Extraordinary Interview of Max Keiser

This appearance of Max Keiser on Alex Jones' show was on June 21, 2010.

In this segment of the interview, Max points out that the $20 billion that BP is being required to pay will actually increase the risk of another oil spill disaster.

Another thing that he mentions is that trades of stock can be pre-dated or post-dated, so I hear him saying that this needs to be kept in mind when considering evidence in any conspiracy theory.

Additionally, Max said that the algorithms used in automatic trading done by computers - high frequency trading (HFT) - actually can read the news and interpret. Then, humans come after the computer and pick the trades they want, and have the government bail out the trades they don't want. Or, they dump the losses to corporations who need a loss for tax purposes:



In this segment, starting at 7:30, Max talks about the close connection between the CIA and the stock market, and pre-9/11 put options:



(It appears to me that the title of these videos, “Max Keiser Reveals ‘Put Options’ Ties to BP’s False Flag Oil Spill Event" is in error. He did talk about put options, but it was in reference to 9-11.)

Originally posted by Mary Rose

In this segment, starting at 7:30, Max talks about the close connection between the CIA and the stock market, and pre-9/11 put options:

I found the zerohedge.com article "SEC: Government Destroyed Documents Regarding Pre-911 Put Options" that Max talked about.

I see the film 911 Jackpot that Max talked about listed here on Max’s Pirate My Film website.

Maybe this film will make a difference in the 9-11 truth movement.

Keiser's a very entertaining speaker; I enjoy watching him, but I take his ideas with a big, big grain of salt. He's a mixture of truth and exaggeration... anyway, thanks for posting; a good ride as always.

Double post, sorry.

[edit on 6/25/10 by silent thunder]

Originally posted by silent thunder
He's a mixture of truth and exaggeration...

What's an example?

Originally posted by Mary Rose
What's an example?

Just watch his show "On the Edge" on Press TV. (There are many clips on youtube). He is full of hyperbole. He is always tossing around expressions like like "the most ____ in the world" or "The biggerst _____ ever" and so on that are blatantly false in a statistical sense. He also mixes a lot of emotion and rage into his analysis. He's pretty clever and smooth about it, so it comes off as entertaining. But if you sift through his stuff with a critical eye, he's long on sweeping statements and short on hard facts. Even so, he does call attention to serious issues and problems that the MSM would rather ignore, so he does have some value.

Originally posted by silent thunder
Just watch his show "On the Edge" on Press TV. (There are many clips on youtube). He is full of hyperbole. He is always tossing around expressions like like "the most ____ in the world" or "The biggerst _____ ever" and so on that are blatantly false in a statistical sense.

I'm familiar with On the Edge and The Keiser Report.

I disagree that he's always tossing expressions like that around.

Can you cite one of the people he has described in that fashion and fill in the blank with what Keiser said about the person?

Originally posted by Mary Rose
Can you cite one of the people he has described in that fashion and fill in the blank with what Keiser said about the person?

Heh, you're giving me a real grilling, huh? OK, fair enough. The truth is that this is just my impression after watching many of his clips over the last few years. So I don't have any examples to whip out of my pocket.

But I did a quick google search and came up with the following transcript:

CLICK HERE

I didn't pick the above for any reason other than it was the first Keiser transcript to come up on Google. So, looking at the above source as an arbitrary example, I will list as follows just three instances of what I consider emotion and hyperbole rather than fact. All three are drawn from the very first part of the text:

Keiser quote #1: "...if [Sheikh Mohammed of Dubai] wanted to be a real estate speculator in a theme park he could have spent his money more wisely, just buy Florida... He could have just bought Florida and he could have fulfilled his vision."

My comment: Floriday 's GDP in 2008 was $744.1 billion. This is more than ten times the net worth of the world's wealthiest individual, and Sheikh Mohammed is not the world's wealthiest individual. Moreover, annual GDP is a fraction of the "value" of any given territory, as it does not include private or public real estate, physical plant, capital investment, human capital, etc. etc., which would push the "real value" of Florida to another order of magnitude at least. Thus, this is a patently absurd and exaggerated statement with zero basis in fact.

Keiser quote #2: "And now you’ve got Abu Dhabi who’s the most powerful of the seven emirates..."

My comment: By what metric? Economic? Political? Keiser doesn't say. Example of hazy hyperbole/superlative statement tossed out with no empirical data.

Keiser quote #3: "We have hit peak credit."

My comment: Who is "we" in this statement? Global? US? Dubai? Is he saying inflation and further quantitative easing -- by any nation -- are impossible? What about global net creditors like East Asian nations with large foreign currency reserves? Leaving that aside, consider that every central bank in the world has the power to extend infinite credit...not that that's a good thing (it leads to hyperinflation), but it is logically misleading to apply the term "peak" (reminiscent of "peak oil") to an abstract quality such as credit. As a matter of fact, central banks around the world continue to churn out larger and larger amounts of credit that is repeatedly extended to troubled financial institutions and used to buy national bonds. Many now believe we are in the midst of an historic credit-fueled sovereign wealth bubble. Keiser's statement is vague in terms of reference and intensity.

So, there you have three examples I came up with after 15 seconds of googling. I'm fairly sure that if I looked deeper, I could come up with even more egregious and blatant examples.

But, as stated, I do see some value in his presence, so it is not my attempt to utterly debunk or bash him. Nevertheless, I take him with a big grain of salt.

Am I released from the witness stand, Your Honor?



[edit on 6/25/10 by silent thunder]

Yikes, another double post. Please see above.

[edit on 6/25/10 by silent thunder]

reply to post by silent thunder






I'm familiar with Thom Hartmann. He's a good guy.

You've given me a homework assignment.

Thanks!

Originally posted by silent thunder

Originally posted by Mary Rose
What's an example?

Just watch his show "On the Edge" on Press TV. (There are many clips on youtube). He is full of hyperbole. He is always tossing around expressions like like "the most ____ in the world" or "The biggerst _____ ever" and so on that are blatantly false in a statistical sense. He also mixes a lot of emotion and rage into his analysis. He's pretty clever and smooth about it, so it comes off as entertaining. But if you sift through his stuff with a critical eye, he's long on sweeping statements and short on hard facts. Even so, he does call attention to serious issues and problems that the MSM would rather ignore, so he does have some value.

I would tend to agree with that statement in general, Alex Jones does this as well....

Except:

When Max gets on AJ show they can't both play that role and Max becomes very nuetral and unbiased is his opinions. This is readily obvious from the four videos in this segment. Max speaks truth with no exaggeration or sensationalism.

That's what makes him such a goldmine on Alex show. If you haven't watched these particular videos you wont know my meaning.

Besides, at least Alex and Max are selling truth, instead of selling lies.

Whats $20bn when they are using Bp to introduce a personal carbon tax thay will go string to the IMF and they reason your goverment dare not stop this is because they own money to the IMF.

This $20bn will soon rake in $20tr for our zionist leaders and censors workers all get new jobs but will only be doing 2 hours real work a day.

Fantastic and this is why they don't want people seeing what these ex censors workers are doing down at the beach.

Originally posted by silent thunder
CLICK HERE

Keiser quote #1: "...if [Sheikh Mohammed of Dubai] wanted to be a real estate speculator in a theme park he could have spent his money more wisely, just buy Florida... He could have just bought Florida and he could have fulfilled his vision."

My comment: Floriday 's GDP in 2008 was $744.1 billion. This is more than ten times the net worth of the world's wealthiest individual, and Sheikh Mohammed is not the world's wealthiest individual. Moreover, annual GDP is a fraction of the "value" of any given territory, as it does not include private or public real estate, physical plant, capital investment, human capital, etc. etc., which would push the "real value" of Florida to another order of magnitude at least. Thus, this is a patently absurd and exaggerated statement with zero basis in fact.

Wasn't Max only talking about the potential of real estate speculation in Florida? What would this have to do with GDP in Florida?

Originally posted by silent thunder
Keiser quote #2: "And now you’ve got Abu Dhabi who’s the most powerful of the seven emirates..."

My comment: By what metric? Economic? Political? Keiser doesn't say. Example of hazy hyperbole/superlative statement tossed out with no empirical data.

He said they had 10% of the world's oil and gas supplies.

Originally posted by silent thunder
Keiser quote #3: "We have hit peak credit."

My comment: Who is "we" in this statement? Global?

I interpreted Max to mean global, and to be saying that in order to drill for oil, you need credit.

I enjoyed reading the transcript. I think it shows Max Keiser's grasp of the big picture.

Originally posted by Mary Rose
Wasn't Max only talking about the potential of real estate speculation in Florida? What would this have to do with GDP in Florida?

He was talking about "buying Florida," as in "buying the whole state." So I tried to show how ridiculously expensive such an undertaking would be for any individual by looking at the value of even just one factor (GDP) that would go towards defining the theoretical price of Florida.

Originally posted by Mary Rose
He said they had 10% of the world's oil and gas supplies.

True, and I sort of inutit that is his meaning, but that doesn't automatically imply greater power either economically or militarily. Nigeria has more oil than the Japan, which (although full of its own peculiar woes) is still the word's second-largest economy. And military/political power is even less directly correlated with domestic natural resources. Moreover, Max didn't even specify in which sense he was talking about "power."

Originally posted by Mary Rose
I interpreted Max to mean global, and to be saying that in order to drill for oil, you need credit.

Sure, but this in no way implies "peak credit" in the sense he was using that dubious term.

Look, despite the fact that tighter logic would be appreciated, I don't want to get pushed into the role of the "Max-basher" in this thread. I do think he both A) entertaining and B) willing to look at things from an oblique angle that wakes people up, and willing to take on important, uncomfortable, and underreported things. I enjoy all the financial gadflies...Celante, Schiff, and so on, and I think they need to be heard. Ultimately its far better to listen to Keiser than to be parallaxed by idiocy after watching CNBC all day for a decade or something.

[edit on 6/25/10 by silent thunder]

Originally posted by silent thunder

He was talking about "buying Florida," as in "buying the whole state." So I tried to show how ridiculously expensive such an undertaking would be for any individual by looking at the value of even just one factor (GDP) that would go towards defining the theoretical price of Florida.

He was talking about real estate.

Originally posted by silent thunder

True, and I sort of inutit that is his meaning, but that doesn't automatically imply greater power either economically or militarily. Nigeria has more oil than the Japan, which (although full of its own peculiar woes) is still the word's second-largest economy. And military/political power is even less directly correlated with domestic natural resources. Moreover, Max didn't even specify in which sense he was talking about "power."

One could figure out from context.

Originally posted by silent thunder
Sure, but this in no way implies "peak credit" in the sense he was using that dubious term.

He was saying that credit for countries who depend on oil sales for their credit base had reached peak credit. And considering the global meltdown we're experiencing due to being awash in debt, peak credit is not a dubious term. It's apt, in my opinion.