Another: "Mr. Markus Angelicus,
I read the gold-eagle write. You have made the link between London ( LBMA ) and South Africa."
Date: Sat Nov 22 1997 23:13
The Rothschilds, LBMA, and Gold
Date: November 21, 1997
The moment I think I understand freegold and what is behind is just a pregnant waiting for next surprise. :o)
" The French House also controlled mining companies ( De Beers and gold mines in South Africa ) , metal plants ( Rio Tinto ), oil interests ( Royal Dutch Shell ) , and chemical industries (Morton, 1962). The Baron was estimated to be the richest Rothschild and probably the most multiple millionaire/billionaire in Europe."
Date: Wed Nov 05 1997 20:33
The oil and gold connection looks to be changing now! After all these years we hear of an end to foolish thought. This should get very interesting.
Date: Fri Nov 07 1997 21:59
How do you get oil to rise? Today, we stop our CBs from selling gold!
The Washington Agreement on Gold was signed of 26 September 1999 in Washington DC during the IMF annual meeting.
Another: Wed Nov 12 1997 20:41
"A BIS meeting was held and from those doors the world did change. The Bundesbank has now made clear to all what will now be policy for CBs. A crisis is at hand! All physical gold sales will stop. All gold lending will wind down. We will see the results of this as a massive scramble to cover open positions slowly unfolds. All of us will see the destruction of the gold market as we know it, LBMA will be no more!"
-> So it seems this crises has been maintained or postponed.
[mRt: A cLuE aBouT aNoThEr?]
I read your last correspondence with a great deal of interest. One question that immediately comes to mind is what exactly do you mean by old world order reasserting itself? The old European aristocracy? Is the political/economic power in Europe as it was prior to World War I? Also, if Europe undermines U.S. does it not also undermine its own security? Is not the Russian bear far from dead but simply in hibernation? Is Europe able industrially to gear up its military defense industry quickly enough to replace U.S. protection? I would think that the same applies to the Gulf and Saudi Arabia. Iraq and Iran are not friendly countries and Europe cannot protect the region from unstable societies. One would think that the U.S. would protect corporate interests in that part of the world no matter what happens in Europe, but if America goes bankrupt it will have other concerns.
On the subject of gold: Do you have any information as to the backing on the euro percentage-wise? Does it actually make any difference if its 10%, 20%, 30%? Or is the psychology the important factor? Any gold backing would make the euro more appealing than the dollar.
This morning a Portuguese central bank governor implied that gold was drawing such a nice interest rate that Portugal would probably would not sell gold. Implied in that statement is a willingness to lend. What would happen if borrowing entities suddenly found themselves unable to pay back their gold loans. Wouldn't this undermine that nation's balance sheet not to mention their sovereignty? Do you know of any instance where central bank gold loans have gone bad? And by the way, just WHAT DO YOU AS A CENTRAL BANKER take for collateral on a gold loan? Is not gold the ultimate, liquid collateral? Do you take back a piece of paper representing the right to future gold delivery? What good is that. To me it is pure folly. I've never understood this idea of a gold loan from a practical point of view? By its nature, it must by necessity be an unsecured loan.
Along these lines I have one more related question, then I must go. How long do you think those playing this game of paper selling can continue? We have heard for many months that there will come a time when physical demand will force the shorts to bid up the price to cover. It has not happened. Why not? Can LBMA play this paper game forever? Are you and I underestimating their ability to play the magician in this regard and keep us all mystified?
Though we are in a new market because of the euro, there is still much of the old because of the Bank of England and LBMA -- do you agree?
5/21/98 ANOTHER (THOUGHTS!)
I offer simple thoughts for hard questions.
"And by the way, just what do YOU AS A CENTRAL BANKER take for collateral on a gold loan?" (USAGOLD question)
I think, the currency of a country does no longer hold "backing". This term, it is used often, but is not correct. Today, all modern money does have "reserves", and such is used only for "the dirty float" in currency warfare. As in war, the larger and better equipped army in "reserve" does rule over the lesser force. Perhaps we should think in this way: in "cold war" of modern exchange rates, "digital currencies from reserves are used", however, when "hot war" of major default does begin, "nuclear weapons of GOLD" are deployed!
As in real war defense, of today, some countries hold a much lesser army, and depend on "the alliance" with other stronger nations to defend them. Such it is with the currencies! Many states hold but a few "digital currencies" as reserves for currency wars and see no need for "gold nuclear weapons". They sell off these weapons and do join "the currency alliance" of stronger nations. We see this in Europe, yes?