"What matter who's speaking, someone said, what matter who's speaking."
here's that sprott report once again pdfhttp://www.sprott.com/pdf/TheVisibleHand.pdfhtmlhttp://126.96.36.199/search?q=cache:Sj0aFtCJiDsJ:www.sprott.com/pdf/TheVisibleHand.pdf+ada%C3%B9+smith+visible+hand+of+ucnle+sam&hl=fr&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=fr
Why are they being so defensive about this? The US government intervenes in the stock markets in different ways all the time. How can it be so controversial that it might directly support the stock markets? From their point of view, there surely couldn't even be anything to object to in such a policy.
How can it be so controversial that it might directly support the stock markets? From their point of view, there surely couldn't even be anything to object to in such a policy.But they don't really object to the policy, they object to people admitting its existence and talking about it in public. The actions of the PPT aren't like a rate cut or a bailout; they're necessarily covert: if every Friday afternoon rally was met with the CNBC tools speculating on the role of the PPT, it would be compoletely redundant, obviously. Their function is to maintain the fiction that the DOW is a faultless and rational measure of market sentiment and by implication of the health of the economy as a whole. Plus, as you see from the analogies they make, and these stupid excuses like 'someone would have spilled the beans', they're pushing the line that the US doesn't do 'conspiracies'. You may as well be surprised that the corporate media don't speculate on the USG's involvement in the drug trade or its training and financing of Al Qaeda.
its alsonot like a rate cut or tax policy in that it is actually rigging the casino; they use firms to do it, you can't police trading on the knowledge, and they alter the relations between stocks - its longs longs longs. Rate cuts and taxpolicies and the rest have little in common with actually using taxpayer money to bet long and coordinating with chosen banks - this is market manipulation.
(you have to wonder if they don't coordinate shorts too sometimes, special occasions when it really would be useful.)
(you have to wonder if they don't coordinate shorts too sometimes, special occasions when it really would be useful.)There was a lot of speculation about this after the first bailout bill failed to pass wasn't there?
After the outrageous suggestion ("First time I've heard it on TV, Scott!") that the Plunge Protection Team might actually intervene to protect against plunges, observe how the tension mounts:"Absolutely not! I just think it's a silly discussion.""Scott, I have some concerns here. This seems to me to be one of those Internet things."... until finally, the smug fuck with the permanent smirk actually says the thing that's positively yearning to be said:"It's a conspiracy theo-"Does he cut himself off (in embarrassment?), or is he cut off by the other squawkers? Whatever. They don't fail to repeat the incantation: "Internet thing" ... "rumour"... "Conspiracy Theory."That term is an amazingly effective blunt weapon. I don't call it "Thoughtstopper No. 1" for no reason.
Christ! Yet again (at 3:39, and this time it's someone else):"That's like sending in a guy knocking off a head of state without telling anyone. I mean, it's almost as much of a conspiracy theory."Well, quite. (It's a pity Patrice Lumumba was unable to take part in this discussion.) And, yet again, yet another (at 4:45):"I'm not getting involved in any of the conspiracy theories."They never tire of that blunt weapon, and not for no reason. - But how angry they get:"It's crap!" "You're saying, it's like the Second Gunman, or The World Trade Center or... It's conspiracy crap, is that what you're saying?""Yeah, that's the Black Helicopter crowd!""The Black Helicopter crowd."Blunt weapons for gangsters. Reminds me of Stalinist psychiatry, or the baseball-bat scene in Scarface.
it's interesting how well this succeeds in making the guy's interest in the actual price action seem in itself a sign of insanity or naïveté or something. its a general insistence that the only sane posture is childish faith in the goodness and fairness of the government, even when faced with a phenomenon requiring some genuine explanation. "There was a lot of speculation about this after the first bailout bill failed to pass wasn't there?"yeah the shorting ban created such an odd situation already and on top of that the intense panic, it's impossible to look at those days and guess what the PPT - or even some banks coordinating without officialdom's help - could have been doing (nefariously/politically or just trying to prevent a catastrophe).
here's a funnyhttp://calculatedrisk.blogspot.com/2008/11/market-crash-dow-under-8000-nasdaq.htmlUpdate: Overheard on the trading floor ..."I don't want the cheese anymore... I just want out of the trap."
'Nother big Friday rally last week!Chuckie K