notorious in its refusal to cooperate with the request. As tensions built, Saddam officially complained to the United States that Kuwait had been slant-drilling into Iraqi oil reserves. The USA refused to take sides, and in August of 1990, Iraq invaded Kuwait in the Gulf War.

President George H. W. Bush responded with an ultimatun to Saddam Hussein to withdraw. When this ultimatum went unanswered, the United States entered the conflict on behalf of Kuwait. Despite public sentiment to continue on and destroy the Iraqi regime, Bush stopped at the Kuwait border, declaring victory. The oil interests of the United States, primarily the shipping ports in Kuwait, were secure, and Saddam was still, supposedly, our friend.

Under the auspices of the United Nations, a cease-fire agreement was drawn up. Iraq would have designated 'no-fly' zones where no Iraqi military aircraft were allowed, and the United States would patrol these zones. Irag would have to disarm and be subject to UN inspections to prove this. Despite having signed the cease-fire agreement, Saddam Husseion stubbornly defended Iraqi sovereignty, denying inspector access to certain areas on the basis of "national security" and continuing to hae troops fire anti-aircraft weapons at patrol planes in the no-fly zones. Additionally, the UN imposed economic sanctions on Irag, leading to years of economic misery for the country. In 1996, the United States again went up againt saddam Hussein by refusing to lift the sanctions, instead collaborating with the UN to implement an Oil-for-Food Program, which was beset with widespread reported abuse. this abuse ranged from usury fees to improper transactions to items paid for but never received to outrageous overhead expenses. It has been called the worst scam in history.

Saddam Hussein was destroyed as a leader, shamed, disgraced... but purposely alive. His violations of the cease-fire agreement went on until the attacks on the World Trade Towers in New York on September 11, 2001. As a direct result of the public outcry against the attacks, the United States under President George W. Bush declared a "War on Terrorism" and announced its intention to invade any country where terrorism was flourishing. Afghanistan was identified as the most likely location for the alleged ringleader of the Al-Qaeda terrorists, Osama Bin Laden, and was subsequently invaded. Then, in somewhat of a surprise move, Iraq was invaded as well, although up till now not much was said about Iraqi ties to terrorism.

Or was that just the cover story?

Petrov, Engdahl, and other analysts point out that in 2000, Saddam Hussein began to demand euros, rather than dollars, for his oil exports; once Saddam was deposed, Iraq's oil exports were once again sold in dollars.
Source: m...

Despite being purposely spared in 1991 after invading another country, despite 10 years of violating the cease-fire agreement, one year after demanding Euros instead of dollars for oil, Saddam Hussein was hunted down until the was found, imprisoned, convicted, and hung.

The Iraqi War was not about oil, nor about terrorism, nor about WMDs, nor about personal attacks... it was about money. Depegging oil from the dollar would have major economic repercussions for the United States and the Federal Reserve. It would remove the prop that holds the value of the dollar up and lead to major economic woes.

Soon after, reports surfaced of Iran developing nuclear weaponry. But there is a parallel to what happened with Iraq:

Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad ordered in September 2009 the replacement of the US dollar by the euro in the country's foreign exchange accounts.

Earlier, the Islamic Republic of Iran had announced that the euro would replace the greenback in the country's oil transactions.

This depegging from the dollar is happening at the same time as the dollar is falling in value worldwide. Oil-producing countries who are depegging from the dollar are quickly becoming the victim of war propaganda. And now it appears too many countries are seriously considering depegging to stop them all. What to do when all your plans fail? Go to plan B of course.

Plan B: Hedge against the inevitable. Banks stand to lose billions of dollars should the economy fail. During the last two years, several bailouts have been announced, where United States tax dollars are being given out freely to banks. The stated reason for this transfer of funds is to "loosen the money supply and restore credit". But the money supply isn't loosening, despite trillions of dollars being given out.

The simple truth is that the money was never intended to "loosen credit"... it is a hedge fund for those who stand to lose everything they have built up through generations of manipulating the economy of the United States (and to some extent, the world itself). But there is another problem: the public is growing tired of it.

Plan C: If you can't control the oil through dollars at the source, control it at the end. There are two byproducts that come from burning any oil-based fuel, regardless of how pure or how refined it may be:

water (H2O) and carbon dioxide (CO2). Everything else that comes from the combustion process can be filtered out either in the fuel or in the combustion products themselves. Water is something that no one could ever possibly believe is dangerous, CO2, on the other hand, is not something needed by humans to survive on a daily basis, at least not in public belief.

If there were away to make sure that anyone who used oil-based fuels had to pay for that privilege, in dollars, then the use of energy would stabilize the currency just as well as making sure anyone who bought fuel did so in dollars. That would require regulation,and obviously regulation on energy use for the sake of a currency that is fiat in the first place would be extremely unpopular. Instead, a permit needed to use fuel, necessary for the safety and well-being of people world wide, would be much more palatable to the public. But this is not something that can be done overnight; it will require years of preparatory work to first demonize the fuel by-products, then time to institute regulations and a financial collection apparatus to control the use of fuel.

The demonization is complete. CO2 is blamed regularly for Global Warming (sometimes now referred to as 'Climate Change' just in case the weather gets cooler instead of cooperating and getting warmer), and predictions are rampant about how badly life will be impacted should this plan not be put into action immediately. The implementation is underway, with the introduction of the concept of 'carbon credits'. And since the problems with oil dollars are escalating, so must the rush for implementation.

Plan C is here.


posted on Apr, 18 2010 @ 04:10 PM
This thread should be recieveing more attention. It is a lot of information wrapped together in a plausible by little spoken of thesis.

Its where you get into oil being the real backing of the currency that things get interesting. This is also well known among conspiracy buffs but little spoken of, and the climate change stuff just follows.

I don't see how a carbon tax is going to force these foriegn countries to use dollars. I think that's part of the push for a world bank and consolidation of currencies we see now.

More work needs to be done on finding out where the bailout funds went. Your hedging assessment explains some but I know there's more to it.

posted on Apr, 18 2010 @ 04:49 PM
Bravo, thank you.

Definitely a thread deserving of a bump. Thank you for putting this all together so nicely, its a perfect crash course in recent history.

Star and Flag.

posted on Apr, 18 2010 @ 05:00 PM
reply to post by beebs

Great thread, should be more like this one.

For the people who want a little more of this, go get Jim Marrs book "Rule by Secrecy' it covers the OP + a lot more.

I've read it four times already.

See my signature below....nuff said.

posted on Apr, 18 2010 @ 07:51 PM
reply to post by downunderET

Yeah, good call. I read that book last year, and it is definitely the red pill/rabbit hole.

Everyone needs to read it, especially everyone on ATS. Marrs puts so many connections together its insane.

I do need to read it again, because there is no way to get it all after one reading.

This great thread barely gives the historical scope of the big picture... but more than enough to get the idea.

Bump... come on lets get more flags.

posted on Apr, 18 2010 @ 08:39 PM
Yeah, all you guys are correct; I barely touched on the whole picture. Everything that has contributed to this story would fill 7 libraries and 3 encyclopedias, much more than a single thread can hold.

That's why I spent so much time linking. Anyone who wants to know more can start off there. Most of the links are easy to read (Wikipedia), but contain more links to more in-depth information.

TPTB are not infallible, and there is no one group, as this thread indicates... there are several groups, all linked through friendship and finances, but all also looking to expand their own power and reach. It's a huge chess game, and we are the pawns.

Hopefully some of us pawns can see what the next move is. I know I have become pretty good at predicting general trends based on this concept.

Thanks for the bumps and flags. Keep the conversation going!


posted on Apr, 20 2010 @ 11:48 AM
reply to post by TheRedneck

Starred and Flagged!
Excellent thread. As you said, it is far from complete, because it would fill volumes. One name that I would respectfully like to add to your list is the DuPont family. This family has been more involved in the behind-the-scenes manipulation of government and industry than virtually any other family in the last two centuries. Of course, it was the Duponts that were behind the "Business Plot" to overthrow the US government in 1933. The fact that virtually nothing happened as a result, points to the power that this family held, and STILL holds.


In the summer of 1933, shortly after Roosevelt's "First 100 Days," America's richest businessmen were in a panic. It was clear that Roosevelt intended to conduct a massive redistribution of wealth from the rich to the poor. Roosevelt had to be stopped at all costs.

The answer was a military coup. It was to be secretly financed and organized by leading officers of the Morgan and Du Pont empires. This included some of America's richest and most famous names of the time:

* Irenee Du Pont - Right-wing chemical industrialist and founder of the American Liberty League, the organization assigned to execute the plot.
* Grayson Murphy - Director of Goodyear, Bethlehem Steel and a group of J.P. Morgan banks.
* William Doyle - Former state commander of the American Legion and a central plotter of the coup.
* John Davis - Former Democratic presidential candidate and a senior attorney for J.P. Morgan.
* Al Smith - Roosevelt's bitter political foe from New York. Smith was a former governor of New York and a codirector of the American Liberty League.
* John J. Raskob - A high-ranking Du Pont officer and a former chairman of the Democratic Party. In later decades, Raskob would become a "Knight of Malta," a Roman Catholic Religious Order with a high percentage of CIA spies, including CIA Directors William Casey, William Colby and John McCone.
* Robert Clark - One of Wall Street's richest bankers and stockbrokers.
* Gerald MacGuire - Bond salesman for Clark, and a former commander of the Connecticut American Legion. MacGuire was the key recruiter to General Butler.

Researchers at the Political Economy Research Institute of the University of Massachusetts Amherst ranked DuPont as the largest corporate producer of air pollution in the United States.

The fact that the MSM barely mentions DuPont when it comes to air pollution, again, tells you how much control they have over the MSM.

DuPont virtually owns Mike Castle, a Republican,the current Delaware Representative in Congress, and soon to be new Senator for Delaware, taking Joe Biden's seat, after the next election. His election is a foregone conclusion, a rather interesting fact, given the overwhelming Democratic Party registration in Delaware.

Of course, it was Delaware Governor DuPont that picked Castle as his successor as governor, soon after picking and guiding him to election as Lieutenant Governor of Delaware, in 1980.

In addition, DuPont was founded in 1802 as a gunpowder manufacturer:

The company grew quickly, and by the mid 19th century had become the largest supplier of gunpowder to the United States military, supplying as much as half of the powder used by the Union Army during the American Civil War.

I could go on, however, a quick Google search would reveal more information on the power and manipulation by the DuPonts that would put the bandwidth to a severe test.

posted on Apr, 20 2010 @ 11:53 AM
Bloody fantastic thread !

Sadly, it seems not "sexy" enough for most of ATS, which is a real shame

Threads that go into a lot of detail, and contain a lot of hard work and research don't seem to be that popular anymore when they contain factual information...

And that sucks

posted on Apr, 20 2010 @ 12:03 PM
reply to post by Retrovertigo

Threads that go into a lot of detail, and contain a lot of hard work and research don't seem to be that popular anymore when they contain factual information...

Right on. The optimal thread for maximum member participation would go something like this:

Secret conspiracy by Reptilians, who control the world, to hide the fact that in 2012, Elvis will return on Nibiru, and reveal the truth about JFK, 9/11, and OKC, and set up a one-world government, with Obama as its leader.

Now there is a thread that will garner flags!

posted on Apr, 20 2010 @ 04:51 PM
reply to post by ProfEmeritus

Yes, indeed, DuPont definitely ranks up there in the list of names that have exerted power and influence over the population. However, in the chemical industry it is not alone. DuPont Chemical shares the stage with Dow Chemical and BASF.

All of these companies are heavily into plastics production, which itself depends on oil for the raw materials. All of them also have questionable practices in their past.

What really amazes me, though, when I study this subject is that those at the top are as fallible and given to moods as the rest of us. They are human too. They simply have the power to influence the rest of us in powerful ways, and like most humans, have a tendency to abuse that power when it profits them.

TPTB are not like they are typically portrayed, a group of men laughing hysterically in some back room office at the rest of us. Rather, they are interested in their money and power. It's not like they want to hurt anyone, but more like they simply don't care if they do. As long as their lifestyle of extravagance and their financially-rooted sense of self-worth is maintained, they are fine with whatever means are needed to achieve their goals.

There are also more than one group. The DuPonts care nothing for the Rockefellers or the Morgans, except they can use them for their advantage. And as I pointed out in the OP, the oil barons of the Middle East are simply trying to increase their power base as well, and in many cases in direct opposition to some of these powerful families. What we see on the nightly news is the result of moves played against each other.

It's a lot like the old movie The Highlander... in the end, there can only be one. The question that concerns us is: how much misery will be heaped upon us, the people, by these power plays in the meantime?


posted on Apr, 20 2010 @ 07:12 PM
reply to post by TheRedneck

OK! I've read you theory which was good reading, but I have something which I can't understand about your theory.

You say in your theory that other countries worldwide would pay for this privilege "carbon credits" in dollar - is that correct?

Because I don't know if that would be correct according to what I have read before in UN papers etc.

I know there are various standards bodies who set the carbon emission bar such as the Chicago Climate Exchange, the Voluntary Carbon Standard and the CDM Gold Standard.

GOLD STANDARD - a best practice methodology and a high quality carbon credit label for both Kyoto and voluntary markets

The Gold Standard Foundation is a non-profit organization under Swiss law that operates a certification scheme for premium carbon credits.

Gold Standard credits (GS-CER and GS-VER) are offered for sale in compliance offset markets established by the Kyoto Protocol and in non-Kyoto voluntary offset markets. The Foundation has trademarked the Gold Standard label, which is today internationally-recognised as the leading indicator of quality in carbon markets.

And in Europe we have (for example) BlueNext and Nord Pool, the French and Nordic exchanges etc, which are trading the "carbon credits" in EURO's.

And as far as I know, the European carbon credits are also created here in Europe based on the value of the Euro - and payed for in Euros!

Can you please point me in the right direction to where i can read that 'soley' the dollar will be implemented and be the 'only' allowed currency for this trade?

Nowhere have I read that this system would change to implement the trading SOLEY in dollars?

[edit on 20-4-2010 by Chevalerous]

posted on Apr, 20 2010 @ 08:33 PM
reply to post by Chevalerous

At the present time, you are correct; carbon credits are bought in the currency of the nation issuing them. However, this is because so far the carbon trading has not been global in nature. If it is instituted as a global requirement (which is the goal of conferences like the recent one in Copenhagen), then it would make sense that the value would need to be set in a single currency.

It is even possible that this standard currency could be in Euros, for instance. The only difference between the Euro and the dollar is the country (or group of countries) that issues them. As long as there is a single currency that the elite can use for their control, all would go well for them. The dollar is just the historically preferred currency in that respect, primarily because the Federal Reserve operates to maintain the dollar's integrity.

I mention this possibility because there is an International parallel to the Federal Reserve: the International Monetary Fund (IMF). The IMF was formally started in 1946 in Bretton Woods, NH at a conference of the 44 Allied nations from World War II, with the stated goal of stabilizing the world's economy... just as the Federal Reserve's stated goal is to stabilize the United States economy.

The World Bank was established at the same time in order to assist the IMF in managing loans to countries. So, with these two organizations firmly in place, it is possible that a change in preferred currency could happen. It simply depends on where the interests of those in control of the UN lie at the time.


posted on Apr, 20 2010 @ 09:46 PM
reply to post by TheRedneck

The implementation is underway, with the introduction of the concept of 'carbon credits'.

The illegitimacy of trading carbon credits is obvious. You can only trade assets that you OWN. To the best of my knowledge, no one owns the Earth's atmosphere, and since the discharge of CO2 is into the atmosphere, a decent lawyer(if there is such a person) could easily prove the illegitimacy of such trades.

posted on Apr, 20 2010 @ 10:04 PM
reply to post by ProfEmeritus

That is precisely why the demonization must be complete and total. There are too many legal loopholes that have to be plugged in order to make such a scenario work,and the only way to do this is to convince the public in general of the hazards of this innocuous gas. Public awareness of the 'problem' will allow the necessary laws to be passed. Political correctness will do the rest.

Irregardless of the quality of the legal representation, the final verdict will be made either by a judge or a jury. It is difficult to get people to pass judgment against something that is saving their lives...


posted on Apr, 20 2010 @ 10:17 PM
reply to post by TheRedneck

BTW, this issue actually ties together your plan C validity and my comments about DuPont and Mike Castle. Mike Castle was one of the few "Republicans" to vote FOR Cap and Trade. See how nicely this all ties together-Castle, Cap & Trade, and DuPont?DuPont wins all around.
In fact, tonight, before this reply, I was researching some other issues regarding Castle. I discovered this:

Castle has just been placed in the position of Ace of Spades by Levin, as the WORST RINO in the nation. I think Levin, though, misses the point. Castle is just one of many stooges owned by the large corporations, bought and paid for, by them, and placed in power by them.

I certainly agree with your premise that TPTB are not a huggy group of compatriots, but rather similar to the various crime families that competed for the same territories. No matter how many "sit downs" the families held with each other, in the end it was each family for itself. Greed is the ultimate actor.

posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 06:49 AM

Originally posted by TheRedneck
reply to post by Chevalerous

At the present time, you are correct; carbon credits are bought in the currency of the nation issuing them. However, this is because so far the carbon trading has not been global in nature. If it is instituted as a global requirement (which is the goal of conferences like the recent one in Copenhagen), then it would make sense that the value would need to be set in a single currency.

It is even possible that this standard currency could be in Euros, for instance. The only difference between the Euro and the dollar is the country (or group of countries) that issues them. As long as there is a single currency that the elite can use for their control, all would go well for them. The dollar is just the historically preferred currency in that respect, primarily because the Federal Reserve operates to maintain the dollar's integrity.

Yeah I understand what you mean! - and yes, it would make sense that the value would need to be set in a single currency.

But here you and I have different opinions - I don't think this NEW SINGLE CARBON CREDIT CURRENCY will be in Dollar since many other countries and growing economies are fed up with having the Dollar as the "Reserve Currency"

All these great advantages for the US economy holding the world's reserve currency since the 1944 agreement has begun to upset some of the other growing economies who now want a more diverse world currency basket.

The Dollar since it was implemented with the most unfair Bretton Woods 1944 as the world's reserve currency has given great advantages for the success of the U.S economy with The Petro Dollar Recycling System, just by printing more money propping up the US economy and paying for US imports by issuing IOU's etc etc.

Because to the world - The Bretton Wood system was an unfair system which gave tremendous advantages to the US economy at the expense of the rest of the world who were forced to buy and hold the Dollar as the sole reserve currency for trading and buying oil.

The world are quite fed up with having the Dollar system and many voices of the G20 and BRIC countries are now screaming out loud to through their membership quotas of the IMF to implement the IMF's SDR (Special Drawing Rights) currency basket instead, which the Dollar is sharing with the other currencies in the SDR basket.

To base the "World Reserve Currency" on the SDR currency basket would be more logical for the NWO - and be more fair to the world and other growing economies - that's why we are now since the crises begun, are hearing this being discussed in G20 meetings for the first time as an alternative.

It would not make any sense at all for the rest of the world and their growing economies to continue to use Dollar as 'the' Carbon Credit curreny - why would they go along with this lunacy when implementing the new Carbon Credits? - it would not give the rest of the world and their currencies any special advantages in trading Carbon Credits.

What would give the rest of the world currencies better and more fair advantages though - is the SDR currency basket from IMF.

This is one of the reasons why you now hear all these voices from China, Germany, Russia, Japan, India, Brasil asking to use the IMF's 'SDR' Special Drawing Rights as the NEW world reserve currency instead of soley the Dollar.

The SDR currency basket is made up of, and contain the main other strong currencies of the world as well.

The SDR currency basket basket contain for the moment these currencies:

Euro - Japanese Yen - Pound Sterling - U.S. Dollar

But the G20 countries have been discussing to include the currencies of Russia (Ruble) and China (YUAN) into the new SDR basket as well, which would replace the Dollar as the SOLE world reserve currency.

The Dollar would still be a great part of the SDR basket, but not alone as the world's reserve currency soley - it would share that status with the rest of those strong currencies in the basket.

This would be more fair to the rest of the world and their growing economies.

And this is why I think that the new Carbon Credit currency will be based on the new SDR currency basket - and not soley the Dollar - then the Dollar would share its 'world reserve' status with the rest of the currencies in the SDR basket.

I also read an interesting article a couple of days ago about the SDR and how this would also fit and tie in of using SDR's as the new world currency where they simply swap out their dollar-based debt for IMF's SDRs.

So my best bet and my own theory would be that the SDR basket actually is the new world currency and will also serve as the currency for the implementaion of the "Carbon Credits" on the wider, broader worldwide scale.

Of course! this is nothing that is happening overnight, and none of this can be official until the new system would be implemented and until they have swapped out their dollar-based debt for IMF's SDRs.

And the Dollar value would need to be stable at this current level until all things are implemented and the new system is up and running.

But interestingly there is a new G20 meeting starting this weekend 22-23 of April - let's see if any information of that meeting is leaked out to the Internet next week?

IMF Prepares for Financial Meltdown

The IMF has been making a lot of noise recently, but their biggest move almost managed to slip through completely unnoticed.

The Executive Board of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) today approved a ten-fold expansion of the Fund's New Arrangements to Borrow (NAB, and transfer the Fund's premier standing credit arrangement into a more flexible and effective tool of crisis management. The NAB will be increased by SDR 333.5 billion (about US$500 billion) to SDR 367.5 billion (about US$550 billion), representing a major increase in the resources available for the Fund's lending to its members.

This IMF program didn't even exist until a year ago, when the IMF began issuing SDRs for the first time since the 1970's. The IMF has only sold SDRs in times of global financial stress.

It makes a person wonder "Why now?" Why is the IMF suddenly tripling its lending facilities? What do they know that we don't?

To answer that, let's look at the announcements of the past few weeks.

The IMF has been busy issuing warnings over the past couple weeks. If this massive expansion of lending resources is a direct reaction to their recent statements, then we are looking at a severe financial shock in the near future.

That's where the SDR comes it. They simply swap out their dollar-based debt for SDRs.

It should be noted that SDR is merely a ledger entry. Its is a composite of major reserve currencies, rather than a new currency by itself, but it does help diversify.

The reason for the IMF rolling this out now might be two-fold:

1) an approaching financial crisis that the IMF needs to build up its reserves to prepare for, and

b) the demands of Asian creditors to diversify their holdings in order to help avoid the impact of that coming financial crisis.

It definitely seems that something major is lurking behind the curtain.

And I agree with most of your eminent theory down to the point where you assume that all of this and the new system will be based on the Dollar.

I am unfortunately of a different opinion regarding this, and I don't agree with you regarding the Dollar as the currency for the 'Carbon Credits'

In my opinion! this new world reserve currency and the currency of Carbon Credits will be based of a newly made SDR currency basket which would also include the Yuan and the Ruble.

By doing so, all major currencies of the growing economies and their trading with Carbon Credits would benefit more - and it would be a hell lot of easier for the NWO to implement this new 'Global Carbon Credit System' on a worldwide scale without having the other growing economies making troubles, complaining about it, and hindering their NWO efforts of doing so on a worldwide scale.

In this crises! - it just make more logical sense!

(Sorry for the poor broken English!)

[edit on 21-4-2010 by Chevalerous]

posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 06:56 AM
A great morning read for me here Redneck!

You outline a very interesting string of ideas and theories, mixed with your own personal feelings about this said topic!

I wish I had a little more time before work here to really get into what you are talking about.. Yet I must save it until later..

Until then star and flag, and I will get back to you later on this..

Its often been my understanding that many of this is all under one banner.
Yet with many off shoots, and (heads) as you call it..

Reminds me of Tiamat...!


posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 01:13 PM
reply to post by Chevalerous

I have to mention here that this is exactly what I love about ATS... the ability to compare theories about what is going on behind the scenes. Thank you so much for your viewpoints, and please continue to examine the evidence!

And that goes for everyone who has posted, too.

I have noticed a couple of trends that have recently been occurring concerning currencies... the Euro is, of course, gaining acceptance as an International currency, evidenced by the recent moves of some Middle Eastern nations to accept the Euro as payment for oil (referenced in my OP). Also, the rumors of the Amero have been flying hard and fast.

The US dollar is about to be replaced by the Amero at a rate of two dollars to one Amero, according to a high level financial source in Switzerland. The Amero will replace the US and Canadian dollars and the Mexican peso, he says. It will be backed by Mexican and Canadian gold, the source adds.


The Western government does not want to cede control of its financial system to China so a decision was made to go with the gold-backed Amero, he says.

I have been told by gold investors that the Amero is a multi-fold arrangement. It's purpose is to placate China, who holds so much debt now as to be capable of single-handedly destroying the US economy and the dollar, to re-establish an American currency with (temporary) gold backing, to expand the US economy into Canada and Mexico without currency conversions and political headaches, and to gain control of the exponentially rising American debt through the equivalent of a default disguised as a currency conversion. Let me sort through these 'benefits' one at a time:

China right now holds enough US debt to make them the most dangerous country on Earth for our economy. Their holdings alone, if dumped on the open currency market,would completely crash the dollar, throwing us into a pure depression. And, whether as a result of necessity or as a result of bad decisions I don't know, China is being pandered to by the US government financially, in an attempt to prevent them from dumping their dollar assets through diplomacy and goodwill. The result of this action has been that China can pretty much get away with murder and has been doing so, importing sub-standard merchandise into the US duty-free and therefore actually increasing the debt load.

That is the reason products from China are not heavily tariffed and why companies here actually get tax breaks to move to China. It is also why substandard products (children's toys that contain lead for instance) are allowed here. It's not that we want them; it's that we can't do anything about them without jeopardizing the entire economy. It's not smart to slap a guy who's holding a gun on you, even if he deserves it.

The fact that a fiat currency is an unstable currency is not lost on those who control the economy of the United States. As mentioned in the OP, the dollar was never completely fiat; it was backed by an agreement tying it to oil rather than by gold. In recent years, however, that agreement has failed, and the dollar is now completely fiat. To try to tie it to a gold or silver standard now would be akin to an admission of what was going on behind the curtains, so switching to the Amero, citing the economic problems now facing the majority of Americans, is a good covert way to reintroduce precious backing for the dollar.

I actually believe that the reason behind the huge government expenditures that we have been experiencing is as much to collapse the dollar and pave the way for the Amero as it is to reward those already in power. If one can glean two benefits from a single action, it simply makes that action more attractive. So the banks and the large International corporations (and by extension, the families that control them) get both a hefty payout for the purpose of riding out a coming collapse, and the payouts also serve to hasten that collapse so a new monetary unit that is more controllable can be instituted.

Of course, I don;t expect the Amero, should it come to pass, to be backed by metals for any length of time. The prospect of a fiat currency that is manipulatable is too tempting to abandon. But in the face of rising economic pressures from the loss of the dollar's backing and global economic slowdowns, it only makes sense to reintroduce the precious metals backing policy.

As a continental currency similar to the Euro (which has enjoyed quite a bit of success), the Amero will also gain respect from other countries. Instead of one nation comprised of 50 states backing it, now three separate countries, each with an appreciable economy, will be backing the Amero. Sometimes, one must copy the oppositions actions in order to compete, and the Amero is indeed an almost direct copy of the blueprint behind the Euro. It also expands the borders between the US and Canada/Mexico, effectively adding in the two countries as additional financial states.

The Amero also allows the United States to partially default on the debs it has. If, as mentioned in the source above, the Amero is initially introduced as being worth two dollars, it is not much of a stretch of the imagination to assume that it will quickly revert to a one-to-one exchange. For instance, one may exchange $10,000 for $5000 in Ameros, but the price of a loaf of bread could remain at a one-to-one exchange (or at least revert to such quickly). People who are used to paying, say, $1.29 for that loaf of bread would not be very surprised to see that same loaf after the exchange to be 1.29 Ameros. Remember that we are talking about the average person on the street, who typically knows little and cares less about International currency exchange rates and the like.

That right there would be a 100% inflation rate overnight, and would make the International debts worth half of what they are today. Those debts would be paid off at the exchange rate, not the rate that the Amero is actually worth in real products.

For those reasons above, I believe that the dollar may well be replaced by another currency, but I would think that the Amero would still be preferable to those in power over the Euro. After all, the dollar is not dead as an International currency, even yet:

The value of the SDR was initially defined as equivalent to 0.888671 grams of fine gold—which, at the time, was also equivalent to one U.S. dollar. After the collapse of the Bretton Woods system in 1973, however, the SDR was redefined as a basket of currencies, today consisting of the euro, Japanese yen, pound sterling, and U.S. dollar. The U.S. dollar-value of the SDR is posted daily on the IMF's website. It is calculated as the sum of specific amounts of the four currencies valued in U.S. dollars, on the basis of exchange rates quoted at noon each day in the London market.
(emphasis mine)

That same source (the official IMF website) also makes a statement on the intent of the SDR:

The SDR is neither a currency, nor a claim on the IMF. Rather, it is a potential claim on the freely usable currencies of IMF members. Holders of SDRs can obtain these currencies in exchange for their SDRs in two ways: first, through the arrangement of voluntary exchanges between members; and second, by the IMF designating members with strong external positions to purchase SDRs from members with weak external positions. In addition to its role as a supplementary reserve asset, the SDR, serves as the unit of account of the IMF and some other international organizations.
(emphasis mine)

An actual currency is needed rather than a report on general health of various currencies, which is basically what the SDR is. This could indeed, as I mentioned earlier, be in another unit besides the dollar, but based on the fact that the IMF (which will surely oversee the operations of any global carbon credit program) is still using the dollar as the standard for currencies, I would expect either the dollar or the proposed Amero (should it surface) to be the currency of choice.

Remember that the purpose of this standard currency is not to help others but to maintain control by those in control. You make an excellent point that other currencies would be more beneficial to more people, but that is not what matters in the end; the decision will be made based on how well it will serve those in power, and that is quite a different requirement.


posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 01:27 PM
reply to post by TheRedneck

I have been told by gold investors that the Amero is a multi-fold arrangement.

My friend, have you considered the possibility that those gold investors are only interested in pushing gold sales, and that every thing that they are saying is purely self-serving? I don't make this statement without some inside knowledge of what is going on, but I cannot be more specific right now.

new topics

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in