|
In the Summer, 2006, Deepcaster was among the first to warn of a Massive Financial and Geopolitical Scheme to dissolve the Sovereignty of the United States, Mexico, and Canada into one Regional Unit called the North American Union (NAU) (“Massive Financial-Geopolitical Scheme Not Reported by Media,” Deepcaster, August 11, 2006). Today, nearly one year later, this North American Union project (otherwise known as the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP)) has been widely exposed. Indeed, there is a Resolution pending in the United States Congress that would halt its implementation (H.ConRes40, Goode R-VA). Yet implementation of the NAU Project continues notwithstanding. Land has been purchased in Texas for a Transnational “Mexico” to “Canada” Transportation Corridor (four football fields wide) and development of a Mexican Port Project in Kansas City (the so-called Smart Port) proceeds. Moreover, both the House and Senate versions of the pending Illegal Alien Amnesty Bills contain provisions which would speed implementation of the North American Union - - including potential U.S. taxpayer funding for beefing up border security at “Mexico’s” southern border; that is, at the southern border of the prospective North American Union (see below). A key financial component of this National Deconstruction Plan is the eventual adoption of a North American Regional Currency, the “Amero,” as the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) consultant Robert Pastor named it. This of course would entail the final destruction of the U.S. Dollar, the demise of which has already begun - - or should we say, is being managed*. The annual increase in M3 (a figure no longer issued by the U.S. Federal Reserve) has recently been calculated to be in excess of 12%(!) by shadowstats.com! *[For more information on the apparent intervention in key markets by The Cartel of Central Bankers see Deepcaster’s October 2006 Letter entitled “The Mega Manipulations - - Juiced Numbers IV: How the Government Gets the Statistics It Wants, Markets Get Manipulated, Citizens Get Deluded and Worse” and the substantial evidence for intervention in the Gold and Silver Markets collected by the Gold AntiTrust Committee at www.gata.org. Remarkably, Deepcaster’s (and GATA’s) reports are based almost solely on publicly available evidence.] Where the economy is growing at a much slower rate, a 12% annual increase in the supply of money is “money inflation” and leads inevitably to hyperinflation of prices. That is, destruction of the currency. Yes, the U.S. Dollar’s demise is already underway. Though very recently it has given the appearance of some buoyancy as a result of apparently bottoming just above 80 on the USDX, it has nonetheless been in a sustained downtrend for some years now. Of course, this downtrend can NOT make the foreign government holders of over one trillion dollars of U.S. Treasury Securities feel much comfort as the actual value of their portfolios of U.S. paper has continued to diminish. Deepcaster has addressed the issue of the demise of the U.S. dollar on other occasions. But the consequences of the demise are so significant that one must ask the question about the possible alternatives to the U.S. Dollar and the implications of each. There are two major alternatives to the U.S. Dollar (and other similarly weakening fiat currencies). One is re-linking the (presently fiat) currencies to gold and silver, an approach that Deepcaster has long favored as fundamentally sound. The other alternative (doubtless favored by The Cartel of Central Bankers and certain other Pooh-Bahs of international finance) is to dissolve major national “fiat” currencies and create regional or multi-national currencies, such as the Amero. Thus the battle lines are drawn for the Great Currency War of the next few years: Gold and Silver-based currencies versus the Amero and other Fiat Currencies. Were the destruction of national currencies (e.g. the U.S. Dollar) and the Deconstruction of Nations (e.g. the current North American Union Push) not a Very Serious Project of powerful organizations and persons, and were it not already underway, the notion of denationalizing currency - - and specifically the dissolving of the U.S. and Canadian dollars and the Mexican peso into the Amero - -perhaps would be dismissed as only a matter of a curious academic interest. But the North American Union Plan about which Deepcaster warned in its August 11, 2006 Alert is proceeding apace. It not only involves dissolving the sovereignty of Mexico, Canada and the United States into one governmental entity known as the North American Union with a single currency, the Amero. It also involves the politically revolutionary dissolution of borders between the aforementioned nations - - thus allowing the “free flow of persons and goods” which the SPP agreement calls for. This convergence of monetary and political policies goes far to explain the enthusiasm of the Bush Administration and Open Borders Members of Congress for the Illegal Alien Amnesty Bills now pending in Congress. After all it was Presidents Bush, Fox and Martin who launched the SPP/NAU Project via their Agreement in March, 2006 in Waco, Texas. It would also explain why the Illegal Alien Amnesty Bills discussed below contain NAU Implementation Provisions. Thus it is also not surprising that serious proposals for adoption of Regional Currencies are being floated. Since the dollar is already in an increasingly tenuous position, and since the forces pushing to create open borders (the Bush Administration’s Alien Amnesty Bill would de facto dissolve the United States’ borders) may prevail, we must take proposals for denationalizing currencies very seriously. Thus, given that the push for National Deconstruction and the end of National Currencies is in progress, essential questions are: Will the Push succeed? How should an investor deploy assets to protect himself from this Push as well as, hopefully, to profit from it? Even so, to fully address these questions it is important to understand more thoroughly what the proponents of denationalizing currency and amnesty for illegal aliens are actually pushing. A recent article issuing from the very fount of The Globalist International Financial Community has made answering these questions easier for us. Indeed, some would say that the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) magazine is a major mouthpiece of international finance and the international Central Bankers Cartel. Judge for yourself. This article laying out the Monetary Denationalization Game Plan entitled “The End of National Currency” (in the May/June 2007 issue of “Foreign Affairs” the magazine of the CFR) was written by Mr. Benn Steil, Director of International Economics at the CFR. Its basic pitch is “globalization and monetary nationalism are a dangerous combination, a cause of financial crisis and geopolitical tension. The world needs to abandon unwanted currencies, replacing them with dollars, euros, and multinational currencies as yet unborn.” Steil does confess that ending monetary nationalism would result in a significant diminishing of economic sovereignty (and, Deepcaster would add, a diminishing national sovereignty and key individual rights). Thus it is important to examine Steil’s key theses: “Governments must let go of the fatal notion that nationhood requires them to make and control the money used in their territory.” National currencies and global markets simply “do not mix…In order to globalize safely, countries should abandon monetary nationalism and abolish unwanted currencies which are the source of today’s instability.” In conclusion he states “since economic development outside the process of globalization is no longer possible, countries should abandon monetary nationalism.” Any reasonable critical examination will show all these theses to be false. And they are false because (inter alia) their underlying premises are wrong. For example, globalization and monetary nationalism are a dangerous combination in part because fiat national currencies increase the likelihood of financial crisis and geopolitical tension. Indeed (and in large part because they are not linked to the precious monetary metals gold and silver) fiat currencies are manipulable and thus can be, and ARE, used as a type of (very destabilizing) “weapon” to gain an edge in the export markets. For example, China’s pegged currency continues to create a tension between it and the United States. And Japan is notorious for its currency manipulations, its interventions in the ForEx markets, and its absurd .5% interest rate, which, incidentally, makes the potentially destabilizing “carry trade” possible. That is, it is not monetary nationalism per se that is the cause of financial and monetary instability. Rather, one cause is the fact that the fiat currencies which monetary nationalism employs are merely fiat, that is, they are not tied to any tangible assets such as gold or silver. Thus it is the (mere paper) fiat currencies themselves that are one basic cause of the “instabilities.” Steil’s claim that economic development outside the process of globalization is “no longer possible” is so preposterous as to be almost unworthy of a response. One need only consider successful recent micro-loan programs (for which a Bangladeshi, Vanderbilt University-trained entrepreneur received a Nobel Prize) or the prosperity of the United States in the 1950s in which the United States’ largest market by far was, well, the United States. The Alternative Model of a relative national self-reliance plus “fair trade” (e.g. the United States in the 1950s) has considerable benefits. But one’s conclusion about globalization partly depends on perspective. International finance and some Manufacturers have benefited from globalization, but certainly workers whose jobs are outsourced and lost and whose wages are depressed are not similarly helped. American workers will never be able to compete with Chinese workers who are making $2 a day. And given that the American consumer is 60% of the U.S. economy, one can see the impact of globalization on the middle class in the United States - - it is disappearing, both statistically and as a matter of fact. Supporters of Monetary Nationalism have cogent counter arguments. One of them, Nobel Laureate Joseph Stiglitz, asserts that crises of monetary instability should be blamed on international institutions such as the IMF. “Dictatorships of international finance” (as he calls them)….”Countries are effectively told if they don’t follow certain conditions, the capital markets or the IMF will refuse to lend them money. They are basically forced to give up some of their sovereignty.” Stiglitz is quite right of course. Unfortunately he does not expound upon other consequences of giving up some economic sovereignty. Giving up economic sovereignty also entails giving up aspects of national and personal sovereignty that one might like to keep. In the United States the right of Habeas Corpus (i.e. the right to be brought before a judge if accused of a crime, and not just arrested and held incognito indefinitely) is central. Or it was until the Bush Administration pushed legislation that impaired it. Another example is Free Political Speech, which although under threat in the United States now, is still ostensibly guaranteed by the First Amendment. With regional or global institutions such important national guarantees have been and are being lost. The European Union has recently imposed German and Canadian-like speech restrictions on all members of The Union. And in the United States bills are periodically introduced which would criminalize certain political speech. Moreover, as American investors and workers have learned, the greatest beneficiaries of globalization are not individual investors and workers. The beneficiaries are International Financial Institutions and global conglomerates. And shall we include The Cartel of Central Bankers? To not too greatly oversimplify, the loss of national monies would result not only in a diminution of economic sovereignty but also in a diminution of political sovereignty and a diminishment of individual and investor freedom, with the consequent increased subservience to “global” (as opposed to national and inter-national) institutions. It is thus not surprising that the publisher of Mr. Steil’s article, the CFR, is also the source of Robert Pastor’s plan pushing the SPP/NAU. It is thus also not surprising that the same Bush Administration which entered into the SPP/NAU agreement in March, 2006 is also pushing an Illegal Alien Amnesty Bill which contains provisions which would facilitate creation of the NAU. Thus it is important to consider the Illegal Alien Amnesty Bills that are the subject of much debate in the House and Senate now. The pending Senate Bill (S1348) actually cites the SPP Agreement that is the blueprint for building a European-style merger of Canada, Mexico, and the United States. Specifically, the Senate Bill states “it is the sense of Congress that the United States and Mexico should accelerate the implementation of the Partnership for Prosperity…” Similar language fast-tracking implementation of the NAU is contained in the House Bill. Of importance are the following provisions (and select impacts of those provisions) that are contained in versions of the House and/or Senate bills most of which would de facto aid in dissolving the United States’ borders.
Clearly, passage of such an Illegal Alien Amnesty Bill would be a de facto step toward dissolving the United States’ borders and thus toward realizing the North American Union. We reiterate that the cornerstone of the NAU (SPP) Agreement is the “free movement of persons and goods.” The bottom line of the push for de-nationalized currencies and the deconstruction of nations is that it benefits global institutions and global businesses to the detriment of most nations, intra-national businesses and their inhabitants, including most individual investors. Adoption of a Regional Fiat Currency such as the Amero whose value (purchasing power) is determined by a Central Bank Cartel, would likely spell a reduction in economic as well as political and individual freedom. Protecting and Profiting from The Push
The Push for De-nationalized Currencies and Deconstruction of Nations is real and ongoing. Failure to address the issues it raises dramatically increases the risks of suffering a variety of losses.
CONTACT
INFORMATION
DEEPCASTER FORTRESS ASSETS LETTER The opinions of FSU contributors do not necessarily reflect those of Financial Sense. |
