Tag Archives: SDR

The Future of America and Gold Standards, a Reader’s Perspective and My Response

In my recent post asking for audience feedback (in which I received a lot of valuable commentary – thank you), I received a series of comments from a fellow Truth-seeker named Peter. He shares a unique perspective from his experiences in Europe during the collapse of the USSR, which I’d recommend reading:

Comment #1
Comment #2

My response to Peter is a long one and includes a few perspectives I’ve yet to share in the form of proper articles, so I re-present them here in the hopes you might find them valuable. I’m also in the process of working on an entry about a recent Chatham House policy paper on the unfolding of multipolar World Order in 2016, so stay tuned for that as well.

My Response

I appreciate your unique perspective on this issue, especially as it pertains to alt-media programming of Americans vs. Europeans. I wonder how much of this is, as you suggest, a managed perception or merely a difference in culture, as the “prepping/survivalist” mentality of Americans has existed (in its modern form) since at least the age of the Cold War; in America, for example, there were/are no massive public works programs like bomb shelters or food stores as there were in the Soviet Union – Americans were urged to do this of their own accord. “Prepping” as opposed to “being prepared for.” That’s not to say I discount the possibility of some sort of “second American (color) Revolution,” as the breaking down of large nation-states to be (re)federalized under a new system would certainly weaken their ability to participate in this new “World Federalism.” The rest of the world has experienced hard times in a manner that America hasn’t in nearly 100 years, so we’re certainly overdue. As you say, only time will tell.

Of course, I wasn’t around to experience the dissolution of the USSR, but from what you’re saying there was a sense of relative affluence before the detonation of the country. There is no such affluence in America anymore. There is virtually no manufacturing, no jobs for the youth outside of the service sector, and those higher-paying jobs typically require a healthy dose of University brainwashing, which of course means indebtedness. In short, there’s little left to rob. In my brief time on this planet, I’ve watched this country go from a form of opulence to severe wealth dislocation; there are pockets of the country where reinvestment in infrastructure is strong, but many more that look like parts of the Third World. For example, if you were to ask a citizen of Detroit or Cleveland when the “economic collapse” is coming, they’d say it already came and went, and in the context of those cities they’d be right. And this is of course without mentioning the severe deterioration of physical and mental health, as most Americans have been poisoned (GMOs) without their realizing it over the past 20 years.

As I see it, there are three primary differences between the breakdown of Soviet satellite states and some hypothetical breakdown of the “United” States (though these are by no means the only differences).

  1. Americans are heavily armed and it’s hard to imagine a managed uprising in this country that doesn’t include significant bloodshed or resistance; much easier to control and direct a mob with Molotov cocktails and clubs than one with guns, which (in my opinion) is one of the main reasons Americans are being “slow-killed” by poisoning of water and food and “slow-robbed” via economic booms and busts as opposed to some overnight sea-change.
  2. Unlike the USSR, which had infrastructure to plunder by the West, American companies are no longer “American.” They’re sufficiently globalized and their wealth diffused enough to leave this country behind without thinking twice, as they already have in the post-GATT/Uruguay Round world. The TPP will only accelerate this. It’s a similar process to the looting of the USSR, but it’s being done in slow-motion and has only accelerated since 2008.
  3. We’re entering an era unlike any other we’ve seen in history with the rise of low-level algorithmic AI, robotics, and automation, and thus, I think it very difficult to extrapolate from history any clear picture of the future from where we stand today. For once, the phrase “this time it’s different” may ring true. For example, what is the future of Imperialism if you no longer need human soldiers to occupy a country (or at least significantly less humans) and use robots in their place? What is the future of “sweat shop Capitalism” if all manufacturing is completely automated? In this regard I have far more questions than answers.

As for the notion that there is some secret Chinese elite working on behalf of Free Humanity as in your linked article, I find this to be ridiculous wishful thinking if not overt disinformation. American corporations and capital built modern China. Anglo-American wealth managers, through the LBMA, have fixed metals prices and managed the wealth transfer from West to East since Day One. The BRICS concept was the brainchild of Goldman Sachs, and the PBOC itself are readily integrating themselves into the IMF’s SDR system. As such, I think the “Global Monetary Reset” your linked article mentions will include elements of a commodity/currency basket, but I’d be hard-pressed to call this a positive development.

 

Zimbabwe is indeed a resource-rich nation, though I would caution the idea that the IMF’s interests in Zimbabwe are fundamentally any different than China’s. Take, for example, Mongolia, which has been pumped dry of all her material wealth by the Chinese for decades now. The average Mongolian should have pockets overflowing with gold, but instead that wealth has ended up in the coffers of the PBOC. I see no reason why, in the long run, African nations will not be treated the same way.

There’s much more to say on this topic, but I would also caution your notion that a “Gold Standard” is in any way “better” than fiat standards in terms of control of populations. In fact, I’d say in many ways it’s worse. I’ve considered dedicating an entire article to this concept and may do so in the future, but I’d recommend a reading of Eustace Mullins’ original work on the Federal Reserve.

Unlike most of the researchers who followed in Mullins’ footsteps, he starts the history of monetary debauchery in America not with the creation of the Fed, but 50 years before, recounting the managed monetary crises of 1873, 1893, and 1907. Needless to say, the devastation they wrought couldn’t have been brought about without a Gold Standard. The monetary pendulum swings throughout history from “sound money” to “fiat money,” but the power behind the proverbial curtain never actually changes.

“He who owns the Gold makes the Rules.”

I’d also note that I’m not an atheist, merely an “anti-religionist.” I believe in “God” and have experienced significant evidence for this concept, but not in the manner of a “Bearded Man in the Sky” that’s outside of (and apart from) myself. But that’s a topic for another day!

I truly do value your personal experiences on these issues, Peter, and thank you for taking the time to respond.

This December, Agenda 21 is Getting an “Update”

From November 30th to December 11th of 2015, a consortium of world “leaders” from 190 countries will gather in Paris, France as part of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. The occasion? The much maligned Neomalthusian “environmental” program, known as “Agenda 21” by its original visionaries as well as its opponents, will be of drinking age, its “sustainable” protocols having been officially adopted in 1994.

So, too, is this UN Convention in Paris a celebration of the Kyoto Protocol’s numerological accomplishments, as COP21/CPM11 marks the 11th year of the emission regulation’s force as “International Law” (as of 2004).

The purpose of these festivities, however, is hardly mere ceremony; as Agenda 21 comes of age, the burdens it places upon those living beneath its yoke are also maturing. Unlike every UN Climate Convention since Rio 1992, which were mere “global visioning” seminars, COP21, according to the Anglo-American Cambridge University, has far more grandiose and binding aspirations:

“The United Nations Climate Change Conference, COP21 or CMP11 will be held in Paris, France in 2015. The international climate conference will be held from 30 November to 11 December 2015. The conference objective is to achieve a legally binding and universal agreement on climate, from all the nations of the world.
Cambridge Interdisciplinary Research on the Environment

In other words, Agenda 21 v2.0 will soon be upon us.

Information on what exactly this “upgrade” entails for Free Humanity is sparse, as the UN remains resolutely vague (perhaps deliberately, given recent notoriety surrounding “sustainable development”) on the specifics of the Convention’s “binding and universal agreement.” Yet in spite of Globalism’s sincere attempt to obfuscate Neofeudal Technocracy’s latest iteration, open-source intelligence can give us a glimpse behind the proverbial curtain at the magic tricks in store at COP21 this December.

All the World’s a (Sustainable) Stage

As the curtain begins to rise on Act 2 of Agenda 21, it’s worth reminding ourselves of the nodes of forensic history which lead to COP21. Perhaps the most integral of these nodes is the research produced by whistleblower and activist, George Washington Hunt, in his party-crashing exploits at the pre-Rio planning committees of the early-90s, attended by such Globalist “luminaries” as Maurice Strong and Edmond de Rothschild; all of whom were caught on tape by Hunt’s daring infiltration:


Even more undercirculated than Hunt’s video presentation are the documents this Conference produced. It is within these Anglophilic pages that the World Order created by Agenda 21 is spelled out with stunning clarity – particularly as it pertains to the “developing” world, China and India chief among them:
UNCED1

China and India's "conditions" for signing on to the Rio '92 agenda as documented by the UN Environment and Development Conference

China and India’s “conditions” for signing on to the Rio ’92 agenda, as documented by the UN Conference on Environment and Development

China and India, recognizing the influence their signatures (or lack thereof) would have on adopting Agenda 21 globally, told the UN succinctly: “We haven’t come here for ‘aid’ (IMF loans). Instead, we want in on the Western game of ‘Global Trade’ (Neomercantilism). Give us a slice of the wealth pie (compensatory financial flows) or we’re not signing up.”

History informs us, however, that China and India did sign up for Rio’s binding protocols. The past twenty-odd years also spell out quite clearly that the Anglo-American Establishment has fulfilled its side of the wager to her former colonies. This “Faustian Bargain” has made India and China rich, but at what cost?
UNCED3Was the price paid by India and China their economic autonomy? While it’s certain that the Indian caste system and the “State Capitalist” collectivism of modern China are hardly beacons of “liberal free market” activity, their development includes elements of this therein; in fact, Eastern banking systems grow more “Anglo-Saxon” in ideal and structure by the day, despite the facade of independence being maintained.

This blend of Western structure with Eastern identity in banking strikes one as the potential compromise reached between the “First” and “Second” worlds at UNCED – a final bid to maintain the “Anglo-Saxon system of banking”:
UNCED5

The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (or AIIB) is an excellent example of this burgeoning “East-Anglo” banking model. While widely reported by some as signifying the end of the decaying Western banking model, the AIIB’s steadfast devotion to Agenda 21 makes one wonder whether or not the AIIB is a truly autonomous entity, or merely China’s fulfillment of an Asian Development Bank or Development Bank of Latin America-style puppet as called for by Rio ’92:
AIIB1

Jin Liqun, secretary general of the bank's multilateral interim secretariat, tells Xinhua on the topic of the AIIB. From China Daily and Reuters.

Jin Liqun, secretary general of the bank’s multilateral interim secretariat, tells Xinhua on the topic of the AIIB. From China Daily and Reuters.

It seems the AIIB plans not only on investing in “green” infrastructure projects, but will do so in partnership with the Globalist World Bank and ADB, both of which were set up by the West following the devastation of World War II. Christine Lagarde and the IMF, too, state that they would be “Delighted” to work with the AIIB.  Is this new system of banking and financing what Edmond de Rothschild meant when he referenced a “Second World Marshall Plan” in relation to Agenda 21, as described in Hunt’s recording? Is this why “developing  nations should look to Germany and Japan,” countries rebuilt by World Bank funding, for their banking models, as described in the UNCED document?

One must bear in mind that the United Nations Council on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) quoted in the document above is the same group which authored the paper, “A BRICS Development Bank – A Dream Coming True?” in March of 2014, which heralds the rise of the BRICS New Development Bank as a global force for “sustainable development” and an ardent partner in Agenda 21:
BRICSDB

The BRICS to put "development on center stage," as called for in the UNCED documentation

The BRICS to put “development on center stage,” as called for in the UNCED documentation

And thus, a pattern emerges – the “New Kids on the Trading Bloc” and their corresponding banks are, universally, in lock-step with Agenda 21 and the multipolar Technocratic Order it represents. From sustainable banking to metals exchanges, the infrastructure required by a reinvention of the Global Order seems to be in place in advance of COP21, with the exception of at least one key element: A global carbon credit scheme.

Carbon Credits Cometh

Much ado has been made recently within the alternative media about the IMF’s decision to delay inclusion of the Yuan into the SDR basket until September of 2016, with various theories floated as to why this has occurred. Viewing this announcement within the context of COP21’s heavy emphasis on the future of carbon trading markets, a piece of the Yuan-SDR puzzle falls into place; if what anti-Technocracy researchers like Patrick Wood have unveiled is true, Global Technocracy’s Neomalthusian environmental implements must also develop in tandem with a new currency system underpinned by energy credits. The pre-release documents from COP21’s “Scientific and Technological Advice” PDF, as well as COP21’s sponsors, hint at this being an integral part of the discussions taking place in December:
COP21Tech2CTXPartner21CarbonTrackerPartner21One key country expected to be signatory to COP21’s treaty has revealed that they are not yet ready for the “new market-based mechanism” the UN will require: China. The Chinese National Development and Reform Commission announced that their national carbon trading markets will not be ready until late 2016 at the earliest:
CDCarbon1

So it seems the IMF has delayed the Yuan’s SDR inclusion for almost exactly as long as it will take for China to launch its national carbon trading scheme – is this mere coincidence? The timing of these moves strikes this author as potentially significant.

The launch of this national program will be built on the foundation of the regional carbon markets China has been fostering over the past few years, one of which should be familiar to us:
CDCarbon3The site of the Trilateral-assisted “Eco-City,” Tianjin, is also the site of China’s pilot carbon trading market; the same Tianjin whose “not-so-smart” counterpart was recently set ablaze by a mysterious explosion, ostensibly caused by “chemicals.”

If the “problem” of unsustainable manufacture and development wasn’t clear to China’s human resources before last week, it is now.

Hegel 21

“…back then, we were talking about projections of a problem (Climate Change) with literally no solutions that we could talk about. And that is, for people, just not going to work. People need to know that there’s hopefulness before they’re gonna even admit there’s a problem. If you give them a problem and there’s no solution, they pretend it doesn’t happen.

We’ve been doing that for 25 or 30 years.

What we see now is that we actually have solutions, and we’re actually being hit with the problem now.”
Gina McCarthy, EPA Administrator

This is how the head of the EPA, Gina McCarthy, chose to frame the Obama Administration’s implementation of the Malthusian “Clean Power Plan” during her tell-a-vision appearance with Bilderberger and CFR member Charlie Rose. Sound familiar? The Hegelian Dialectic strikes again, only this time, on a global stage. The mass of the public, properly conditioned to accept “Climate Change” as the Harbinger of Doom, is now prepared for the solutions phase of Eco-Fascism: The final round of de-industrialization and centralization of the American power grid.

This latest Hegelian trick’s synthesis, birthed from the antithesis represented by the EPA’s slashing of American carbon emissions, must inevitably include the rapid development of American “renewable” power:

Regardless of the “winner” of the 2016 Presidential (s)election, the mechanics for such a program are already well underway at the Corporatist level, as China, the largest solar panel producing country on Earth, is well underway in supplying American solar infrastructure:
Screenshot from 2015-08-14 14:02:47In the case of Suniva’s purchase by Shunfeng Clean Energy, China’s solar juggernaut worth over $20 billion, the merger will be underwritten by two powerful forces of Anglo-American wealth as well:
goldmanwarburgchinasolarThe Warburg banking family and the ever-present Goldman Sachs are steadfast in their support of this “sustainable” trend. A safe bet, surely, as the Obama Administration’s “Clean Power Act” virtually requires a tremendous uptick in solar panel manufacture for the West. COP21 is set to require even more. Will the “cheap money for cheap goods” and “cheap precious metal for cheap bonds” relationship between China and the West soon be joined by a “carbon credits for cheap solar panels” arrangement? As “experts” on the East-West Dialectic and originators of the term BRICs as early as 2003, Goldman seems to be betting that this is the case:
Screenshot from 2015-07-28 23:24:10Screenshot from 2015-07-28 23:24:27

One may recall a recent post, “China 21: Anglo-American Sustainability in Asia,” in which this author noted the Hegelian Dialectic’s use to usher survivors of Fukushima into Agenda 21 “Smart Cities.” We see these same “Thesis, Antithesis, Synthesis” tactics at work in the rubble of Tianjin. Whoever or whatever caused the Tianjin blast, whether or not this is a case of a synthetic event or simply a matter of “never letting a good crisis go to waste,” the reality of the situation is unchanged: The old Tianjin is in ruin, whereas Tianjin Eco-City, located outside of the blast radius, remains in tact with its scheduled completion in 2020 unhindered:
TianjinBlast1

In tandem with “old” Tianjin’s destruction, degradation of air quality is also being reported surrounding the blast site; air quality issues that, presumably, would not exist had Tianjin Eco-City been at full capacity and the environmental standards of COP21 been fully developed:
COP21Tech1Tianjin Eco-City, unlike its counterpart, already includes a “greenhouse gas data interface,” a trait shared by every Smart City on planet Earth. Nor would Tianjin Eco-City’s “Eco-Industrial Park” have allowed such volatile and “unsustainable” manufacturing to take place in the first place. This is the thesis as constructed in the Hegelian programming surrounding the Tianjin catastrophe.

All that’s left now is for transnational Technocrats to wait in anticipation for the ultimate synthesis to be unveiled this December at COP21, and given the grand overtures being prepared by all nations in advance of the Paris conference, the “legally binding and universal agreement” it will produce is set to be no less bombastic.

The specifics of the threat posed by COP21 to Free Humanity can only be divined upon the gathering’s close, but its overall aspirations are known to us. They are the same in 2015 at COP21 as they were at Rio in 1992; the same today as in 1972 with the Club of Rome’s publication of The Limits to GrowthNothing short of global colonization by the Anglo-American Establishment, as admitted at UNCED ’92:
UNCED4To the “billions of Lilliputians of lesser race” out there, myself included, we have been warned. The Hour is Late. Whether the Fabian degradation of freedom and prosperity continue their steady grind or the world is “compelled” by economic catastrophe into implementing “Global Sustainability” as foretold by Maurice Strong, the remainder of 2015 and 2016 are set to be a turbulent period in this ongoing Age of Transitions.

Amidst the potential tumult that Act 2 of Agenda 21 and other geopolitical events may yield, just remember, Reader:

You either learn your way towards writing your own script in life, or you unwittingly become an actor in someone else’s script.
-John Taylor Gatto

Masters of Metal: China, the Rothschild Fix, and the “New World Currency”

Lies, Damned Lies, and Forensic History

As regular consumers of alternative media have likely noticed, China’s voracious appetite for gold has been reported on ad nauseam in the wake of the 2008 Depression. Endless geopolitical and economic analysts have mused about the implications of Chinese gold accumulation, with most concluding (perhaps prematurely) that some form of gold-backed Yuan is on the horizon. Some extend this scenario further, optimistically declaring that the BRICS NDB (New Development Bank) and AIIB (Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank), led by China, will usher in a “New Golden Era” of progress and prosperity, spelling the end of the Western model of Central Banking tyranny.

The reason for this transfer of precious metals from West to East by the Anglo-American Establishment, these pundits prognosticate, is a simple and tragic combination of incompetence and malfeasance. The aged and corrupt West must end, and in the wake of its destruction, the Phoenix of the East must rise.

Does this narrative, however, have any basis in reality when viewed within the context of history? How have institutions traditionally defined as “Globalists” participated in satiating China’s gold fever? Is the hand of the Red Shield, infamously and intimately involved in the metals market for over 200 years, at work, even in the East?

And what, ultimately, do the answers to these questions spell for the “BRICS Saviour” meme?

To begin answering these questions, we must analyze the history of the London Bullion Market Association (LBMA) and the ignominious “Precious Metals Fix” that makes it all possible.

The (Global) Fix Is In

In 2010, the alternative finance community was set ablaze by the revelations of bullion trader turned whistleblower Andrew MacGuire, contending that JPMorgan and HSBC, operating as agents for the Federal Reserve, had suppressed the price of precious metals in an effort to silence the “Canary in the Coal Mine” amidst unprecedented money printing. By using managed selloffs via algorithmic trading bots, bullion banks drove down the price of “electronic/paper” metals certificates at the COMEX, effectively capping their price and ultimately driving them down to new 5-year lows.

The Commodities Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) deemed MacGuire’s claims credible enough to warrant further investigation; led by Bart Chilton, the CFTC’s probe into silver price manipulation ended in September of 2013 with the stunning declaration that no illegal activity had occurred:

“Based upon the law and evidence as they exist at this time, there is not a viable basis to bring an enforcement action with respect to any firm or its employees related to our investigation of silver markets.”

-CFTC Statement

What many fail to realize is that the CFTC’s conclusion is technically correct. JPMorgan and HSBC were not acting in violation of any legal structure; they were, in fact, merely implementing the dictates of the long-standing LBMA Metals Fix:
LBMA1

The LBMA's early history, as recounted by themselves

The LBMA’s early history, as recounted by themselves

Already we can identify the hand of the Anglo-American Establishment at work by way of the East India Company. The LBMA’s commentary on the nearly global “Silver Standard” of the 17th and 18th Century is not without consequence; the British Empire’s domination of the gold market of the era made subjugation of nations like China and India, rich in silver wealth, notoriously difficult to colonize.

The Opium Wars changed this nearly overnight. Beyond the engineered addiction and mercantile foothold the opium trade gave the East India Company in China, it also made way for the wholesale looting of China’s silver wealth:

“From China, the Company bought tea, silk and porcelain. The Chinese wanted silver in return. Over the next 100 years tea became a very popular drink in England, and there was a fear that too much silver was leaving the country to pay for it. To stop this happening, the Company became involved in a triangular trade by smuggling opium (a highly addictive and illegal drug) from India into China.

The Company grew opium in India. They were looking for something that the Chinese would accept instead of silver, to pay for the goods they bought at Canton. Opium was a valued medicine which could deaden pain, assist sleep and reduce stress. But it was also seriously addictive and millions Chinese became dependent on the drug.”
British Library

With China gutted of her material wealth, the Chinese silver standard came to an end in November of 1935, a mere decade before the implementation of the first truly “Global Gold Standard,” the Bretton Woods agreement.

The path was set for a worldwide metals price-fixing mechanism, and the LBMA was more than happy to provide. Front-running the Bretton Woods agreement by decades, the LBMA’s own gold fix – run by N.M. Rothschild – was officially established in 1919:

LBMA4

By the LBMA’s own admission, the Rothschilds maintain this price fixing mechanism to the present, and seemingly, the sole beneficiary of their recent price suppressing actions is none other than China, the very country looted of monetary metals a century ago. Is this a rare act of benevolence from the Rothschild family, or do they have big plans for the East’s newfound wealth in the coming World Order?

The writings of the British analogue to the Council on Foreign Relations, Chatham House, seems to suggest the latter.

Chatham House Rule and the Gold-Backed SDR

Established in the wake of World War I at the Paris Peace Conference, the Royal Institute of International Affairs was created. Fulfilling the dream of the Last Will and Testament of Cecil Rhodes, the RIIA also birthed its more widely known American outpost, the Council on Foreign Relations. Its headquarters, Chatham House, have become the RIIA’s colloquial moniker.
Screenshot from 2015-07-28 18:41:50As what many would contend is the world’s premier “Think Tank,” Chatham House has been far from bashful in exploring a wide range of topics, and in the wake of the “Great Recession,” gold and the IMF’s “Special Drawing Rights” (SDRs) have been chief among them.

While national Central Bankers like Ben Bernanke have been vocal in their opposition towards a remonetization of gold, the supranational level represented by groups like the IMF, Bank of International Settlements, the CFR, and Chatham House have been far more accommodating towards the idea of a return to a “partial gold standard.” Chatham House has gone so far as to create the “Chatham House Gold Taskforce” designed explicitly to examine gold’s role in a “multipolar World Order.”
goldtaskforce

This task force has yielded a number of fascinating forecasts. Take, for example, these 2011 comments by Lord Meghnad Desai, the Indian-born, British-naturalized member of the House of Lords and Chatham House member in a paper entitled, “Gold, the SDR, and Other Matters.” Desai remarks:
DesaiGoldSDRFar from challenging gold’s role as a monetary metal, Chatham House is recommending the exact opposite: Nothing less than a gold-backed SDR to take the place of the dollar as World Reserve Currency, with calls for the IMF to make legal the monetization of gold. All this coming from a man who is a Professor at the Keynesian London School of Economics, lecturing chiefly on econometrics and Marxian Economics. Quite the curious blend of ideology, no?

Desai’s commentary is far from the only (seemingly) pro-precious metal rhetoric born of the “Chatham House Gold Taskforce.” Also included in the report were the writings of one Catherine Schneck of the University of Glasgow, entitled, “Adding Gold to the Valuation of the SDR,” directly echoing Baron Desai’s recommendation:
Screenshot from 2015-07-28 19:28:09Schneck, perhaps directly referring to Chinese gold acquisition, makes specific note of the RMB’s current exclusion from the SDR in the paper’s introduction. The inclusion of the RMB in the article also seems to imply that “reducing the USD weighting” as called for in bullet point 3 could indeed be “in favour” of the RMB in the future, overtly stating that the Euro, Pound, and Yen are unfit for the task:
Screenshot from 2015-07-28 19:27:47

Schneck concludes her paper by recommending potential avenues to “mitigate possible obstacles” in implementing a gold-backed SDR. Manifestations of Globalist “monetary magic” could include:
schneckgolddd

Allowing the IMF to issue more SDRs than they have gold hearkens back to the era of bank-issued Gold Certificates and their eventual monetary debasement; not a new scheme by any means. Nor are “residual” gold claims, which were commonplace during the Bretton Woods era. The last statement, “not include any right to sell SDR for gold,” would effectively ensure that gold could never be redeemed by “citizens” from banks, assuring gold coinage would never actually circulate.

A pseudo-gold standard if there ever was one.

The Chatham House Gold Taskforce’s premier publication, “Gold and the International Monetary System,” maintains the more typical Newspeak of Globalist documents with its somewhat reserved analysis; its most revealing passages, however, greatly reinforce the thesis already outlined herein.
Screenshot from 2015-07-28 20:42:35

The document reiterates the “rising China” narrative, noting that China’s recent advancements in the form of the recently-launched Shanghai Gold and Silver Exchange are a “small step” in subverting the dollar as the World Reserve Currency:
Screenshot from 2015-07-28 20:43:16Ultimately, the Chatham House Gold Taskforce concludes that, while the RMB is a strong contender for reserve currency status, it still lacks one major prerequisite for the role – Inclusion in the IMF’s SDR basket: 
Screenshot from 2015-07-28 20:43:37Chatham House also seems to advocate a digital, cryptographic version of gold as opposed to physical notes. Perhaps as a direct response to the rise of cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin and BitGold, perhaps as the implementation of a “One World” digital currency as foretold by Nicholas Rockefeller, Chatham House devotes an entire section of its policy paper examining “digital gold.”
Screenshot from 2015-07-28 19:29:45Screenshot from 2015-07-28 19:30:30
So it seems that the Anglo-American Establishment has lofty aspirations for China’s gold horde and the RMB after all. Regardless of the manner by which China’s reunion with precious metals has manifested, however, this Globalist plot coming to fruition is still dependent upon Chinese participation.

Is there any evidence to suggest that China desires inclusion into the SDR basket? Would they allow the West to use their gold as collateral against the SDR (or something akin to it) as a reserve currency as opposed to the Yuan?

Enter stage East.

Crouching PBOC, Hidden Bank of International Settlements

Meet the latest actor in our twisted drama, Zhou Xiaochuan:
XIAOCHUAAAAAAN

A Globalist by any objective metric, Xiachuan is the head honcho at the People’s Bank of China, effectively the Janet Yellen of Eastasia. Readers, look into the eyes of this man. If anyone were to lead the world’s return to “sound money,” a BRICS without usury, and a gold-backed Yuan utopia of gold-plated puppies and kittens, by necessity, it would have to be China’s most powerful Central Banker.

Think he can pull it off?

Unfortunately for those still steeped in the millieu of the “BRICS Saviour Paradigm,” I don’t think he particularly wants to. He probably never has, as long before Xiaochuan began China’s purchase of Rothschild “fire sale” gold via the LBMA, he joined the Board of Directors of the Bank of International Settlements.

For readers not yet aware of the specific role the BIS has to play in the “Rings Within Rings” structure of the Anglo-American Establishment, it is referred to by Georgetown Professor, Globalist insider, and whistleblower Carroll Quigley as the “apex” of the “powers of financial capitalism.”

The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world’s central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank…sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world.”

-Professor Carroll Quigley, Tragedy and Hope

It is to this “apex” which Xiaochuan counts himself as a proud member of, and it is via this “apex” which he published his official position on Chinese precious metals, the future of the Yuan, and the SDR. The title of this BIS paper? “Reform The International Monetary System,” and its vision for the future is virtually identical to that of Chatham House and the Anglo-American Establishment.

Xiaochuan makes mention of the Silver and Gold Standards of the past, right before discussing the "creative reform" necessary to save the global monetary system

Xiaochuan makes mention of the Silver and Gold Standards of the past, right before discussing the “creative reform” necessary to save the global monetary system

If the Yuan is to become a gold-backed currency (let alone the World Reserve Currency), it will not be accomplished by the desires of the People’s Bank of China. It is not the RMB that Xiaochuan applies these grandiose aspirations to, but the IMF and its Special Drawing Right:

The PBOC's recommendation for the SDR as a supra-national reserve currency

The PBOC’s recommendation for the SDR as a supra-national reserve currency

Presumably, a world in which the SDR is a “super-sovereign reserve currency” would also include the Yuan in the SDR currency basket. At least, it will if Xiaochuan and Chatham House have anything to say about it. And of all those shiny kilo bars of gold and silver recently re-homed to Shanghai?
xiao3Zhou would have them priced in SDRs in international trade. It seems the PBOC would see the Shanghai Gold Exchange as a mere clearing house as opposed to a physical exchange devoted to pricing outside the LBMA fix.

Xiaochuan’s damning statements as head of the PBOC and BIS Board Member are not his first documented foray into international financial debauchery. Precious metals researcher and forensic historian Charles Savoie contends that Zhou Xiaochuan had participated in the wholesale liquidation of “paper” silver contracts at the behest of the LBMA at the turn of the Century. If true, this would have effectively lowered the price of silver from 2000-2004 in favor of the COMEX pricing mechanism.

The Gold Anti-Trust Action Committee (GATA) pressed the LBMA on potential silver price manipulation via Chinese silver liquidation, much to the chagrin of Jeffrey Christian of the CPM Group, who referred to China’s paper silver dumping as a “myth.”  A masterful PR move in providing an alibi of sorts for Xiaochuan’s silver manipulation, as the CPM Group is a 1986 spin-off of none other than the criminal banking syndicate known as Goldman Sachs.

The same Goldman Sachs that, in 2003, coined the term BRICS and “forecast” the rise of Brazil, Russia, India, and China in a paper entitled, “Dreaming With BRICs: The Path to 2050.” Bear in mind, this is a full four years before the BRICs even existed.
Screenshot from 2015-07-28 23:24:10

 

Screenshot from 2015-07-28 23:24:27

What incredible foresight the analysts at Goldman have! Or perhaps it’s insider knowledge? Maybe even assistance in drafting the BRICs “vision?” Whatever the case, it is to this “BRICS Dream,” the dream of Goldman Sachs, that the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development make reference to when calling on the BRICS bank to fund “sustainable development” projects throughout Asia:
Screenshot from 2015-07-28 23:31:49

Some, when faced with the evidence of widespread collusion between financial Elites of West and East, paraphrase a passage of Sun Tsu’s The Art of War – “Keep your friends close, your enemies closer,” and perhaps this is indeed the ultimate goal of the People’s Bank of China.

But an equally prescient American saying also comes to mind: “Don’t let the fox inside the hen house.”

In Closing

Has the fog before the eyes of Free Humanity begun to dissipate? Hopefully enough to realize that the BRICS “anti-hegemon” are no friends of human autonomy. In viewing the BRICS NDB’s recent appointments to upper management, the organization’s participants are barely distinguishable from World Bank and IMF rosters, and while the controlled demolition of China’s financial crisis just begins to emerge, so, too, will the pre-arranged monetary “solution” to the woes it shall create, as outlined throughout this article.

An end to the “Debt and Death” paradigm will not come from national, supranational, or hierarchical structures, but from those seeking Freedom themselves. Unparalleled advancements in decentralization of trade and manufacturing. Truly local agricultural independence. Open-source software, not to mention news. Modern pioneers in liberty are already making great strides in these and many other fields, and it is from these men and women which hope springs eternal.

Not Zhou Xiaochuan’s Globalist gold horde and whatever “New World” monetary paradigm will be foist upon us in the wake of the next financial crisis.