August 18, 2011 By 318 Comments
By Andrew McKillop 21st Century Wire August 18, 2011 Today, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has ordered his nation’s central bank to repatriate $11 billion of gold reserves held in developed nations’ institutions such as the Bank of England, as prices power through one record high after another, smashing through $1800 per ounce today. This puts the shoe on the other foot for Britain, who is normally used to asking for their money back. A long-running saga of the 1980s and 1990s was the strident demand by England’s Margaret Thatcher for the European Commission to hand back what she considered was Britain’s over-large contribution to European Union spending on themes that Mrs Thatcher did not like – for example trying to cut youth unemployment and stop industries delocalizing out of Europe. As she said: this was a wanton infringement of free playing go-go markets, with a dedicated urge to impoverish Europe, marginalize million of persons, de-industrialize the economy and destroy social solidarity. Her present day acolyte and admirer, PM David Cameron recently had a taste of what happens when too much Thatcher-type free market discipline comes home to roost. Exactly like in the good old Soviet Union, you need one policeman every 200 metres along all main thoroughfares to suppress mob rage – and paying cops costs money. Hence, government spending rises. Mrs Thatcher’s favourite finance minister Nigel Lawson was not in favour of it, but the late 1990s New Labour chancellor Gordon ‘Goldfinger’ Brown played the IMF game of breaking the back of gold bullion dealers attempts at driving gold prices to wantonly dangerously highs – say $ 350 per Troy ounce – in those dangerous days at the start of the millennium. Gordon Brown sold around one-half of the Bank of England’s entire stock of gold in the 1999-2002 period at prices as low as $ 240 per Troy ounce. What a clever boy. Venezuela is estimated to hold more than 210 tons of its 365 tons of gold reserves in European, Swiss, US and other banks, but will now progressively repatriate its bullion, Chavez announced on Wednesday August 16. Outside the central banks, like the UK Bank of England, Venezuelan gold is held by several of the highly discreet, even secretive authorized bullion banks – JPMorgan Chase, Barclays Plc, Standard Chartered Plc and HSBC plc. When the Venezuelan gold is handed back, they will likely have to move fast to replace it – through buying on the open market. FREE MARKET LIBERALS CAN ONLY GO SO FAR Chavez has a well-rehearsed rent-a-crowd revolutionary image, but when it concerns stashing his country’s gold, Chavez clung to the decisions of his predecessors steeped in admiration of Mrs Thatcher’s free market ranting and blethering. Nearly one-half of all Venezuelan gold “parked” in the capitalist world’s central banks was held in Thatcher’s England, from very early on. As Chavez said, August 16: “We’ve held 99 tons of gold at the Bank of England since 1980. I agree with bringing that home. It’s a healthy decision.” The Venezuelan decision was simultaneously announced by central bank president Nelson Merentes, noting that for the world’s 15th-largest holder of gold reserves, repatriating the yellow metal is not unassociated with its 28 percent price leap, to date, in 2011. His colleague, Venezuelan finance minister Jorge Giordani hinted the real reasons for why Chavez is pulling his gold back home at this moment. He referred to the weakening U.S. dollar, the near-default by the U.S. government on its sovereign debt, and the pan-European sovereign debt crisis which all signal danger for Venezuela’s savings in the shape of yellow metal. This could opportunistically disappear or get sucked into IMF “virtual gold” operations, swapping real gold against SDRs but pretending the liquidated gold is still there, safe and comfy in a vault somewhere, and not replaced by titanium alloy bars with a thin covering of real gold. Chavez could or may also have taken stock of what is happening to oil – which supplies around 95 percent of Venezuela’s national revenues, exactly like Saudi Arabia. In a nosedive of the global economy, oil prices will seriously tank but gold prices could go on growing. Simply to buy food, it will be handy to have those 210 tons of yellow metal on site and in place. REVENGE IS NIGH Chavez may only be an expense account revolutionary, but his gold repatriation decision will have quick and strong anti-Chavez results. Apart from the UK gold stash, Venezuela parked even more tons in Switzerland, and a large amount in the USA, too. The key term to describe the revenge action against Chavez is “attachment risk”, in arbitration case rulings able to freeze Venezuela’s international assets, very surely cut its credit rating, and raise interest rates on Venezuelan debt. Even prior to the Chavez decision, Venezuelan bond pricing already incorporated a sizeable premium on its lack of transparency (at rates as high as 14 percent) but his gold repatriation decision is a geopolitical signal for Venezuelan bond prices to fall further and interest rates to go on rising. More succinctly, the arrival of gold at Caracas airport could be simply an attempt by Chavez to spend his way back into another presidential mandate, using the gold for politically motivated spending ahead of next year’s presidential elections, and pre-emptive effort by US oil corporations to punish Chavez for booting them out of the huge potential, Orinoco oil sands. While Venezuelan paper dollar assets can easily be frozen, this does not apply to metallic gold. After Venezuela, the logical question is: what country is next? Apart from other oil exporters who are well worth analyzing relative to their gold holdings, we will surely find that Europe and the USA have the biggest potential gold scandals lurking under the “keep the party going” rhetoric. -
April 1, 2011 By 293 Comments
By Patrick Henningsen 21st Century Wire April 1, 2011 It was only a matter of time before gungho western audiences and pundits would have to face the harsh reality that overwhelming military power produces: 1,400 air sorties and 700 Tomahawk cruise missiles later, the civilian body bags are beginning to mount up. And the political ramifications for the acting war parties in Washington, Britain and Paris are inescapable. According to yesterday’s report from Reuters, at least 40 civilians were killed in air strikes by Western forces on Tripoli, a top Vatican official in the Libyan capital told a Catholic news agency on Thursday, quoting witnesses. “The so-called humanitarian raids have killed dozens of civilian victims in some neighborhoods of Tripoli,” said Giovanni Innocenzo Martinelli, the Apostolic Vicar of Tripoli. Martinelli goes on to add, “I have collected several witness accounts from reliable people. In particular, in the Buslim neighborhood, due to the bombardments, a civilian building collapsed, causing the death of 40 people”. NATO has said it will investigate reports that up to 40 civilians were killed in the Coalition bombing strike near Tripoli, a Press TV correspondent reported. In addition, medical sources said at least seven more civilians were slain in Wednesday’s raid on the village of Zawia el Argobe, 15 km (9 miles) from Brega. The airstrike also wounded more than 25 civilians and destroyed several nearby homes. The Libyan government on Thursday night claimed close to 100 civilians had died in air strikes since Allied hostilities began last weekend. The final bill in human lives cannot really be tallied until a much later date. There is little doubt though, that given the current frequency of Allied bombs and missiles and what we have learned from the West’s fabled “surgical strike” operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, that the final number of confirmed civilian body bags will certainly exceed 1,000 within a week or two. COALITION USING DEPLETED URANIUM Only a few days into the US-led attacks on Libya, there have already been reports of forty-five 2,000 pound bombs containing depleted uranium (DU) being dropped down on Libya by the U.S. B-2s during the first 24 hours of the attack, say Stop the War Coalition. Additionally, American journalist Dave Lindorff reports, ”The British-built Harrier jets used by British naval air forces and also by U.S. Marine pilots, are often equipped with pod-mounted cannons that fire 20 mm shells–shells that often have uranium projectiles designed to penetrate heavy armor”. The use of DU has been a major feature in US-led Coalition and Israeli war efforts since 2001, even though it has been banned through an international treaty signed by all UN security council member states at the Geneva Convention. The damage it does is well documented, long-lasting and horrific to say the least. Deaths could be calculated over many years, as radioactive dust continues to blow throughout the region. Its use is classed as a war crime under international law, so when will the US, Britain and Israel be called to explain these actions in the dock? WESTERN POLITICAL DILEMMA Here is where we come to the fundamental moral and legal dilemma for the Western aggressors in Libya. When the number of civilian deaths by Allied strikes exceeds the number of alleged civilian deaths by Libyan Leader Moumar Gaddafi, the political pressure cooker will begin to boil- some say it already has. Interestingly enough, all of the sensational reports of Gaddafi “gunning down his own people”, a rallying cry used by everyone from Barrack Obama to the BBC, have yet to be corroborated by any independent human rights or aid agency, leaving media audiences with mostly hearsay and rumour generated from White House and Whitehall press briefings a few weeks ago. The truth is, we will never know. This also includes past allegations that the Libyan military had launched an air strike on demonstrators in the capital Tripoli, Al Arabiya quoted by witnesses in late February. Surprisingly, or not, we are left with the fact that an entire multi-billion dollar Coalition military operation has been based on these same, non-specific reports- about what Gaddafi has allegedly done, or is about to do. According to the UN Resolution which effectively gave the green light to bomb Libya, “The Council specified that the flight ban would not apply to flights that had as their sole purpose humanitarian aid, the evacuation of foreign nationals, enforcing the ban or other purposes “deemed necessary for the benefit of the Libyan people”. What has actually transpired is, of course, miles away from the cloudy humanitarian intent which its writers have woven into the language of this UN document. Legally speaking, aside from any civilians that Gaddafi is alleged to have “gunned down”, any armed rebels who met their demise during the initial days of the uprising, according to the newly revised American and British rule books, would be classed as “enemy combatants” and “domestic terrorists”- and not as civilians. Innocent Libyans pay the ultimate price in this Coalition-fuelled civil war. Using the same moral imperative, thus far, both the American and the British governments have been able to avoid the same UN disciplinary measures they have imposed on Libya, even though they have been found guilty of multiple documented incidences since 2001. The list is long: falsifying intelligence claims to the UN, false imprisonment of innocent civilians, the use of illegal DU munitions, mass torture and that little problem of over 1 million dead Iraqis since 2003. It is obvious now that state participants in the recent UN Resolution 1973 were unable (or unwilling) make the intellectual or legal leap needed in order to differentiate who were, and how many of these so-called civilian victims there actually were during the initial domestic uprising in late February and early March 2011. Following the complete and abject failure on the part of Washington and London to convince the public that Saddam Hussein had massive caches of WMDs in 2003, spin doctors and speech writers have upgraded their public relations and public opinion-forming approach to fit their new, lighter framework for the out-dated “pre-emptive strike”. Enter the humanitarian strike, based on any number of unsubstantiated reports and guesswork, a new political term that is ultimately more profound than its predecessor because the term effectively disarms endless columns of liberal gatekeepers and mainstream pundits who previously targeted the Bush-led wars. But do not be fooled. These contrived PR terms are designed to cover the same long-range foreign policy goal which we have already witnessed in Iraq and Afghanistan… regime change. Once this is achieved, the major players can begin carving up the natural resource and financial assets of this once sovereign nation. - Patrick Henningsen is a writer, pr/communications consultant and Managing Editor at 21st Century Wire. Contact: email@example.com
March 31, 2011 By 15 Comments
Kurt Nimmo Infowars.com March 30, 2011 The clip features the usual NWO suspects, including Richard Haass, president of the Council on Foreign Relations since July 2003; former U.S. rep Jane Harman, soon to be the boss of the globalist training center, the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars; the neocon Robert Kagan, who is a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and a PNAC co-founder, and the neocon and former CIA director under Clinton, James Woolsey, who is a self-described “Joe Lieberman Democrat” (meaning he advocates bombing small and defenseless Muslim countries) who is also a PNAC supporter and former member of the CIA-infested “Freedom House” (an Orwellian term – it should be called the “Color Revolution House”). Usual NWO suspects argue about six and one half dozen of the other aka “regime change”.
March 31, 2011 By 232 Comments
Editor’s Note: Barrack Obama was given his Nobel Peace Prize only 2 months after being in office, a bizarre move if there ever was one and one that finally discredited the Nobel Prize Committee. ”Obama has now fired more cruise missiles than all other Nobel Peace prize winners combined”, this message has been widely retweeted all over Twitter today. He’s now joined the ranks of Henry Kissinger and other notable mass bombers, an elite club for the ages. Congratulations Barrack. Digital Journal March 31, 2011
The Bolivian President and a Russian political leader have launched a campaign to revoke Obama’s honour after the US attacked Libya. Liberal Democratic Party of Russia leader and Vice-Chairman of the State Duma Vladimir Zhirinovsky released a statement today calling for the Nobel Prize Committee to take back the honour bestowed on US President Barack Obama in 2009.
Zhirinovsky said the attacks were “another outrageous act of aggression by NATO forces and, in particular, the United States,” and that the attacks demonstrated a “colonial policy” with “one goal: to establish control over Libyan oil and the Libyan regime.” He said the prize was now hypocritical as a result.READ ARTICLE HERE
March 30, 2011 By 1 Comment
Editor’s Note: Please. Listen people, it’s time for a reality check. We’re going to just throw this out there for any of our confused readers who still believe- in their heart of hearts, that this attack on Libya is for humanitarian reasons. If you fall into this camp, well… you’ve been duped again. Iraq should have your wake up call, but we are aware that many people suffer from short-term memory loss. At some point, you will have to wake up and realise that powerful western financial interests are steering the economic takeover of these sovereign states, like parasites feeding off the resources of their new host. So we only ask that next time, when the sparks fly, watch as the players move in for the kill… Bloomberg Financial reports: Libyan rebels in Benghazi said they have created a new national oil company to replace the corporation controlled by leader Muammar Qaddafi whose assets were frozen by the United Nations Security Council. The “Transitional National Council” released a statement announcing the decision made at a March 19 meeting to establish the “Libyan Oil Company as supervisory authority on oil production and policies in the country, based temporarily in Benghazi, and the appointment of an interim director general” of the company. The Council also said it “designated the Central Bank of Benghazi as a monetary authority competent in monetary policies in Libya and the appointment of a governor to the Central Bank of Libya, with a temporary headquarters in Benghazi.” The Security Council adopted a resolution on March 17 that froze the foreign assets of the Libyan National Oil Corp. and the Central Bank of Libya, both described in the text as “a potential source of funding” for Qaddafi’s regime. Libya holds Africa’s largest oil reserve. Output has fallen to fewer than 400,000 barrels a day,Shokri Ghanem, chairman of the National Oil Corp., said on March 19. The country produced 1.59 million barrels a day in January, according to estimates compiled by Bloomberg. Exports may be halted for “many months” because of sanctions and unrest, the International Energy Agency said.
‘Extended Shutdown’Brent crude for May settlement on the London-based ICE Futures Europe exchange fell 0.3 percent to $114.62 as of 8:50 a.m. It surged to a 2 1/2-year high of $119.79 on Feb 24 as geopolitical tensions spread throughout the Middle East and North Africa. The European benchmark will average $109 a barrel this year, up from a previous forecast of $98, on expectations of an “extended shutdown” of Libyan oil supplies, Societe Generale SA said in a monthly review dated yesterday. The statement by the Transitional National Council also said the rebels would “urgently prepare a file on the referral of Qaddafi and his gang and his associates involved in the killing of Libyans to the International Criminal Court.” The Security Council referred allegations of human rights violations by the Qaddafi regime to the court in a resolution adopted on Feb. 26. The statement said the council would begin choosing ambassadors to foreign countries. The UN said yesterday that Deputy Ambassador Ibrahim Dabbashi, who broke with the regime last month and said he was then representing the rebels, was no longer Libya’s accredited ambassador. Ambassador Mohammed Shalgham, who also broke with the regime, similarly lost his accreditation when Qaddafi appointed former UN General Assembly President Abdussalam Treki as envoy to the world body. Treki hasn’t presented his credentials yet to Secretary- General Ban Ki-moon, a prerequisite for officials taking the post. -
March 29, 2011 By 348 Comments
activist post March 29, 2011 It’s perplexing to see a high level of support for the unprovoked bombing of Libya on so-called “progressive” websites. There has been an endless stream of humanitarian propaganda flowing from these sites trying to convince average liberals that the “human thing to do” is to rain down tomahawk missiles with depleted uraniumto bring freedom and democracy to an oppressed people. Huffington Post ran a piece by Ed Schultz titled Why I Support President Obama’s Decision to Invade Libya where he described his reasoning as follows:
“President Obama explained this won’t be a long-term operation… Matter of days, not a matter of weeks. Not even months… He’s (Obama) trying to give the rebels, those who want democracy, a fighting chance at just that and trying to stop Gaddafi –this is the human thing to do — from slaughtering his own people.”By the very use of the word “invade” in the title, Schultz would seem to understand that the continued military support is likely to last for quite some time. Indeed, this was confirmed on Sunday morning when Defense Secretary Gates and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton hinted that the operation could indeed last for months, which seems to debunk Schultz’s main argument that it’s only a days-long conflict. This justification is reminiscent of Wolfowitz and Rumsfeld falsely stating that the Iraq war would be quick and easy — only cost a couple of a billion dollars that would be paid for by Iraqi oil. Establishment progressives can no longer hide behind phony labels. They have officially joined the ranks of the War Party serving up American blood and treasure to support profits for the military-industrial complex and Big Oil, while compromising on austerity cuts at home. Related: central bank of libya is 100% state owned
March 29, 2011 By 20 Comments
The Economic Collapse March 29, 2011 The rebels in Libya are in the middle of a life or death civil war and Moammar Gadhafi is still in power and yet somehow the Libyan rebels have had enough time to establish a new Central Bank of Libya and form a new national oil company. Perhaps when this conflict is over those rebels can become time management consultants. They sure do get a lot done. What a skilled bunch of rebels – they can fight a war during the day and draw up a new central bank and a new national oil company at night without any outside help whatsoever. If only the rest of us were so versatile! But isn’t forming a central bank something that could be done after the civil war is over? According to Bloomberg, the Transitional National Council has “designated the Central Bank of Benghazi as a monetary authority competent in monetary policies in Libya and the appointment of a governor to the Central Bank of Libya, with a temporary headquarters in Benghazi.” Apparently someone felt that it was very important to get pesky matters such as control of the banks and control of the money supply out of the way even before a new government is formed. Of course it is probably safe to assume that the new Central Bank of Libya will be 100% owned and 100% controlled by the newly liberated people of Libya, isn’t it? Most people don’t realize that the previous Central Bank of Libya was 100% state owned. The following is an excerpt from Wikipedia’s article on the former Central Bank of Libya….
The Central Bank of Libya (CBL) is 100% state owned and represents the monetary authority in The Great Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya and enjoys the status of autonomous corporate body. The law establishing the CBL stipulates that the objectives of the central bank shall be to maintain monetary stability in Libya , and to promote the sustained growth of the economy in accordance with the general economic policy of the state.Since the old Central Bank of Libya was state owned, it was essentially under the control of Moammar Gadhafi. But now that Libya is going to be “free”, the new Central Bank of Libya will be run by Libyans and solely for the benefit of Libyans, right? Of course it is probably safe to assume that will be the case with the new national oil company as well, isn’t it? Over the past couple of years, Moammar Gadhafi had threatened to nationalize the oil industry in Libya and kick western oil companies out of the country, but now that Libya will be “free” the people of Libya will be able to work hand in hand with “big oil” and this will create a better Libya for everyone. Right? Of course oil had absolutely nothing to do with why the U.S. “inva—” (scratch that) “initiated a kinetic humanitarian liberty action” in Libya. When Barack Obama looked straight into the camera and told the American people that the war in Libya is in the “strategic interest” of the United States, surely he was not referring to oil. After all, war for oil was a “Bush thing”, right? The Democrats voted for Obama to end wars like this, right? Surely no prominent Democrats will publicly support this war in Libya, right? Surely Barack Obama will end the bombing of Libya if the international community begins to object, right? Obama won a Nobel Peace Prize. He wouldn’t deeply upset the other major powers on the globe and bring us closer to World War III, would he? Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has loudly denounced “coalition strikes on columns of Gaddafi’s forces” and he believes that the U.S. has badly violated the terms of the UN Security Council resolution….
“We consider that intervention by the coalition in what is essentially an internal civil war is not sanctioned by the U.N. Security Council resolution.”So to cool off rising tensions with the rest of the world, Obama is going to call off the air strikes, right? Well, considering the fact that Obama has such vast foreign policy experience we should all be able to rest easy knowing that Obama will understand exactly what to do. Meanwhile, the rebels seem to be getting the hang of international trade already. They have even signed an oil deal with Qatar! Rebel “spokesman” Ali Tarhouni has announced that oil exports to Qatar will begin in “less than a week“. Who knew that the rag tag group of rebels in Libya were also masters of banking and international trade? We sure do live in a strange world. Tonight, Barack Obama told the American people the following….
“Some nations may be able to turn a blind eye to atrocities in other countries. The United States of America is different.”So now we are going to police all of the atrocities in all of the other countries around the globe? The last time I checked, the government was gunning down protesters in Syria. Is it time to start warming up the Tomahawks? Or do we reserve “humanitarian interventions” only for those nations that have a lot of oil? In fact, atrocities are currently being committed all over Africa and in about a dozen different nations in the Middle East. Should we institute a draft so that we will have enough young men and women to police the world with? We all have to be ready to serve our country, right? The world is becoming a smaller place every day, and you never know where U.S. “strategic interests” are going to be threatened next. The rest of the world understands that we know best, right? Of course the rest of the world can surely see our good intentions in Libya, can’t they? Tensions with Russia, China and the rest of the Arab world are certainly going to subside after they all see how selfless our “humanitarian intervention” has been in Libya, don’t you think? In all seriousness, we now live in a world where nothing is stable anymore. Wars and revolutions are breaking out all over the globe, unprecedented natural disasters are happening with alarming frequency and the global economy is on the verge of total collapse. By interfering in Libya, we are just making things worse. Gadhafi is certainly a horrible dictator, but this was a fight for the Libyan people to sort out. We promised the rest of the world that we were only going to be setting up a “no fly zone”. By violating the terms of the UN Security Council resolution, we have shown other nations that we cannot be trusted and by our actions we have increased tensions all over the globe. - -
March 28, 2011 By 60 Comments
By Eric V. Encina 21st Century Wire March 28, 2011 One seldom mentioned fact by western politicians and media pundits: the Central Bank of Libya is 100% State Owned. The world’s globalist financiers and market manipulators do not like it and would continue to their on-going effort to dethrone Muammar Muhammad al-Gaddafi, bringing an end to Libya as independent nation. Currently, the Libyan government creates its own money, the Libyan Dinar, through the facilities of its own central bank. Few can argue that Libya is a sovereign nation with its own great resources, able to sustain its own economic destiny. One major problem for globalist banking cartels is that in order to do business with Libya, they must go through the Libyan Central Bank and its national currency, a place where they have absolutely zero dominion or power-broking ability. Hence, taking down the Central Bank of Libya (CBL) may not appear in the speeches of Obama, Cameron and Sarkozy but this is certainly at the top of the globalist agenda for absorbing Libya into its hive of compliant nations. When the smoke eventually clears from all the cruise missiles and cluster bombs, you will see the Allied reformers move in to reform Libya’s monetary system, pumping it full of worthless dollars, priming it for a series of chaotic inflationary cycles. The CBL is currently a 100% state owned entity and represents the monetary authority in The Great Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya. The financial structure and general operation procedures of a state bank is of course much different than that of an American or European based central bank. Form starters it is not privately owned, for-profit bank with a undisclosed list of private shareholders like the US Federal Reserve and the Bank of England are. Libyan constitutional law establishing the CBL stipulates that its central bank maintains monetary stability in Libya and promotes sustained growth of its national economy. Libya also holds more bullion as a proportion of gross domestic product than any country except Lebanon, according to the London-based World Gold Council using January data from the International Monetary Fund. The value of gold is based on the March 25 close of $1,429.74 an ounce. Will this gold remain in Libya once Allied forces have taken control of Tripoli, or will it lost, or exchanged for pallets upon pallets of paper aka US dollars? FOLDING LIBYA INTO THE NEW WORLD ORDER In the Libyan banking charter, one of the primary mandates will be that it is regulating the quantity, quality and cost of credit to meet the requirements of economic growth and monetary stability. This of course, is the very opposite role which privately owned central banks play elsewhere in the world. Private central banks elsewhere create inflation, periodically inflating bubbles by design and then popping them in order to transfer large sums of wealth out of lower and middle class hands and into the hands of the financial elites. It is becoming easy to diagnose the very root-causes of chaos in the Middle East and the ongoing war-attacks against Libya. Finance, oil, militarization & imperialism, globalization- all of these comprise a running agenda for the New World Order. Egypt and Tunisia have both fallen to interim military dictatorships and have been hooked with billions in cheap loans from the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) and the World Bank. Any country or nation that is running against the grain of this agenda- going against the orthodoxies of the New World Order, will eventually be flagged and brought to heal by way of military hammer. Regular acts of war against these non-globalist nation states are designed to humiliate, degrade and compromise international human rights- a condition that has become embarrassing to the world at large. CANADIAN PUPPET DESIGNATED AS LEADER FOR NATO’S LIBYAN OPERATION Most observers would claim that Canada is neutral in the Libyan conflict. But on this occasion, it’s been the consensus of the world axis of greedy powers that Canada will be running the front-of-house for their intervention in Libya’s civil chaos. With respect to Honourable Canadian leaders and officials, Canada’s participation in this particular war and in the cover-up for Obama in Libya is too adroit for the sake of profits and taking over resources in that particular region of the world. “Canadian Defense Minister Peter MacKay said Friday that Lt. General Charles Bouchard has been designated to lead the alliance’s military campaign in Libya. (Yahoo News, March 25, 2011). “Bouchard is stationed in Naples, Italy, at the Allied Joint Force Command. Bouchard’s recent job was deputy commander of NORAD, reporting to an American general. MacKay adds here, “He will be commander of the NATO operations, yet to be fully defined NATO operations”. Here is another challenge for the Canadian people. Another repercussion is that the Canadian budget will also be leached by such participations as the national Bank of Canada is also based on debt finance. If Canada, in not too distant future, would continue to participate in war(s), it would then become a fully fledged globalist war-nation, joining the likes of the USA and the UK. One wonders what will become a world that is at perpetually at war with itself? Why build wealth only to have it destroyed by wars? Why collect more taxes, spend and wantonly waste state revenue, create money out of nothing at the point of usury, and lend and/or borrow money at interest that disastrously piles up national debt at sky-rocketing rates? We see the results time and time again: the economy collapse, creation of poverty, and the continuing finance of weapons’ manufacturing, arms sales and the most technologically sophisticated wars in history that cause the most unimaginable devastations and irreparable damages to human lives and nations. If the Western based foreign policies continued to be war-based, bent on controlling the world’s resources, there seems to be no worse future for mankind. One big reason for the Western assault on Libya: Libya owns and issues its own money. - Author Eric V. Encina is based in the Philippines and works as an activist and social reformer. He is also an advocate of Social Credit. RELATED: Wow, That Was Fast! Libyan Rebels Have Already Established New Central Bank Of Libya