This article was shared by some regular readers here, including some in the SE Pacific and in India, and it's a significant development. First, a little context. You'll recall that last in last Wednesday's News and Views from the Nefarium I outlined French National Front leader Marie Le Pen's letter to the governor of the French central bank, outlining not only a problem for repatriating all of France's gold reserves currently held by foreign banks (reading between the lines: all French gold on deposit with the New York Federal Reserve Bank), as well as a sweeping program to audit all secret central bank agreements made by the Bank of France with any other private or international bank. Reading between the lines a bit again, this would seem to invoke the principle of disclosure against the European Central Bank, arguably a sovereign entity given the complete lack of any need for its transparency. In this, it is an extension of the BIS (Bank of International Settlements) and its sovereign status. You'll recall that Le Pen's argument was rather subtle: if central banks have by whatever charter gained a monopoly status over a nation's currency and economy, then they owe a responsibility to the people they ostensibly represent. In other words, the moral requirement supersedes any legal charter or negotiation that may have instituted it. In short, no matter what treaties may have been signed, if they have negotiated away this responsibility, they are null and void.

Now that, of course, is reading a lot into Le Pen's letter, but nonetheless, I think it is a legitimate interpretation of the implications of her remarks; bad news for shadowy and murky institutions like the European Central Bank or BIS. Le Pen, in other words, wants not only a repatriation of France's gold, but she wants what is, in effect, an open audit of the major institutions of western finance, including its most secretive ones.The implied argument here is: can we trust these institutions (and countries) with France's gold if they are not willing or able to be transparent in their relationships and agreements? Answer: no we cannot.

And all of this comes at at time when the American-inspired economic sanctions on Russia are working a deleterious effect on France's economy.

So in all this light, consider this article:

Mistral row: France risks losing Rafale contract in India

One need go no further than the first two paragraphs to see what the long term implications for France's significant arms industry - and therefore for the already struggling French economy - are:

"France risks losing a contract to supply 126 fighter jets to India due to its refusal to deliver Mistral-class ships to Russia, a leading French analyst told the Delovoi Peterburg website. French officials said this week that they will not deliver the first Mistral-class amphibious warship that Russia had ordered as part of a $1.7 billion agreement for weapons sale.

"The biggest repercussion would be a loss of reputation for France as a reliable supplier, Arnaud Dubien, a Russia research associate at the Institut de relations Internationales et Strategiques said. 'Officials from the French Ministry of Defence, in private conversations acknowledge that if they fail to deliver the Mistral to Russia, then France will lose its contract to supply 126 fighter jets to India,' Dubien said.

But as Mr. K.L., one of the people who shared this article with us, put it to me in his email: the BRICSA bloc are standing together. Well, maybe not quite together, but that could be the long term result. For if France is viewed as an unreliable supplier on the basis of pressures from the USA and Germany, this will hardly incline India (or other BRICSA bloc countries) to turn from France to the USA or Germany for their military needs. This will leave them with two alternatives: (1) turn to other BRICSA bloc suppliers like Russia or China, or (2) like Brazil has done with some of its military needs, develop its own indigenous military infrastructures, including military aircraft. India faces a touch choice in the interim, but to my mind it will already be clear in New Delhi what the long term demands, and that is a hefty beefing-up of India's indigenous military-air industry. France, of course, gains nothing from either course of action, and hence, gains nothing from the Washington-inspired sanctions on Russia, unless of course it wants to take up the slack and buy the French aircraft itself, which is, of course, extremely unlikely.

In short, India has served hard, and in Europe, France (and neighbors Germany and Italy) are looking hard at the long-term consequences of subservience to London and Washington. This is yet another story to watch in the on-going and developing Cold War, 2.0.

See you on the flip side...

(My thanks to all of you in India and the Pacific Southeast who shared this article.)



Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and "strange stuff". His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into "alternative history and science".


  1. Frankie Calcutta on November 30, 2014 at 12:46 pm

    Maybe India has other reasons for canceling these contracts. Maybe they have finally engineered the ancient Sanskrit blueprints for the vimana flying machines and don’t need these lousy combustion engine contraptions anymore. When I think of a French built airplane, I think of misplaced wine corks mucking up the engine assembly and the perpetual smell of beef and cheese in the cockpit. It would be enough to drive any hindu mad.

  2. kitona on November 29, 2014 at 8:54 pm

    Well, I’m no “white supremacist” but I do like Marine Le Pen because she actually seems to say some reasonably intelligent things. If the mainstream politicians really want keep control away from the presumptive fringe elements like Le Pen then they need to start at least making an effort to represent the interests of their constituents (whether French or whoever) instead of just blatantly doing the bidding of the power mongers in Brussels & the assorted banking centers.

    If people like Hollande, Sarkozy, etc would just get a clue and act as if they listen to people then maybe we wouldn’t find the likes of Le Pen so attractive. Call her a racist if you will but at least she cares about France.

    • jedi on November 30, 2014 at 8:48 am

      Only white people can be labeled racsist…..the word racist, actually means to love yourself, your people your culture. It is a word that has been turned from one that means love, to one that means hate.
      It is a trick that parasites use to confuse people that are being ripped off. The master slave relationship. It is how the system fails. All western nations are in full blown economic destruction.

  3. marcos toledo on November 29, 2014 at 12:11 pm

    Is all this interfering with trade between continental Europe and Russia-Asia be the last ploy of the Norseman. Their last chance to achieve their millennial dream to finally conquer Europe and the rest of the World. Have they come to a deal with their rivals in the Near and Middle East to enslave and loot the rest of the World.

  4. WalkingDead on November 29, 2014 at 10:34 am

    The shadow world government will have its “world order” or it will attempt to bring the entire global economy to ruin resulting in a great many bad things.
    The question is how long will our allies put up with the arrogance coming out of Washington and London before they have suffered enough to abandon it for their self preservation and will they do so in time.
    The East vs. West theater may also be just that. With no knowledge of what is planned, we’re left to guess based on what we are able to observe and deduce. When the defecation hits the rotary oscillator, you can bet the 1% will ride it out in their pre built and stocked underground facilities, or possibly “elsewhere”, to emerge and take charge of what’s left in the aftermath. There appears to be ample evidence that this has happened before either through natural means or warfare. What appears to be coming isn’t going to be pretty…

  5. Aridzonan_13 on November 29, 2014 at 10:05 am

    The manipulation of critical commodities and the ability to print money out of the ether are more powerful than being able to turn lead into gold. We are trapped in their commodities matrix. Where unless you can make it yourself, you are at their mercy, price wise.. This game needs to be raided. Hopefully, this will give the BRIIICSAA more motivation to create competing commodities exchanges.

    • Guygrr on November 29, 2014 at 11:38 am

      My biggest worry is their stranglehold on food and water. I agree that the times ahead are not going pretty. They’ve turned every person and country into addicts dependent on the system. Most people aren’t even able to admit they have a problem, let alone see the longterm benefit of breaking the habit. A quote I came across that I really liked was “the lesser of two evils is still evil”. One of my other worries is the PtB and their fondness of mutually assured destruction, well not exactly mutual because they’d be able to ride it out but still. I can certainly see them saying “well if we can’t be in control no one will.” Queue the doomsday weapons.

  6. loisg on November 29, 2014 at 8:26 am

    Russia is annoyed with France so therefore their bloc cannot deal with that country. With oil prices plunging Russia needs something to fill the gap and forcing their allies to look to them for their military needs just might fill the bill. Besides forcing them to deal only within their bloc works to keep them all in tow in the short term but long term it will work against them. Russia is playing a high stakes poker game that could really end up costing them dearly.

  7. Lost on November 29, 2014 at 8:09 am

    Le Pen, father and daughter, celebrated by white supremacists, and that ilk.

    Right, Russia is annoyed with France and Russia just ran a few navel ships down the English Channel and anchored them off France.

    • Guygrr on November 29, 2014 at 11:18 am

      I can’t tell whether you’re being sarcastic about the Russian ships in the English Channel. Wouldn’t that be a violation of GBs national waters? (is that the proper term, as oppose to international waters?) You’d think that would cause a bit of a stir.

Help the Community Grow

Please understand a donation is a gift and does not confer membership or license to audiobooks. To become a paid member, visit member registration.

Upcoming Events