|Boston on Friday, April 19, 2013|
Deep in the Heart of Middle America...
Q: I’ve been hearing things about a... “recent development.”
A: Yeah, bit of a jolt, this one. Heard on the grapevine, it’s these Chechens, heard of ’em? Well, they’ve taken over, massacred the entire 113th Congress and took over Homeland Security to boot. Saw the footage of Capital Hill. Gawd, what a mess. But ah... personally I don’t see anything to be concerned about. I mean, really, they can’t be any worse than the last bunch. Give the lads a chance, that’s what I say. That’s what America’s all about, right? A place where you can get ahead. Show a bit of initiative, innovation; give it a go. And I’ll tell you something else. From what I hear these guys are pretty solid on family values, ya know? And guns? They’re not against guns. Now I can prove that... So well, that’s what I say... I can’t really see a problem here....
Q: what about Obama, the President. Did he say anything?
A: Well ah, yeah he made an announcement. Something like “weapons of war have no place on our streets.” He said something... honestly I can’t really recall much of this. I know he said something but... ah...
Q: Yeah, right.
An interesting thing happened in Boston. Not the explosions that killed several people and maimed many more—such gruesome events happen with some regularity in more and more parts of the world—but what happened afterwards. Under the thinnest of pretenses, Boston was placed under martial law, with heavily armed troops patrolling the streets, pointing machine guns at civilians who dared so much as to look out their windows.
A large part of the city was placed under lockdown, supposedly because a single 19-year-old, on foot, was on the loose. (There may be dozens of armed teenagers on the loose in Boston on any given Friday.) [Correction: Dzokhar Tsarnaev was unarmed at the time of his “shootout with police.”] The official story makes little sense. Do you think the Tsarnaev brothers did it? I doubt it. They seem like patsies at most. They seem to have been picked because they are Chechen, and tying in Chechnya, and Russia, and radical Islam, makes it a better story. As with 9/11, the official version has many holes in it, there is contradictory evidence, but the officials and the official media steadfastly ignore it, ready to label anyone who calls the official story into question a “conspiracy theorist.”
I am not an investigator or an intelligence analyst; I am merely expressing an opinion based on my intuition. While all of this was unfolding, I was making use of the good weather to paint a boat (the fancy two-part polyurethane paint doesn't cure well if it's humid or under 50°F, and it was finally warm and dry enough to apply it) and I had the boat's stereo blasting NPR as I worked. I wasn't even listening all that carefully because I had to concentrate on avoiding drips and smudges. But after a while I had a sudden realization about the voices on the radio: They Are All Lying! There is a certain intonation that is hard to suppress, and it indicates that someone is trying very hard to sound like they believe what they are saying. I heard that intonation over and over again. Now, granted, some of them didn't even know for sure that they were lying, but to me it appeared that somebody was hastily concocting a story for public consumption. Not being an intelligence analyst or an investigator, I asked Mike Ruppert, who is both of these things, and he wrote back “Of course the bombing was a lie and a set-up. I don't chase the details anymore though. Waste of energy.” And I have to agree with him; I have neither the time nor the interest. But somebody else has chased down a few of the details, and they don't look good for the official story. See for yourself: here, here, here and here.
If this is another false flag operation by the special forces, what, you might reasonably ask, is the motive? From whose perspective, you might wonder, was it a good idea to stage a horrific mock terrorist incident right in the cradle of the American Revolution, and specifically on Patriot's Day, which is a state holiday commemorating the first battle of the Revolutionary War? And from whose perspective was it a good idea to then stage a military occupation of Boston? The symbolism is unmistakeable: were these the first shots fired in the Counterrevolutionary War? Obviously, the people behind it are the ultimate scum of the earth. But let me try to propose a few ideas for their rationale.
The US can no longer afford to fight foreign wars. It just doesn't have the money. The twin fiascos in Iraq (where only something like 50 people got killed in terrorist attacks on that same day) and Afghanistan (similar story) have cost the country a prodigious amount of money, most of it borrowed, with precious little peace and stability to show for it, and now there are simply no resources for further overseas military adventures. But the US military is a beast that cannot be tamed by anyone—not the President or the Congress—because it is simply too profitable. And so, of necessity, the new venue for military operations will have to be the US itself. There are some inconvenient laws currently on the books that make this difficult but, as the experiment in Boston has shown, they can now be safely ignored.
Also, we should expect there to be plenty of good excuses for deploying troops on the streets of American cities. There are some nasty financial and commercial disruptions on the horizon, which will result in serious domestic mayhem. For many years now, more and more as time went on, the US has been critically dependent on its ability to print and export US dollars. The dollar is the country's #1 export. But recently more and more countries have started turning away from the once popular US dollar and entering into bilateral trade agreements based on their own currencies or gold, and this shift is now unmistakeable and quickly running its course. As this happens, the US dollar loses its reserve currency status, and countries shift their reserves out of the dollar and into gold.
A recent desperate attempt to drive down the price of gold and silver by manipulating the futures markets, and by doing so to prop up the value of the US dollar along with other paper currencies, backfired in a grand fashion, resulting in people across the world snapping up physical gold and silver at what they consider bargain prices, to a point where now many metal sellers are simply out of metal, and buyers face long waits for delivery. Interestingly, there is as yet no mechanism for bidding up the price of physical metal separately from the futures market, which trades something like 100 phantom ounces for each real ounce of metal. A daily auction for all the physical gold and silver available for immediate delivery would be far more honest than this corrupt "mark to paper" scheme.
Given that more and more people are no longer content with holding mere paper and want to take delivery of their metal, the phantom, paper ounces are not long for this world. When enough people demand to take delivery of them, the futures market will implode, the physical gold price will explode, and the dollar will sink. Normally governments maintain a gold reserve to back the value of their currency, but the US seems to have quietly spent most of its gold already. Nobody knows how little of it is left. And so once the ability to suppress the price of gold by manipulating the futures market is lost, the dollar will go into free-fall. Two immediate effects of the loss of purchasing power of the dollar will be:
1. Loss of control over interest rates, causing payments on US government debt to swallow the entire budget, in turn causing much of the government to shut down (financial collapse triggering political collapse)
2. Loss of access to imports, such as well over half of the oil the country burns, shutting down much of the consumer economy (financial collapse triggering commercial collapse)
The net result will be mayhem, troops on the streets, curfews, checkpoints and travel restrictions. Americans have no recent experience of living under military occupation (the experience of the South in the 1860s is not recent enough to qualify). But now they are going to get a taste of it—at their own hands.
If you are finding this difficult to absorb, rest assured that your reaction is perfectly normal. Few people find it easy to accept the fact that what was once “their” country is now an empty husk run by thugs and manipulated for personal gain by shadowy puppet-masters who are the ultimate scum of the earth. These are the people who will now govern you, inasmuch as you allow yourself to be governed at all. Saying good-bye to financial security and a comfortable lifestyle is hard enough; saying good-bye to your national identity is even harder. The grieving process is much longer than grieving for a few dead and wounded, regrettable though these casualties are. At the end of this grieving process you come out with your public persona diminished: not a citizen or a patriot but at best a compatriot and at worst someone from a place you don't wish to return to, hear about or discuss.
And now it's time for this week's highly relevant excerpt from The Five Stages of Collapse which, last I heard, is coming off the press tomorrow.
Financial and commercial collapses are already potentially lethal. People lose their bearings and their sense of purpose, or decide to take advantage of those in distress, or fail simply through an inability to adapt to radically altered circumstances, and when that happens people get hurt. Financial and commercial collapses tend to be hard on those who failed to prepare, by putting aside objects that hold their value when the national currency hyperinflates and banks close and by stockpiling the necessary supplies to tide them over during the uncertain transition period, when the old ways of doing things no longer work but the new ones have not yet evolved. Both of these causes of potentially lethal circumstances can be avoided: first, by choosing the right kind of community; second, by laying in supplies or securing independent access to food, water and energy; and third, by generally finding a way to bide your time and ignore the world at large until times get better.
Political collapse is a different animal altogether, because it makes the world at large difficult to ignore. The potential for chaos is still there, but so is the potential for organized action of a very damaging sort, because the ruling class and the classes that serve them (the police, the military, the bureaucrats) generally refuse to go softly into the night and allow the people to self-organize, experiment and come together as autonomous new groups adapted to the new environment in their composition and patterns of self-governance. Instead, they are likely to spontaneously hatch a harebrained new plan: an initiative to restore national unity, in the sense of restoring the status quo ante, at least with regard to preserving their own power and privilege, at others’ expense. In a situation where every person and every neighborhood should be experimenting on their own to find out what works and what doesn’t, the politicians and the officials are apt to introduce new draconian crime-fighting measures, curfews and detentions, allowing only certain activities—ones that benefit them—while mercilessly putting down any sign of insubordination. To deflect the blame for their failure, the ruling elite usually also does its best to find an internal or external enemy. Those who are the weakest and the least politically connected—the poor, the minorities and the immigrants—are accused of dragging everyone down and singled out for the harshest treatment. This is conducive to creating a climate of fear and suppressing free speech. But nothing causes people to band together like an external threat, and, for the sake of preserving national unity, a failing nation-state often looks for an external enemy to attack, preferably a weak, defenseless one, so that it poses no risk of reprisal. Putting the nation on a war footing makes it possible for the government to commandeer resources and reallocate them to the benefit of the ruling class, further restrict movements and activities, round up troublesome youths and ship them off to battle and lock up undesirables.
Financial and commercial collapse creates an opening for those inclined toward the most miserable despotism. Once a despotic regime is established, the weak, demoralized, disoriented population almost inevitably finds itself incapable of rising in opposition to it, and the new despotism may become entrenched and quite durable, lasting for an extended period of time, during which the country is hollowed out and traumatized before collapsing through internecine strife or a battle of succession, or through increasing weakness that causes it to succumb to foreign occupation. The spectrum of possible responses to financial and commercial collapse stretches from despotism to chaos. There is a sweet spot of autonomous, anarchic social cooperation, with many small skirmishes and stand-offs but well short of all-out armed conflict.
Please order your copy of The Five Stages of Collapse: Survivors' Toolkit for shipment in May.
(Although the order is placed through PayPal, you don't need to have a PayPal account; just click "Don't have a PayPal Account?" during check-out and enter a credit or debit card number. If you do have a PayPal account, please make extra-double-sure that the shipping address associated with it is up-to-date and correct, and will remain that way through May.)