|
THE
NEW WORLD ORDER
Part
8: 21st Century
by Douglas V.
Gnazzo
April 12, 2007
[
Previous parts: 1, 2,
3, 4,
5, 6, 7
]
"He
is a foolish mortal who thinks his luck secure and so rejoices; for
Fortune, like a madman in her moods, springs towards this man, then
towards that; and no one ever experiences the same unchanging
luck." [1]
Abstract
In
the first paper of The
New World Order - Age
of Discontent, it was stated that the purpose of World
War I was to be the war to end all wars, which unfortunately never came
to be. What World War I did
accomplish with surgical precision, however, was the end of the Old
World Order, and the preparation of a fertile crucible: the human race
– to accept the New World Order.
The
Old World Order was based on the rule of absolutism that had governed
most nation states. Now the time had come to throw off the shackles of
nationalism and to embrace internationalism – the New World Order. In
the next article in the series The
New World Order - The
Players, in was shown that one of the main purposes of
the Paris Peace Talks was to set up the League of Nations – the first
true international governmental organization.
The
third paper in the Series: The
New World Order - Secrets,
discussed the many elite groups and organizations that were attempting
to establish the New World Order. Some of those mentioned were:
- The
Club of Rome in Italy
- The
Fabian Society in England
- The
Round Table Group in Britain
- The
Council On Foreign Relations in the U.S.
- The
Institute for Pacific Relations in the U.S.
- The
Royal Institute for International Affairs in Britain
The
New World Order - Incognito,
carried on with an expose of the various elite and secret societies
involved with the New World Order. Emphasis was placed on the Council of
Foreign Affairs and the Fabian Society.
The
sixth article in the series, The
New World Order - Club, was about the Club of Rome. The Club did not
attempt to remain secrete, in fact they were very public with their
opinions for solving the world’s problems via their New World
Order.
The
most recent paper in the series was The
New World Order - Illuminati, which was solely about the order of
the Illuminati, specifically the Bavarian Illuminati. Most of the
various groups, organizations, and societies discussed in the previous
papers were offshoots or roots if you will – from this same
seed.
However,
the Illuminati was born of a seed as well – a most ancient seed that
goes back to when time began – it is in essence why time appears, as
that which Is, is yet to come; and has gone before.
This
paper continues the exegesis of the elite collectivists who desire to
rule the world. Many of their stated policies have of themselves noble
sounding qualities, but noble qualities when used for sinister goals,
are tainted as water is by blood.
The
end does not justify the means – as the means and the end are one and
the same – both are here but yet to come.
Justice is just. Righteousness is right. Not is not.
International
Development
During
the early 1980’s the Independent Commission on International
Development Issues did a study on several of the global problems facing
modern civilization. West German Chancellor Willy Brandt oversaw the
project. A group of former world leaders and other noted specialists
were brought together to determine just what the problems were, and to
suggest a proper course of action.
The
panel’s general finding was that developing nations were economically
dependent upon already developed nations. Once again it was a meeting of
the elite minority to solve the world’s problems.
Although
the 1980’s and 90’s witnessed unprecedented economic growth and
world trade, financed by direct foreign investment and huge flows of
international capital, most of this expansion was concentrated in the
already developed nations. The developing nations saw minimal progress
against even the basic needs of survival: ample food and water. Poverty
actually increased in many developing nations.
In
1980 the North-South: A Program for Survival report was released.
This was followed in 1983 by Common Crisis: North-South Cooperation
for World Recovery. The reports advised a dual approach: an
emergency relief program to address the most pressing conditions of
starvation and poverty, and a second plan for restructuring the global
economy.
The
Commission came up with twelve categories of the most pressing worldwide
problems:
- Aid
- Hunger
- Poverty
- Women
- Population
- Global
Trade
- Debt
Forgiveness
- Money
and Finance
- Global
Negotiations
- Technology
& Corps.
- Armaments
and Security
- Energy
and Environment
Hunger
Needless
to say – in today’s modern world no one should have to go without
food and water. Yet there are hundreds of millions of people
literally starving to death across the world. Many do not have
access to clean drinking water, let alone water for farming, crop
irrigation, and the raising of livestock.
The
Brandt Report called for a two pronged effort to tackle the problem.
First and foremost is an emergency assistance plan to provide immediate
relief to the most destitute areas on earth. Once emergency assistance
has been provided, the focus can then turn to developing farming, crop
and livestock production, all headed towards the goal of
self-sufficiency in food-stuff. The means for obtaining clean water for
drinking and irrigation is imperative.
Poverty
The
underlying cause of hunger is poverty. In the
last two decades, despite the so-called progress the world has made
poverty has more than doubled. Two billion people now live in absolute
poverty – according to the UN Development Program's
standard of minimum human requirements. There is no need or reason for
this to be the case.
The
estimated cost for the relief of world poverty is less than most people
would assume. The World Bank has estimated that a comprehensive
international poverty relief program would cost about $80-$100
billion a year. This is less than 10% of the world's annual
military budget. Once again – what are our priorities: to kill one
another – or to live?
Population
The
rapidly expanding world population was considered to be an issue of huge
importance regarding the future living standards of the world. The
North/South Commission stated that rising population levels:
"Compounds
the task of providing food, jobs, shelter, education and health
services, of mitigating absolute poverty, and of meeting the colossal
financial and administrative needs of rapid urbanization" [2]
Of
crucial importance to the Committee is whether the earth has the
capacity to support human consumption at the present rate of population
growth. I say yes, and that there is more to this issue then meets the
eye. The thoughts of the Club of Rome come to mind. To read further
details click on the following link: The
New World Order - Club.
Women
On
the issue of women the report was of the opinion that:
"Any
definition of development is incomplete if it fails to comprehend the
contribution of women to development and the consequences of development
for the lives of women. Every development policy, plan or project has an
impact on women and cannot succeed without the work of women. And
development with justice calls urgently for measures that will give
women access to better jobs; that will diminish the arduous tasks that
hundreds of millions of women face in their domestic and agricultural
occupations; and that will distribute more fairly between the sexes
opportunities for creative work and economic advancement" [3]
Aid
0
In
1951, developed nations were lending nearly 1% of GNP in aid. In 1980,
it stood at 0.35%, and by the Millennium contributions from developed to
developing nations had dropped to less than 0.21% of GNP. As the worlds
rich became richer – the poor not alone became poorer, but the rich
drastically cut back on any subsistence charity.
The
Reports stated that development assistance remains uncoordinated at the
global level. The Commission recommended an international organization
– perhaps a restructured World Bank – to provide a
centralized location for the distribution of foreign aid.
"We
believe that the richer nations must continue to give special attention
to the poorest countries to help them to help themselves. They should
step up their aid, directing it with effective planning into the
critical areas of the ecology. They should provide emergency assistance
as an addition to the longer-term programs, not (as at present) as a
large share of their total regular aid" [4]
Technology
& Corporations
As
the Brandt Commission noted twenty years ago:
"Almost
all advanced technology originates in industrial countries and most of
it continues to be developed by them. The North accounts for about 96
percent of the world's spending on research and development. The
scientists and engineers, the advanced institutions of education and
research, the modern plants, the consumer demand and the finance are all
found mainly in the richest countries" [5]
The
Brandt Equation: 21st Century Blueprint for the New Global Economy
reported:
“International
corporations continue to locate in nations where wages, taxes, and
trade, financial and environmental restrictions are the lowest. There is
virtually no regulation of corporate practices, which are often at odds
with the developmental objectives and national interests of poor
countries. In addition, there is no international agreement on foreign
direct investment which could allow developing nations to participate in
decisions on:
•
Corporate disclosure of information
• Ethical behavior
• Restrictive business practices
• Labor standards
• Tax policies
• Fiscal incentives
• Repatriation of profits, royalties and dividends” [6]
Energy
and Environment
The
two decades from 1980-2000 saw strong economic growth in the developed
countries and limited expansion in the developing nations. International
and transnational corporations continued to set up shop in undeveloped
nations where wages were cheap, environmental restrictions almost
non-existent, and taxes low. This allowed the corporations to exploit
both the indigenous people and the land, basically accountable to no one
but their own share-holders.
Since
the late 1980s, many scientists have argued that greenhouse gases are
trapping heat in the atmosphere, raising the temperature on earth. The
elite have grabbed hold of this issue and have milked it for all its
worth, when in fact the scientific community is very divided on this
issue.
The
Commission called for a reduced dependence on non-renewable fuels, and
the development of clean energy sources, along with a transnational
energy strategy.
The
North-South report stated:
"Important
harm to the environment and depletion of scarce natural resources is
occurring in every region of the world, damaging soil, sea, and air. The
biosphere is our common heritage and must be preserved by cooperation – otherwise
life itself could be threatened" [7]
Lastly,
the committee called for an internationally authorized agency,
such as the United Nations, to protect and manage the ecosystems and
biodiversity of the world. Once again, control of the world by the
self-elected elite. This will be discussed in more detail later
on.
Armaments
and Security
All
people desire security: the need to feel secure and to be safe, in their
own homes within the borders of their homeland. One of the most basic
functions of government is to provide self-defense of the homeland from
external attacks.
Note
the words self-defense and external, as they sum up the extent and
parameters of necessary military force. They do not speak of imperial
conquest that seeks to force its rule of law upon the rest of the world.
This is nothing more then war-mongering by the merchants of death and
their dogs of war – the elite who wish to rule.
Self-defense
has often been used as the excuse of governments that go way beyond
their constitutional granted authority and seek to attack other nations
in pre-emptive strikes, or to suppress the freedoms and liberty of their
own citizens.
The
Brandt Reports recognized most of these issues, however, they also
stated that ultimately the international community must have a say in
the trade of armaments used for security, and they noted especially in
regions of conflict and tension. The latter alludes to what sounds like
a bit more then the self-defense of the homeland. The issue of “the
international community” having oversight powers of a sovereign
nation’s self-defense will be discussed in future papers.
Global
Trade
The
Brandt reported stated that the trade deficits of the richer developed
nations were keeping the global system running. However, this was
causing the developed countries to be racking up unprecedented debt
levels. Trade was steadily increasing, but disproportionably so. The
undeveloped nations were not experiencing the rising tide of the
developed countries economies.
The
Commission recommended increasing financial aid to developing nations
that
“are
seen therefore as measures both to support growth in developing
countries directly, and to permit a significant expansion of world
trade. It is in this sense that we view them as contributing to growth
and employment creation in the North as well as the South” [8]
Trade
agreements were suggested as means to raise the global level for wages.
This would supposedly increase income, purchasing power, and
consumption. We will comment on this later.
The
report alluded that:
“Perhaps
a Global Securities and Exchange Commission, a new multilateral agency
independent of the WTO, could be created to oversee international
mergers and guard against international capital flight, money
laundering, fraud, and insider trading. Likewise, an independent Global
Foreign Exchange Ministry could be created to regulate international
investment, and a new Global Food and Drug Agency could be setting
safety standards for trade in international health care, food, and
drugs.” [9]
Debt
Forgiveness
Debt
forgiveness to the developing countries was recommended on either a
partial or perhaps even a total level, however, it was also to be
predicated on domestic policy reform.
Recommendations
on restructuring the global economy by setting the
guidelines and format for such changes were to be formulated over time
and passed on to the UN General Assembly.
The
report stated:
“as a means
of modern impunity, debt makes legitimate our inequitable system of
exchange. It allows one person to control another, though the mechanism
of that control may be indirect or concealed.” [10]
This
is an excellent point and will be discussed further on.
Global
Negotiations
The
North-South directive called for a summit of international
leaders to discuss the multi-dimensional collective of issues, both
developmentally and structurally. It was noted that any worthwhile
global negotiations for the formation of a new international economic
system would require a greater commitment from all governments and
international organizations involved in the process.
The
Brandt Reports stressed that:
“The
achievement of economic growth in one country depends increasingly on
the performance of others. The South cannot grow adequately without the
North. The North cannot prosper or improve its situation unless there is
greater progress
in the South” [11]
A
major flaw the Committee reported was that there was no central
international body
fully
empowered to:
- provide
orderly expansion of global liquidity
- provide
oversight on speculative capital flows
- fight
poverty and meet humanity’s basic needs
- respond
to economic setbacks and currency crises
- act
as a central clearinghouse for the world economy
- assist
the adjustment process in nations independently
- effectively
stabilize international currencies and exchange rates
- oversee
sustainable development and protection of the environment [12]
Which
brings us to the topic of the World Bank and the International Monetary
Fund that warrant a section of discussion all their own.
Global
International Pillars
Both
the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund have acted as the two
pillars of the international banking and financial system. They were
created after the war in 1944, at the Bretton
Woods Conference in Bretton Woods, New Hampshire, U.S.A.
International
currencies were maintained at fixed rates relative to the US dollar, and
the dollar was more or less backed by gold. Most refer to this as the
gold standard – the gold standard under which the nation is said to
have thrived.
This
is partially true. Nonetheless, the gold standard prior to the Bretton
Woods Conference was different from the latter, and even more
importantly, the original hard currency system of gold and silver coin
as mandated in the Constitution was a far cry from the gold standard
whereby paper money was backed by gold.
These
are three different systems with only the first – the hard currency
system of gold and silver coinage of the Constitution being Honest
Money; and the standard is silver not gold, which because a
constitutional amendment has never been passed to change it – still
stands as the Supreme Law of the Land. The rest are mere shadows –
waifs in the night. We do not have the time to go into this in detail
here; however, we have done so many times in other papers. To access
further details click on the following link: The
Constitution of the United States & Honest
Money Summary & Conclusions.
The
World Bank
finances large industrial projects in developing countries: public
infrastructure works such as roads, dams, and power plants. The
International Monetary Fund provides temporary loans to countries
that face shortages in foreign exchange or with pre-existing
loans.
Voting
rights in both institutions are based on the size of a country’s
financial contributions to the organization. Since the most developed
nations contribute the most money they dominate the initiatives and
plans at both the Bank and the Fund, which end up reflecting their
individual foreign policy objectives – especially those of the United
States.
Whatever
the original goals of the IMF and the WB may have been said to be, what
they have been used for is a tool of the elite moneychangers for the
privatization of public assets – in other words another wealth
transference mechanism for the elite collectivists. See: Honest
Money: What
It Is and What It Isn't - Part 4 Store of Wealth.
World
Bank programs have been said to often have the direct opposite affect
upon the host country then was supposedly intended. Accusations alleging
the subsidization of corrupt governments, thereby contributing to
increased levels of poverty, and the destruction to the environment due
to inadequate or non-existent environmental policies, are just some of
the charges. Why – because profits are thereby maximized.
IMF
loans are famous for the imposition of draconian measures that require a
nation to divert its monies out of public employment, welfare, pension
systems, education and healthcare, and into debt repayment.
The
Commission recognized these unfair dealings yet they also
suggested that the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund be
restructured; and that they both play a central part in the management
of the global economy – elitism plan and simple.
Money
and Finance
The
Brandt Reports stated that the floating exchange rate system that began
in 1971 caused more problems then it solved, favoring developed
countries over the rest of the world. In 1971, Nixon closed the gold
window – refusing to honor U.S. contractual obligations to settle
foreign trade accounts in gold. This was the severing of the last tie
between gold and our monetary system. Some call such repudiation the
same as a declaration of bankruptcy. We would agree.
This
was the final act that placed the U.S. currency on the road to
perdition. Floating exchange rates are changing exchange rates;
stability is thrown out the window. Currency had been redeemable at a
fixed rate of gold. Now the supply of paper money was flexible and
unrestrained. It began to expand and with it came inflation. Oil prices
reacted upwards and unemployment soon followed.
The
first major coup had already occurred in 1932, under Roosevelt’s
socialist regime. He confiscated all private gold holdings, which at the
time was the actual currency in circulation: the gold and silver coins
mandated by the Constitution. History will recognize this as one of the
greatest swindles of all time.
As
we will see, it is this purposeful destruction of our constitutional
hard money system of silver and gold coin, which allows paper fiat
debt-money to take its place that is the true culprit of all our
economic and monetary problems. The quote above stated that debt is a
terrible thing; but when debt is allowed to circulate as the currency
– it becomes a sinful abomination – a wealth transference mechanism
that sucks the life from those who use it and fall under its mesmerizing
sway. See: Gold's
Hidden Secret: The Moral Hazard of Fiat Money.
The
Brandt Commission believed that gold and paper money should be gradually
phased out of use in their vision of the New World Order. The Committee
called for a new world reserve monetary system, based on the Special
Drawing Right the International Money Fund created, in 1969. The
report stated that
“It is a
contradiction in terms to have a global market without a standard
unit of account, an orderly system of exchange rates, or a universal
regulatory body.” [13]
According
to the Committee, the Special Drawing Right is a line of permanent
credit through which national central banks, treasuries, and the Bank
for International Settlements obtain foreign currencies to clear and
settle outstanding balances.
Furthermore,
it states that since the SDR is the world’s only means of
meeting international payments that has been authorized through
international contract,
“The
SDR therefore represents a clear first step towards a stable and
permanent international currency” [14]
The
following is from the International Monetary Fund’s website under
monetary and financial definitions.
|
Special
Drawing Right (SDR)
|
|
International
reserve asset created by the IMF in 1969 as a supplement to
existing reserve assets.
- SDR
Allocation. Distribution of SDRs to members by decision of the
IMF. A "general" allocation requires a finding by
the IMF that there is a global need for additional
liquidity.
- SDR
Assessment. An assessment levied by the IMF, at the same rate
for all participants in the SDR Department, on a
participant’s net cumulative SDR allocations, to cover the
expenses of conducting the business of the SDR
Department.
- SDR
Department. This department, an accounting entity rather than
an organizational unit of the IMF, records and administers all
transactions and operations involving SDRs.
- SDR
Interest and Charges. Interest is paid to each holder of SDRs.
Charges are levied, at the same rate, on each participant’s
net cumulative SDR allocations. The SDR interest rate is
determined weekly by reference to a short-term market interest
rates on the currencies used for SDR valuation. Interest on
SDR holdings is paid, and charges on net cumulative
allocations are collected, on a quarterly basis, and are
settled on the first day of the subsequent quarter.
- SDR
Use. Participants in the SDR Department (currently all members
of the IMF) and prescribed holders may use SDRs in a variety
of voluntary transfers, including transactions by agreement,
swap arrangements, forward operations, and so forth.
Participants may also use SDRs in operations and transactions
involving the General Resources Account (GRA), such as the
payment of charges and repurchases (repayments). In addition,
the IMF ensures that a participant with a balance of payments
or reserve need to acquire foreign exchange is able to use its
SDRs in a "transaction with designation".
- SDR
Valuation. The currency value of the SDR is determined
daily by the IMF by summing the values in U.S. dollars, based
on market exchange rates, of a basket of four major
currencies—the euro, Japanese yen, pound sterling, and the
U.S. dollar. The SDR valuation basket is normally reviewed
every five years. The last review, which took place in 2000
(see Press
Release No. 00/55), resulted in a revision of the weights
assigned to each currency in order to take into account the
introduction of the euro on January 1, 1999 and the growing
role of international financial markets. The revisions in the
valuation basket became effective on January 1, 2001 (see Press
Release No. 00/87).
|
Courtesy
of the International Monetary Fund’s Website [15]
The
bottom line is that the SDR’s currency “value” is determined daily
by the IMF by summing the values in U.S. dollars, based on market
exchange rates, of a basket of four major currencies: the euro, the yen,
the pound sterling, and the U.S. dollar. Once again, from the IMF’s
website we find:
|
Wednesday,
April 04, 2007
|
|
Currency
|
Currency
amount under Rule O-1
|
Exchange
rate 1
|
U.S.
dollar equivalent
|
Percent
change in exchange rate against U.S. dollar from previous
calculation
|
|
Euro
|
0.4100
|
1.33530
|
0.547473
|
-0.067
|
|
Japanese
yen
|
18.4000
|
118.99000
|
0.154635
|
-0.31
|
|
Pound
sterling
|
0.0903
|
1.97350
|
0.178207
|
-0.111
|
|
U.S.
dollar
|
0.6320
|
1.00000
|
0.632000
|
|
|
1.512315
|
|
|
U.S.$1.00
= SDR
|
0.661238
2
|
0.069
3
|
|
SDR1
= US$
|
1.51231
4
|
|
|
Notes:
|
|
(1)
|
The
exchange rate for the Japanese yen is expressed in terms of
currency units per U.S. dollar; other rates are expressed as U.S.
dollars per currency unit.
|
|
(2)
|
IMF
Rule O-2(a) defines the value of the U.S. dollar in terms of the
SDR as the reciprocal of the sum of the equivalents in U.S.
dollars of the amounts of the currencies in the SDR basket,
rounded to six significant digits. Each U.S. dollar equivalent is
calculated on the basis of the middle rate between the buying and
selling exchange rates at noon in the London market. If the
exchange rate for any currency cannot be obtained from the London
Market, the rate shall be the middle rate between the buying and
selling exchange rates at noon in the New York market or, if not
available there, the rate shall be determined on the basis of euro
reference rates published by the European Central Bank.
|
|
(3)
|
Percent
change in value of one U.S. dollar in terms of SDRs from previous
calculation.
|
|
(4)
|
The
reciprocal of the value of the U.S dollar in terms of the SDR,
rounded to six significant digits.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Courtesy
of the International Monetary Fund’s Website [16]
It
thus appears that the SDR is a mere piece of paper that represents the
“value” of a basket of four other pieces of paper, i.e. the above
listed currencies, and the various exchange rates of said
currencies.
If
nothing else, the SDR is the epitome of paper fiat debt-money: the King
of Paper Fiat if you will. It is nothing more and perhaps a whole
lot less – than an obligation of a basket of obligations: promises of
other promises, as in wishful fantasies that never come to be.
We
find the statement that the SDR is the
world’s only means of meeting international payments that has been authorized
through international contract, to be most telling. This gets to the
heart of one of the central issues that this expose on the New World
Order is trying to reveal: Qui Warranto – by what authority? In
simpler terms: who died and left them King?
The
Proof Is In The Pudding
Yet
for all the sound and fury of the Commission on this subject, nothing of
substance came forth. Nothing was offered that would make any changes to
the existing monetary system that would make it more sound; on
the contrary, it could be argued that the proposal for the SDR would
make the international monetary more unstable.
Debt
is debt any way you look at it and by whatever name you choose to call
it. Money and debt in an honest monetary system are two entirely
different things. Any monetary system that does not recognize and pay
homage to this fact is doomed to fail, be it intended or
not.
The
Commission proposed that an international advisory board be formed to
inform the governments, as well as the UN General Assembly, on
the progress of the international bodies working on the various
problems.
As
the report suggested:
“We must
not surrender to the idea that the whole world should copy the models of
highly industrialized countries. One must avoid the persistent confusion
of growth with development, and we strongly emphasize that the prime
objective of development is to lead to self-fulfillment and creative
partnership in the use of a nation’s productive forces and its full
human potential” [17]
If
the whole world should not copy the models of the highly industrialized
countries, then why recommend that the World Bank, the
International Monetary Fund, and the United Nations all be the center
hub from which the New World Order is to emanate? Why continue to recommend
more centralized global governance and one world rule by
the select elite minority?
Lastly,
on this subject, the Report stressed the need for global financial
sustainability.
"Our
proposals in the monetary field keep in mind the necessity of a more
orderly monetary system for the world economy as a whole, as well as for
meeting the needs of the developing countries. Greater stability in the
exchange rate system encourages both trade and investment" [18]
While
it is true that greater stability and soundness of the money used
in the monetary systems (in contradistinction to the proposed existing exchange
rate system, which the report has already criticized and now seems
to be contradictorily embracing), no where has a viable plan been
offered to affect the soundness of the monetary system. The only change
placed on the table is to use the SDR as the new one world
currency of the New World Order.
The
only form of Honest Money is money that is not debt – money that is no
one’s obligation – the hard currency system of the United States
Constitution: gold and silver coin. All else are fakes – false
prophets – wolves dressed as lambs.
Be
not deceived by the deceivers – by the priests of the temple – by
the descendents of the Babylonian Brotherhood, as they still walk among
us, still trying to satiate the insatiable.
“But
there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will
be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive
heresies,
even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them —bringing
swift Destruction on themselves.” [19]
[1]
[Hecabe 1. Euripides, Daughters of Troy 1204]
[2] (N–S, 106)
[3] (N-S, 59)
[4] (N-S, 88)
[5] (N-S, 194)
[6] The Brandt Equation: 21st Century Blueprint for the New Global
Economy
[7] (N-S, 72-73)
[8] (N-S, 68)
[9] The Brandt Equation: 21st Century Blueprint for the New Global
Economy
[10] same
[11] (N-S, 33)
[12] The Brandt Equation: 21st Century Blueprint for the New Global
Economy
[13] same
[14] (N-S, 209)
[15] IMF
[16] IMF
[17] (N-S, 23)
[18] (N-S, 74)
[19] 2 Pet 2:1

© 2007 Douglas V. Gnazzo
Editorial Archive
All
rights reserved. Any republication without written permission
of author
and Financial Sense prohibited.
CONTACT
INFORMATION
Douglas V. Gnazzo
Honest Money Gold & Silver Report, LLC
Canton Center, CT USA
Email
| Website
About
the author: Douglas V.
Gnazzo is CEO of New England Renovation LLC, a historical restoration contractor
that specializes in restoring older buildings that are vintage historic
landmarks. He writes for numerous websites and his work appears both
here and abroad. Just recently he was honored by being chosen as a Foundation
Scholar for the Foundation for the Advancement of Monetary Education
(FAME).
Disclaimer:
The contents of this article represent the opinions of Douglas V.
Gnazzo. Nothing contained herein is intended as investment advice or
recommendations for specific investment decisions, and you should not
rely on it as such. Douglas V. Gnazzo is not a registered investment
advisor. Information and analysis above are derived from sources and
using methods believed to be reliable, but Douglas. V. Gnazzo cannot
accept responsibility for any trading losses you may incur as a result
of your reliance on this analysis and will not be held liable for the
consequence of reliance upon any opinion or statement contained herein
or any omission. Individuals should consult with their broker and
personal financial advisors before engaging in any trading activities.
Do your own due diligence regarding personal investment decisions. This
article may contain information that is confidential and/or protected by
law. The purpose of this article is intended to be used as an
educational discussion of the issues involved. Douglas V. Gnazzo is not
a lawyer or a legal scholar. Information and analysis derived from the
quoted sources are believed to be reliable and are offered in good
faith. Only a highly trained and certified and registered legal
professional should be regarded as an authority on the issues involved;
and all those seeking such an authoritative opinion should do their own
due diligence and seek out the advice of a legal professional. Lastly
Douglas V. Gnazzo believes that The United States of America is the
greatest country on Earth, but that it can yet become greater. This
article is written to help facilitate that greater becoming. God Bless
America.
The
opinions of FSU contributors do not necessarily reflect those of
Financial Sense.
|