- advertisements -
......................./´./) ....................,/¯../ .................../..../ ............./´¯/'...'/´¯¯`¸ ........../'/.../..../....../¨¯\ ........('(...´...´.... ¯~/'...') .........\.................'...../ ...........\.............. _.·´ ............\..............( ..............\.............\...............\..............\................\..............\.................\...............\
Fuck you, banksters.
Your ship is sinking.
nice...ur skills r extraordinary...
yes, fuck all bankers.....
As a quick aside, this story is really quite humorous.
What if they gave an iPhone 4 party, and no one came ?
They should sell the gold directly to Eric Sprott in exchange for PHYS shares.
or maybe sell it directly to their members...
Ten bucks says it will be sold through a hidden intermediary to the central bank that is ordering it to sell it. Or under orders of the central banks central banker (www.BIS.org) to whomever (meaning nation) wants Gold in exchange for continuing to buy CB paper or whomever just needs to be placated.
I wager ten bucks that you're right.
Buy the fuckin' guacamole!
You know, the dip.
Yes, but when they bought the gold, it probably only amounted to 6% of their assets.
Yep, and just as it's beginning to go to the moon in fiat terms, they want them to divest. Sickening, and I'm surprised the judge sided with these pricks... but then he was probably bought and paid for. I wonder if this is making much news in the Netherlands.
Why buy the guacamole when the whackamole by the Fed is free?
Rest assured I shall steal that. :>)
My sides are hurting. Good thing we have a bit o' humor in these trying times.
Hey Racoon , I ordered that Maple and a few fractionals........ but physical cash is a nice insurance against a CB mind fuck reversal play.
Good! Always nice to heft a little silver or gold in the furry paw.
Cash (fiat lettuce) is necessary, of course. Those lucky enough to be employed or have a mortgage should have a couple of months operating expenses in the currency du jour.
So fookin' right.
I hope the former, but fear the latter (not that either are peachy). Practically speaking, I see no other viable explanation.
If gold is far too volatile, then what is less volatile, capable of reasonable investment? If only volatility is to be reviewed, why is risk to be omitted? Have we not been slapped in the face time and time again with the fact that we literally have no ability to guage risk in the present environment? Do our markets, their regulators, and their rating agencies have unyielding success in their predictions? If not, why not? If so, how can we be surprised by so many financial events?
Wallstreet 2 got the sub-title incorrect... it should read Wallstreet 2: "moral hazard never sleeps, stops, or even slows down to catch its breath."
Sell it and become overweight in rice futures instead...
Definitely cut and paste. I've had that exact middle txt finger saved for nigh on a decade now. I bet it's as old as the internet.
I think I'll use that for my avatar.
Oh that's Brilliant!
Part 4 out tomorrow the bears silver manipulation, should explain why they are liquidating the good gold, or whats left of it on Earth.
$1,363 bid. $1,365 on the follow. For all of it.
Agreed... and if GOLD is so volatile (BS imho) then why is it ALL MAJOR CENTRAL BANKS hold many tons of physical gold as reserves? Me thinks their central bank is a bit short physical gold, though the amount discussed in the above article is chump change yet does set a precedence of possible things to come.
And if the other pension funds had an average of 13% in gold, they seem to say then it would be ok.
"does set a precedence of possible things to come."
Boy o Boy that is the question. But we all know the crack in the wall becomes the break in the dam.
All central bankers a closet gold bugs. If they were true believers in fiat, why wouldn't they sell in all their gold for fiat paper? Hmmm... http://therookiecynic.wordpress.com/
The lightbulb just went on. This is a very visible, major checkpoint I've been waiting for in identifying the speed and pace of this whole collapsing house of cards. Yes, there's been tons of problems, scams, bad policy, fraud, etc. but this incident has sped it all up, in my mind at least.
Someday we're going to look back on this day and clearly see this is the precise moment Skynet first became self-aware.....
AMEN! STICK IT TO 'EM!
WIN! That is *king awesome!*
they are terrified of another incident like Egypt. they dodged that bullet, but they might not be so lucky the next time.
This is all you can do: just show your finger to banksters? It will change nothing.
The only thing that will making the difference is to kill Central Banks. It must be outlawed, at least in America.
Consequently, at the next election, vote every single bastard out of the Congress and outlaw the FED!
you stupid - you think voting will change anything? only riots and buying pms will change anything if at all
C'mon, unky, insulting people doesn't help. And the gentleman is not stupid, he is just looking at different information than you are. The productive solution is to give him better information.
unky, you are fking stupid idiot. People do NOT riot as long as they have a hope!
"People do NOT riot as long as they have a hope!"
i feel an election slogan comming on.
You're criticizing flipping the bird to banksters, yet your only proposal is to vote for 'change'? Who's the idiot again?
Let me revise your second sentence: There is no hope for people as long as they refuse to riot.
Your avatar reminds me of a Dutch glass worker...
What if we vote for pre-1965 change? And that's an invitation to "junk" me (pun intended).
Sorry to say, but that won't work. They need millions to get elected, and the few who are not corrupted in that process are corrupted soon afterward.
The State is ITSELF corruption. That includes EVERY state, even the US in 1789. (Though that one was among the least bad.)
The Banksters took over the states of the West, and the politicians are addicted to their vaulted positions. These are people who live for popularity contests, after all.
The States will NOT reform themselves.
America, as is nobly thought of, existed until about 1790 (Hamilton and his bank were the death note). It was all downhill from there. It's over.
All we can hope for is a massive fall and de-centralization, then a non-bankster restart.
The battle has been fought from day one of the republic. Tree of liberty, blood of tyrants and such.
The State is ITSELF corruption. That includes EVERY state, even the US in 1789.
Nothing but corruption can be expected from those who wield power and wealth obtained not through labor or trade but rather through theft and violence. Only the individual is sovereign.
These are people who live for popularity contests, after all.
It is funny how we choose these types to 'lead' us. 99.998% of them couldn't lead Rush Limbaugh to a pharmacy. They are insecure little children in most respects. It really is no wonder how we got to this point.
As cliche as it sounds, we have to take the power back from them. We've delegated too much of our power to them, and for too long. We need to regain a little bit of our sovereignty. I am stating the obvious, and I can't think of anything more obvious to state than that. Humans: be your own leader. Viva Egypt; don't let the CIA install another puppet. Eyes on the prize, yo!
Unfortunately, they are a reflection of us.
Trot on over to your local WalMart about 11:00 Friday night and take a look at "us".
Or, for a real laugh, read about the latest escapades by one of the Bozos from Congress. Where do we find these amazing "leaders"?
CH1 I think old Andrew Jackson would disagree as his last words were "I KILLED THE BANK"
Hickory where art thou?
yeah - blame Alexander Hamilton, "He sided with the London/European (multi-national) banksters." That's way too easy.
First of all, Hamilton risked his life in the American Revolution (he led one of the charges on the several beseiged British redoubts at Yorktown - definitely hazardous work, to close with some scared and desperate Redcoats, and try to bayonet 'em out of their redoubt) so he was far more anti-British than many fat-cat Loyalists (from NY to South Carolina) who managed to maintain their property during & after the war.
#2., and more importantly, Hamilton was decidedly ANTI-SLAVERY. MOST of the critics (Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, Patrick Henry, etc.) who criticized Hamilton for "IN BED with Euro bankers who want to place America in debt slavery!" were SLAVE OWNERS - who were every bit as ruthless (in supporting the awful slave trade) as the British imperialists (who also supported the slave trade in late 1700s) were.
Get over it: IF you want to DEFEND a nation with a large coastline, you MUST build ships - EXPENSIVE ships. To build, man, & supply a competent navy, you simply MUST have some BIG FINANCE. As in all things, it is question of BALANCE: WHO is OVERSEEING the Big Banks, and in WHOSE BENEFIT do they operate. Hamilton was decidedly PRO-INDUSTRY, his "Report on Manufacturers" Dec. 1791 effectively laid the cornerstone for the ENTIRE Yankee & American industrial economy we have been so proud of for 200+ years (and which the treasonous Neo-Cons are so busy DISMANTLING today.) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Report_on_Manufactures
AS IF the above weren't enough of a DEFENSE of Hamilton, it was Hamilton SECURING the US national debt, and establishing the Treasury, which made his most powerful opponent - Thomas Jefferson - look like a genius, and gave Jefferson THE crowning glory of his presidency; namely, the Lousiana Purchase 1803. Hamilton may have "distrusted the ability of common citizens to govern themselves," and Jefferson may have had "faith" in small farmers and a predominantly agricultural economy, but it was HAMILTON's AMASSING of cold, hard cash (and probably gold) that ALLOWED Jefferson to PAY FOR the Louisiana purchase, America's GREAT BLOODLESS VICTORY which DOUBLED our nation, in 1803.
(And, in context of global, imperial wars, even that was a close thing: Had General Andrew Jackson not been #1. such an Anglo-phobe (English hater; his 2 older POW brothers, and mother who volunteered as a nurse, had died of diseases caught on deadly, concentration-camp style British prison ships); and #2. such an experienced India wars fighter, the British probably would have won the Battle of New Orleans, 1814, and THEY would have COMMANDED the mouth of the Mississippi!)
it's EASY to say that Hamilton "SIDED WITH THE BRITISH BANKERS" - but he FOUGHT THE REDCOATS, IN PERSON, he ESTABLISHED the MANUFACTURING, trade, and FINANCIAL FOOTING, that would allow America to win the war of 1812, and his FUNDING of the early American government provided for at least 2 of Jefferson's biggest triumphs, the defeat of the Barbary Coast pirates by US Navy (expensive ships) and Marines; and the Lousiana Purchase.
++++++ You realize of course this level of actual history knowledge, and the application of that knowledge to make informed logical conclusions doesn't play to well on a "bitchzing" site like ZH sadly. Way to many opinions, way too little knowledge.
Sad, because it wasn't that way before. There was a lot of crap, but also alot pf well reasoned thought -- like yours. Now I tend to read it for some news and humor.
Tips: tips [ at ] zerohedge.com
General: info [ at ] zerohedge.com
Legal: legal [ at ] zerohedge.com
Advertising: ads [ at ] zerohedge.com
Abuse/Complaints: abuse [ at ] zerohedge.com
Advertise With Us
Make sure to read our "How To [Read/Tip Off] Zero Hedge Without Attracting The Interest Of [Human Resources/The Treasury/Black Helicopters]" Guide
How to report offensive comments
Notice on Racial Discrimination.