September 26, 2011 By Joseph P. Farrell

Well the globaloney coming from the banksters and their political lackeys never ends, does it? Last Friday the Daily Bell ran this rather interesting article on the latest ploy, and China's continuing reluctance to enter into partnership with the kooky and corrupt London-New York crowd:

New Crisis, New Currency?

Well, so much is predictable. The banksters have been wanting to set up regional, and eventually, a uniform global, currency system ever since the idea of monetized debt functioning as money was a gleam on some Sumerian bankster's eye millennia ago. It's more of the same, folks, just shuffling ever growing debts in their globaloney ponzi scheme from one central bank to another, to the ultimate ruin of middle classes worldwide. Methinks perhaps this is one reason the Chinese - who have about the only growing middle class left on the planet - are reluctant to buy shares in the latest ponzi scheme.

But all of this raises a teensy weensy little philosophical question, and it's one I've nowhere seen addressed, and perhaps I'm even being a bit simplistic and naive in even asking it. The problem is this: suppose the banksters do get their way, and get their nice shiny big version of the Bank of International Settlements and one world currency. That currency will inevitably be, as are all the pounds, dollars, pesos, and euros now sort-of-circulating, monetized debt instruments, and not real money. And as we all know, interest on these notes grows faster than the actual amount of such notes in circulation. This means inevitably that the banksters will either never be repaid on their worthless currencies, or that they will inflate their currency, as they always do (while intoning their millenia-old arias that central private banks are necessary to prevent governments from inflating their currencies at will). Inevitably, this will lead to a complete shut-down of the middle class, and an absolute halt to "production." In other words, the closed system of finance will end up in entropy, and everything will grind to a halt. Mr. Rockefeller will lose his wonderful mansion at Pocantico, and the Rothschilds will be out several baronial manors, because methinks that people at large will be, well....just fed up.

As I pointed out in Babylon's Banksters, there are really only two ways out of this mess of their own making: (1) either a return to debt-free money issued by states, and not loaned into circulation by banks, or (2) the "system" has to be opened up again, either by new "geographical frontiers" or new technologies (loathsome to the banksters unless they can monopolize it), or both.

Which leads us to the next problem, and to huge speculations. What, if any, are the "new frontiers" that could once again open up the system and allow the banksters to continue their schemes for more millennia? Well, one is the oceans right here on earth, and the other, much more promising venue, is of course, space. But that will require the advance of practical technologies - not rockets - to do so. Now this, in turn, raises yet another interesting speculative possibility. As noted, the banksters will want monopolies on any such technology, that is to say, they will, by necessity and by dint of their own cartelist ideology and outlook, seek to constitute themselves as an instance of Richard M. Dolan's "breakaway civilization."

I find it intriguing and suggestive to this hypothesis, therefore, to note the recent "space events," i.e., NASA's no-fly no-approach lunar zones, and China's announced intentions to send probes, and eventually men, to the Moon, coupled with China's still-enunciated reluctance to enter into the "international financial structure" in quite the way that the globaloney-ists would like. As was said some time ago, "Come Watson, the game's afoot!"