Dow below 9000 = Are the kikes jumping out windows yet?

[Gott]

8904 at 3:15.

[ben shockley]

Most likely they have gold and foreign currency denominated accounts.

Originally Posted by ben shockley

Most likely they have gold and foreign currency denominated accounts.

The actually don't: they are betting against gold and silver. It is their wealth, and consequently their power, which is destroyed in the process.

[Jett Rink]

Patience.

All good swindles have a dramatic moment.

Once this bottoms out it will surge back up, and jews will profit from buying all those solid companies that goys are trying to get rid of in a panic created by the jewsmedia.

Originally Posted by Jett Rink

Once this bottoms out it will surge back up, and jews will profit from buying all those solid companies that goys are trying to get rid of in a panic.

It won't, Jett. The bottom is six years ahead of us.

[Gott]

Originally Posted by Jett Rink

Patience.

All good swindles have a dramatic moment.

Once this bottoms out it will surge back up, and jews will profit from buying all those solid companies that goys are trying to get rid of in a panic.

Yeah, but where is the bottom? At least the lemmings are getting what they deserve, finally. And inflation has been bad for years now...so that under 9000 translates to what in, let's say, 1990 dollars?

[Jett Rink]

This is where jews shine.

They get everyone to panic and sell solid companies that are in no financial troubles, then they buy them up at a deep discount and make the price go up, the goys think everything is great and they try to rebuy their old stocks, of course the jews sell and the market goes back down again.

Jews walk away with the gold.

[Jett Rink]

Ask yourself, where is that plunge protection team?

[Kievsky]

They also took 2 companies, Ford and AIG, out of the DOW 30.

I wish there was a Stock Index with 10,000 stocks instead of 30. I think that would give us a better idea.

[Marse Supial]

Originally Posted by Kievsky

They also took 2 companies, Ford and AIG, out of the DOW 30.

I wish there was a Stock Index with 10,000 stocks instead of 30. I think that would give us a better idea.

Take a look at the Russell Index, Kievsky. It has 3000 stocks in it. That's the broadest one I know of. There is also the overall market index which, I believe, tracks all the stocks on the NYSE.

[Hugo Böse]

Originally Posted by Kievsky

They also took 2 companies, Ford and AIG, out of the DOW 30.

I wish there was a Stock Index with 10,000 stocks instead of 30. I think that would give us a better idea.

The S&P 500 is pretty broad.

[Oy Ze Hate]

Are the kikes jumping out windows yet?

No, they're pushing the Goyim out of their homes.

[strelnikov]

Originally Posted by Gott

8904 at 3:15.

Why would Jew Banksters want to kill themselves? The Pentagon still has their backs.


http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/...ericas_top_spy

The specter of social unrest was raised at the U.S. Army War College in November in a monograph [click on Policypointers’ pdf link to see the report] titled “Known Unknowns: Unconventional ‘Strategic Shocks’ in Defense Strategy Development.” The military must be prepared, the document warned, for a “violent, strategic dislocation inside the United States,” which could be provoked by “unforeseen economic collapse,” “purposeful domestic resistance,” “pervasive public health emergencies” or “loss of functioning political and legal order.” The “widespread civil violence,” the document said, “would force the defense establishment to reorient priorities in extremis to defend basic domestic order and human security.”
“An American government and defense establishment lulled into complacency by a long-secure domestic order would be forced to rapidly divest some or most external security commitments in order to address rapidly expanding human insecurity at home,” it went on.
“Under the most extreme circumstances, this might include use of military force against hostile groups inside the United States. Further, DoD [the Department of Defense] would be, by necessity, an essential enabling hub for the continuity of political authority in a multi-state or nationwide civil conflict or disturbance,” the document read.
In plain English, something bureaucrats and the military seem incapable of employing, this translates into the imposition of martial law and a de facto government being run out of the Department of Defense. They are considering it. So should you.

[notmenomore]

Originally Posted by strelnikov

“Under the most extreme circumstances, this might include use of military force against hostile groups inside the United States. Further, DoD [the Department of Defense] would be, by necessity, an essential enabling hub for the continuity of political authority in a multi-state or nationwide civil conflict or disturbance,” the document read.

In plain English, something bureaucrats and the military seem incapable of employing, this translates into the imposition of martial law and a de facto government being run out of the Department of Defense. They are considering it. So should you.

This scenario, unfortunately, may be the last, best option - the alternative being general starvation and chaos across the Kwa. Be assured that in the event of such, there will be plenty of opportunities for chaos anyway...

[strelnikov]

Originally Posted by notmenomore

This scenario, unfortunately, may be the last, best option - the alternative being general starvation and chaos across the Kwa. Be assured that in the event of such, there will be plenty of opportunities for chaos anyway...

For me probably the best option is to move to the Pacific Northwest, because if the hammer drops in the rest of the US I think a Idaho White Nationalist revolution will go further.

[Joe_J.]

Originally Posted by strelnikov

For me probably the best option is to move to the Pacific Northwest, because if the hammer drops in the rest of the US I think a Idaho White Nationalist revolution will go further.

You are likely correct, although i like the idea that we are everywhere and nowhere at the same time.

BTW, DOW took a shit today. We shall see if the PPT can bring it back up.

[strelnikov]

Originally Posted by deathtozog

You are likely correct, although i like the idea that we are everywhere and nowhere at the same time.
BTW, DOW took a shit today. We shall see if the PPT can bring it back up.

Yea, I may have to resort to night leafleting runs in Boise.

[Hugo Böse]

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/eff64394-f...077b07658.html

Insight: Gold primed to be ‘mania asset’
Steve Ellis February 18 2009

Gold is exhibiting all the classic signs of being in a structural bull market. On fears of inflation in early 2008, it rallied. Then, on fears of deflation in late 2008, it rallied again.

So does gold perform better during inflation or deflation?

In our view, that question is the wrong starting point. On the contrary, the rationale for owning gold, as it once again approaches the $1,000 an ounce level, is the prospect of mounting monetary disorder.

The US Federal Reserve, having flooded the market with liquidity by more than doubling its balance sheet in less than six months, may be unable or unwilling to withdraw it in time for fear of precipitating a secondary relapse in economic activity. Other central bankers will also face intense pressures to “support” their domestic economy by weakening the currency, leading to competitive currency devaluations.

The race to the bottom in fiat currencies has begun and hard assets, particularly gold and silver, should be the primary beneficiaries.

Gold is a prime candidate to become a “mania asset” once its demand becomes chiefly financially driven as opposed to jewellery and/or industrial demand driven where its upside could be capped by “sticker shock”.

In fact, gold is currently one of the few remaining major asset classes where a case could be made for it to rise in a parabolic fashion. Once the psychologically significant $1,000 an ounce is breached convincingly, the speed of the move beyond that level could accelerate sharply. One precondition for a mania is there must be uncertainty about how the asset is properly valued which allows “new era” thinking to take hold. This is very true for gold.

Price explosion might not be imminent, however. Gold is experiencing unprecedented buying by exchange-traded funds, offset by substantially reduced jewellery demand. The fall in the Indian rupee has meant Indian gold prices have reached record levels. This is causing a slowdown in jewellery purchases (even though rupee expenditure levels are holding up, the tonnage of gold imports is suffering).

The long-term story for gold, however, is as a remonetisation play as investors lose faith in fiat currencies. Keep an eye on gold lease rates; a spike would be a good lead indicator that gold is about to punch higher as this would reflect a shortage of lendable bullion. Rising lease rates will cause gold to go into backwardation as holders of gold may not want to sell their gold forward under any circumstances a trend currently evidenced by the high physical premium being paid for gold coins.

Rising lease rates prefigured the last big move in gold back in the spring of 2007 just as the two Bear Stearns hedge funds were blowing up. Central Banks feared counterparty risk for the first time in 20 years and substantially curtailed gold lending and sales. This led to a 40 per cent rally in gold from $700 to over $1,000.

How high can gold ultimately go? A Dow Jones Industrial Average/gold ratio of 2:1 would be a good sign the bull market in gold is getting well advanced. We saw this in 1932 and 1980. Only nine years ago in 2000, however, this ratio reached over 40:1.

Arriving at 2:1 again does not necessarily mean the Dow must decline significantly from here; more likely gold prices surge and the Dow stays range-bound but volatile. Investors are looking for good risk/reward investments.

I cannot say with any confidence that gold will not be without risk and volatility but at least it offers early participants plenty of upside reward to compensate them for the wild ride.
Speaking to central bankers, this is the first time I can recall them actually favouring a high gold price. Normally they see high gold prices as a lack of trust in the financial system (not to mention their ability as central bankers). Alan Greenspan, the former Fed chairman, for example used to target a gold price of around $400 to $500 an ounce.

Recently, the central bankers have become more enamoured of higher gold prices as it would suggest that their attempts to stave off deflation were starting to work.

Central bankers in favour of higher gold prices? Things really have changed.

The writer is manager of the RAB Gold Strategy

[Peer Fischer]

Not an exceptional day on the Street but a good number nonetheless.

[Joe_J.]

Originally Posted by Peer Fischer

Not an exceptional day on the Street but a good number nonetheless.

Indeed it is. We witness the unraveling of the jew in the Kwa.