August 17, 2011
As Consequence Of Libya War Money Leaves From "Western" Banking System
When the U.S. promised the Libyan rebels access to Libyan government accounts I predicted that one of the consequences of this would be a retraction of sovereign funds from the "western" financial systems:
Anyone in power somewhere around the world is now advised to not keep any money in a U.S. based banking account. As soon as some idiots come up and proclaim a revolution, the U.S. will likely size that money and give a few crumbs of it to the revolution leader. (The rest will be taken by the usual banking crooks.)
This will be one of the many blowbacks from this lunatic attack on Libya.
Today the Wall Street Journal reports:
Venezuela plans to transfer billions of dollars in cash reserves from abroad to banks in Russia, China and Brazil and tons of gold from European banks to its central bank vaults, according to documents reviewed Tuesday by The Wall Street Journal.
The planned moves would include transferring $6.3 billion in cash reserves, most of which Venezuela now keeps in banks such as the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, and Barclays Bank in London to unnamed Russian, Chinese and Brazilian banks, one document said.
Moving its money away from accounts where "western" government can confiscate it at a whim is good for Venezuela. It takes away a major graft motive for "western" induced revolutions and thereby lowers the chances of one occurring.
For a "western" banking system that lacks basic capital the move is not a positive sign. But given the example Obama set with Libya we can expect that more countries will silently follow this move.
Posted by b on August 17, 2011 at 03:58 AM | Permalink
Libya is a historical watershed, nothing will be the same after this ends.
Posted by: somebody | Aug 17, 2011 6:53:38 AM | 1
I'm not buying it. If that were the case, the Stock Market would collapse...right now. There's so much dirty money keeping it afloat, if the sanctioned underworld decided the U.S. Stock Market was no longer a safe venue, they could, and would, collapse it with their liquidations.
Also, this is a common tactic. The same thing happened to Iran during the Iranian Revolution.....and ditto Iraq. Those in the know, meaning those with the money and clout, and the two are not one and the same, know whose money is at risk, and whose is not. Kadaffy Duck, or anyone in Libya, was an idiot to have holdings in Western Banks....but stooges will be stooges. They should have listened to Glenn Beck and bought Gold. :-)
Posted by: Morocco Bama | Aug 17, 2011 8:50:16 AM | 2
Those who refuse to submit to the US yoke would do well to keep their money outside of the international banking system.
Earlier, Obama demonstrated to the world that, if they don't want their nuclear fuel supply held hostage to US political interests, they had better start their own nuclear enrichment processes. That was the clear message of Obama's refusal to resupply the Tehran Research Reactor.
With the West becoming ever more desperate to cow recalcitrant nations, US leadership seems to be acting in increasingly crazy and counterproductive ways.
Posted by: JohnH | Aug 17, 2011 10:27:56 AM | 3
Off topic but on the UK riots has anyone read this latest news from The Guardian:
"A 17-year-old who posted a Facebook message saying "come on rioters" has been banned from social networking sites for 12 months. Magistrate Graham Higgins also ordered him to complete 120 hours' community service, a 12-month youth rehabilitation order and observe a curfew between 7pm and 6am for three months."
"The court heard that the boy, who cannot be named for legal reasons, wrote the message at 9.45am on 9 August. It read: "I think we should start rioting, it's about time we stopped the authorities pushing us about and ruining this country. "It's about time we stood up for ourselves for once. So come on rioters – get some. LOL."
What I want to know is where is the EU Human Rights court on this? This is a clear case of prosecuting someone who made a clearly political comment on the internet. This kid didn't riot, he didn't organise anyone to riot, he simply left a comment on the internet claiming we should "stop the authorities pushing us about and ruining this country" "so come on rioters get some. LOL"
Posted by: Colm O' Toole | Aug 17, 2011 11:14:57 AM | 5
The markets are starting to crack
And Europe is leading the pack
To placate the Whore
We need to print more
It's time for a false-flag attack!
H/T: The Limerick King
Posted by: Cynthia | Aug 17, 2011 11:33:32 AM | 6
anyone remember "ROLLOVER" back in 1981?
Posted by: Margo | Aug 17, 2011 12:44:33 PM | 7
Another reason to get out of Dodge: American corruption.
Posted by: Biklett | Aug 17, 2011 1:35:24 PM | 8
Interesting link, Biklett. One of Chavez's closest advisors in bed with WallStreet. Who would of thought? And, of course, Chavez had no knowledge? This would help explain why he's still alive. He's convenient to the West, and compromisable.
Posted by: Morocco Bama | Aug 17, 2011 1:42:20 PM | 9
morocco, it said he was closely linked to the government it didn't say he was an adviser to chavez's government.
In an apparent damage-limitation exercise after the pension scandal, five members of the PDVSA board were relieved of their duties in May, including the official who ran the pension fund. They were replaced by Chavez loyalists including the country's finance minister and foreign minister.
He was close to PDVSA board members and Ministry of Finance officials, but is not thought to have known Chavez personally. The son of a minister in a previous Venezuelan government, Illarramendi did enjoy some perks -- including using a terminal at the capital's Maiquetia International Airport normally reserved for the president and his ministers, according to one source close to his business associates.
who's Michael Kenwood and where did all the money go?
Posted by: annie | Aug 17, 2011 2:44:36 PM | 10
investors securities blog also says he was advising the hedge fund, not the client.
Per the US Department of Justice’s release, a hedge fund that Illarramendi was advising sustained losses in the millions. He had been tasked with investing the money. However, instead of telling clients about their failed investments, the DOJ says that Illarramendi decided to cover up this information by taking part in a securities fraud scam. The hedge funds and other entities that he advised ended up with “outstanding liabilities” far beyond their assets’ values. U.S. Attorney David B. Fein says this securities case this is the largest white-collar prosecution that the office has ever pursued.
Two other men have been detained and criminally charged over their alleged involvement in the hedge fund scam and of aiding Illaramendi. Juan Carlos Horna Napolitano and Juan Carlos Guillen Zerpa are charged with investment adviser fraud and conspiracy to obstruct justice.
Meantime, the SEC says it has amended its civil complaint against Illaramendi and MK Capital Management, LLC. The agency is now alleging that the “breadth” of the securities fraud may be in the “hundreds of millions.”
Posted by: annie | Aug 17, 2011 2:49:42 PM | 11
'. Kadaffy Duck, or anyone in Libya, was an idiot to have holdings in Western Banks....but stooges will be stooges. They should have listened to Glenn Beck and bought Gold. :-) '
Morocco bama likes Glen Beck and hates Gadafi... = right wing
Posted by: brian | Aug 17, 2011 5:41:19 PM | 12
annie, thanks for the clarification. It does beg the question that you can't have a quasi-revolution, as is the case in Venezuela versus Cuba. Cuba purged not only non-loyalists but the dirty bastards who raped and pillaged prior to the Revolution.
It does indicate that the metaphorical Don, Chavez in this case, is slipping. He's operating in a den of Jackals and Hyenas. If he's not aware of the tentacles of the Western World, and what they're up to, his days are numbered if the cancer doesn't get him first.
This is why I consistently point out that in any Revolution, or quasi Revolution in this case, it's imperative that leadership be as disseminated and decentralized as practically possible because if all your eggs are in one basket, the enemy only need focus on that one basket to undermine all your efforts.
Posted by: Morocco Bama | Aug 17, 2011 7:04:46 PM | 13
Pull your armchair a little closer. I'm having trouble understanding you.
Posted by: Biklett | Aug 18, 2011 12:16:02 AM | 15
@15, my armchair? Would that be like your armchair, or anyone else's armchair here, or is just me who has an armchair, because you don't like my tone and content? Comments like that are dismissive, marginalizing and meant to stifle discussion. Everything you read, and have read, on any of these matters is "armchair", pal, so don't hand me that horseshit, as though one opinion is more valuable than the next. Much of the official opinion, "armchair" according to your logic, is even worse, because it almost always, if not always, is offered with an agenda. There's no agenda in any opinion I offer, just observations based off of life's worth of experience. Where I differ from most is that I don't see things as stark Black and White. I don't engage in Dualist logic and analysis. It seldom, if ever, is one or the other. Much of this is shades of gray, and it's often much more nuanced and subtle than those with an agenda would have you believe.
Considering that, are you really having trouble understanding me, or do you merely disagree with me? If you disagree with me, explain how and why, but don't start out with bullshit "armchair" comments when you are sitting in a nice cozy one yourself.
I'll give you a hint about the intent of my post. I deplore concentrated power of any sort. It always leads to tyrannical oppression, so whereas it's appealing to see an underdog like Chavez poke the mighty and formidable Beast that is the U.S., that doesn't preclude the fact that Chavez himself operates in a system that is Centralized and prone to tyrannical oppression.
Also, which part do you not understand about Total Revolution? Cuba was Total Revolution (and now they need another Total Revolution as Che would have had it). The Rebels purged the ranks of all remnants of the previous corrupt regime, either by executing and imprisoning the most sadistic offenders, or by driving the remainder out of the country by removing the heretofore protected status of privilege. Chavez hasn't implemented Total Revolution......his approach has been half-baked, and therefore, there are remnants of the old order (hooked to the West) still operating in and around him. He hasn't pulled the problem up by the weeds, but also, as I've mentioned, so long as power remains concentrated in his hands, and a few others whom surround him, any efforts he has made heretofore, can easily be compromised and overcome once that small core of concentrated power is neutralized, or otherwise compromised.
Posted by: Morocco Bama | Aug 18, 2011 7:02:25 AM | 16
the European courts of human rights (not an EU institution btw) can be appealed to when all national appelation processes has been exhausted. So it will say nothing unless that 17-year old puts in a lot of effort, and then it might say something a couple of years form now.
Posted by: a swedish kind of death | Aug 18, 2011 7:03:18 AM | 17
Kadhafi had plenty of warning really, as Western banks froze or appropriated Lybia’s accounts before - sanctions, remember. And then the mess with CH, which froze some of ‘his’ accounts before the March Attack.
Now several countries are doing some mini defrosting for ‘humanitarian’ aid. (!)
Chavez is bringing all his gold back home.
One of the classical arguments in favor of abstract money (e.g. fiat currency, credit money, tallying exchanges in some unit, etc.) vs commodity money (gold, sliver, wheat) is that the latter can be stolen, while the former cannot. This is true in principle only.
Posted by: Noirette | Aug 18, 2011 10:30:06 AM | 18
Regarding Chavez's attempts to repatriate Venezuela's gold, this commentator from another forum could well be right:
I think Chavez is afraid that the US may go all social media on his ass and get students on to the streets. When he starts shooting everybody like in Libya and Syria the international community will freeze his overseas assets.
Posted by: bokonon | Aug 20, 2011 9:35:30 PM | 20
it is hardly done by social media.
this from al jazeera
"We just spoke with Taher, a Tripoli resident on Sleem Street who has taken up arms against Gaddafi's regime with other residents of his neighbourhood, which is near Bab al-Aziziya, Gaddafi's command center and compound.
Taher told us that he and his neighbours went out last night and have blocked the roads in the area. They are armed with AK-47 assault rifles and rocket-propelled grenades, he said. This morning, security forces armed with heavy machine guns and 14.5mm anti-aircraft guns arrived to confront the men and took up positions on the roofs of nearby buildings, including the Nigerian Embassy and Noor Eye Clinic.
Taher estimated the regime forces numbered 30 to 40 men. AK-47 and machine gun fire was audible in the background. He said that he his mother and niece are hiding inside his house and that they need a NATO helicopter to fire on the security forces on the rooftops."
sounds like the former communist block, people in coutries asking for help ...
Posted by: somebody | Aug 21, 2011 4:01:15 AM | 21
@somebody, yeah "social media" is just an aphorism for CIA
Posted by: bokonon | Aug 21, 2011 8:29:45 AM | 22