What is a false flag?

A false flag event is where covert military or paramilitary operations are designed and executed to deceive the public and further a narrative and fuel propaganda. The operations appear as though they are being carried out by other groups or nations rather than by those who actually planned and executed them.

The recent Boston bombing has many oddities in the story and the video evidence has not been offered to the public. Other suspects involved but not followed up, the 2 brothers were involved with FBI for 2 years and an uncle involved with the CIA. Not forgetting the Saudi that was rushed out of the country and the fact that law enforcement, FBI and private contractors were running a drill at the same time.

The key part of this other than the lack of video evidence is running a drill at the same time of the attack. The same thing happened at 9/11, 7/7 and Sandy Hook. An attack is staged on the public, there is media and apparent public outcry and then laws will be enacted and freedoms withdrawn. This may sound like I should be wearing a tinfoil hat but if you do not believe any of the examples above, the Gulf of Tonkin should set the scene.


Ripped from Cracked

On the night of August 4, 1964, at the height of the tensions between the U.S. and North Vietnam, the communist navy made the bizarre decision to attack two American destroyers — the USS Turner Joy and the USS Maddox. The American ships were outside of North Vietnamese territory when they radioed that they were being attacked by three North Vietnamese torpedo boats.
Since this constituted an act of war, this meant that America had the right to invade Vietnam. Hours after the first radio message from the Maddox, President Johnson was on TV announcing that the communists had attacked us in international waters and asking for permission to make the beef real in Vietnam. The incident is often cited by historians as the key inciting event that started America’s involvement in Vietnam, and a few years ago, it was cited by the National Security Agency as utter b.s.

“These could be ships, or they could be kamikaze seagulls. But whatever, let’s declare war.”
In 2005, an NSA report on the records from the night of the Gulf of Tonkin incident concluded that the event was blown out of proportion on purpose, which is pretty significant, since the NSA was the one who did the initial blowing. According to the report, “It is not simply that there is a different story as to what happened; it is that no attack happened that night.” Yes, the North Vietnamese attack that started the Vietnam War didn’t actually happen, and American officials knew it almost immediately.

An hour after the battle, the commander of one of the destroyers sent a message that there might not have been a single Vietnamese boat in the area, explaining that “Freak weather effects on radar and overeager sonar men may have accounted for” the initial reports. When the sun rose on the gulf and there wasn’t a single shred of wreckage from the two torpedo boats they’d fired on and believed they’d sunk, it was pretty clear to everyone involved that the U.S. Navy had been playing with itself in the dark the night before.

Unfortunately, within 30 minutes of the imaginary attack, Johnson had already decided to retaliate. America had been aiding the South Vietnamese army for years, and they were just looking for an excuse to make their relationship official. While the Gulf of Tonkin attack was completely imaginary, there’s no telling how long it would take the North Vietnamese to actually attack them. So Johnson and the NSA said good enough and made a “conscious effort” to make it look like there was an attack.
So in light of the truth about the Tonkin incident, is it really so crazy to think that 9/11 was an inside job? Yes. Still crazy. In fact, the Gulf of Tonkin conspiracy makes such elaborate conspiracy theories seem even more unlikely (to the sane). It proves that you don’t need to orchestrate elaborate conspiracies to justify an unjust war. All you need is the ability to ignore 90 percent of the facts and focus on the ones that support the case for war. In that way, the Tonkin incident bears a much closer resemblance to the many intelligence oopsies that happened in the run up to the Iraq War.

So a false flag is an attack or just outright lying to the public to further an agenda, an agenda that would not be passed by the public under normal conditions. These people are the terrorists.

4 Corporations agree £4.5 deal billion sweetheart tax deal

In this latest article by Rajeev Syal in the Guardian, HMRC has agreed to ‘deals’ with these big corporations such as Vodafone and Goldman Sachs.

An excerpt:

The scale of the government’s “sweetheart” tax deals – individual secret agreements drawn up between tax officials and corporations to settle disputes – can be revealed for the first time after previously unseen documents showed that just four settlements were worth £4.5bn between them.

A leaked document sent by Dave Hartnett, the former head of tax at HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC), to David Gauke, the exchequer secretary at the Treasury, discloses the figure, which has not been released by HMRC before on the grounds of preserving “taxpayer confidentiality”.”

Not disclosing because of taxpayer confidentiality? This might go to explain why the country is broke. The HMRC is a toothless, not fit for purpose regulator and encouraged by Cameron and Osbourne to allow big corporations to avoid tax. This is effecting all levels of middle class society and down through austerity, do we need austerity or do we need politicians and the HMRC to just do their job competently?


Essentially the UK economy is losing out on £120 billion per year through tax evasion, avoidance and uncollected taxes. This figure is provided b the PCS and Tax justice network. Is this acceptable? Even the HMRC admits to a figure of £30 billion being lost. Who is accountable? It seems that this is acceptable which is just morally repugnant.

‘A spokesman for HMRC said that it could not comment on individual agreements, but “bespoke deals” had been found to be good value.

“The National Audit Office looked into the ‘bespoke governance’ settlements, finding they represented good value for the country and were properly carried out. However, since then we have significantly improved the transparency of the governance around our large business settlements,” he said.’


I have stated before and I will state again, the government is not here for you and me. It is here to serve the central banks, the corporations and their masters. If the government was for we the people, we would have full media coverage of the above chart from the guardian and tax loop holes in the UK and the world would be closed. We would collect all the taxes that have been avoided and austerity would be halted.

I intend to write to my MP and I hope you feel the need to write too. If we make enough noise, maybe just maybe they’ll listen

Derivatives and the Real World Implications

The derivatives market is part of the financial system which operates behind the stock market and shadow banking system. It essentially leverages bets (forward, option or swaps) on the value of commodities, stocks, bonds, interest rates, currencies and anything else they can think of. The value of the market which is hard to nail down but estimates at $700 trillion-$1.4 quadrillion, considering the worlds GDP is about $65 trillion a year, its rather under reported.


Straight from wiki:

“A derivative is a financial instrument which derives its value from the value of underlying entities such as an asset, index, or interest rate. “A derivative is a financial contract whose value is derived from the performance of underlying market factors, such as interest rates, currency exchange rates, and commodity, credit, and equity prices. Derivative transactions include an assortment of financial contracts, including structured debt obligations and deposits, swaps, futures, options, caps, floors, collars, forwards, and various combinations thereof.”

Why is this relevant? Silverdoctors broke the news below and were subsequently hacked. Here’s a slice:

In the introduction, the resolution informs readers that the FDIC and the Bank of England have been working together to formulate the new bail-in model for future bank failures:

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) and the Bank of England—together with the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, and the Financial Services Authority— have been working to develop resolution strategies for the failure of globally active, systemically important, financial institutions (SIFIs or G-SIFIs) with significant operations on both sides of the Atlantic.

The goal is to produce resolution strategies that could be implemented for the failure of one or more of the largest financial institutions with extensive activities in our respective jurisdictions. These resolution strategies should maintain systemically important operations and contain threats to financial stability. They should also assign losses to shareholders and unsecured creditors in the group, thereby avoiding the need for a bailout by taxpayers.

The joint US/UK resolution states that depositor haircuts are already legal in the UK thanks to the 2009 UK Banking Act:

In the U.K., the strategy has been developed on the basis of the powers provided by the U.K. Banking Act 2009 and in anticipation of the further powers that will be provided by the European Union Recovery and Resolution Directive and the domestic reforms that implement the recommendations of the U.K. Independent Commission on Banking. Such a strategy would involve the bail-in (write-down or conversion) of creditors at the top of the group in order to restore the whole group to solvency. And that the legal authority has already been given in the US buried in Dodd-Frank Act.

In Laymans terms, if and when a systemic crash happens, customers accounts will be raided!

But today it was revealed that Deutcshe Bank and not JP Morgan, who has the highest derivatives exposure in the world. Located on page 87 of the annual 2012 report it states that its derivatives exposure is €55,605,039,000,000.


Convert that into USD at the current EURUSD exchange rates 29/4/13, it amounts to $72,842,601,090,000…About $2 trillion more than JPMorgan. Through the magical and mythical accounting procedure of netting, this number collapses into €776.7 billion in positive market value exposure (assets), and €756.4 billion in negative market value exposure (liabilities). Rather than magic I’d like to call it what it is, ACCOUNTING FRAUD.

What does that much exposure look like compared to the German GDP?


It’s worrying that big banks can have so much exposure to highly leveraged instruments and when it goes South, Mr Joe Public will have to take the hit, Cyprus was just a try out and it’s coming to a bank near you!

The question is how to protect yourself? Hard assets like land, property and precious metals such as gold or silver would be a good investment and act as a hedge against a bank collapse, as well as inflation. Having a supply of fiat currency would also help protect you if the banks decided to carry out a bail-in.

Testing times are ahead of us.

The Greatest Weapon Against The Tyranny Of “Very Serious People” – Laughter


From the last edition of Bill Buckler’s “The Privateer”

On A More Personal Note

So, here we are on the last page of the last issue of The Privateer. My wife Cathy and I have had mixed feelings about getting to this point. On the one hand, it couldn’t come fast enough. On the other, there were times when we didn’t want it to come at all. But there are many ways to skin a cat and the particular one we have chosen over the last three decades has outlived its usefulness. It was and is time for a change.

It is easy to get downhearted about the bullheaded stupidity of those who rule our world. It is just as easy to get morose when confronted with the fact that most of those around us seem to have bought the line that any genuine change for the better is politically (or financially, take your pick) impossible. Our particular antidote has always been laughter – which really is the best medicine. We have had countless “rolling on the floor” exercises over the years when contemplating the sheer idiocy of it all. No matter what the state of the world may be, each of us gets to pick those aspects of it which we deem genuinely IMPORTANT. The rest are not worthy of our serious consideration – but they ARE worthy of our derision.

Never forget, the “achilles heel” of anyone who’s driving aim in life is to CONTROL the lives of other people is his or her aching need to be taken “seriously”. No tyrant on any level can handle derision, it deflates them utterly by reducing their stature to its proper level in a way which they cannot escape. Imagine if they held an election and everybody laughed – and then went on about their IMPORTANT business.

In essence, the people who matter in the world are fully confident that they have earned the status of adult human beings and get exasperated with those who insist on treating them as children. There are times when this tiresome tendency can grate very sharply. But most of the time, it really is screamingly funny and really should be treated as such. As Soviet dissenter Vladimir Bukovsky pointed out in his wonderful autobiography – To Build A Castle – one of the most potent weapons wielded by all those who stood up against the tyranny which surrounded them was the political joke. It won a great victory in the end.

Are inflation figures in the UK representative?

Inflation is defined as the rate at which the general level of prices for goods and services, increases over time. For example, if the inflation rate is 3%, then a £1’s worth of midget gems will cost £1.03 next year.

The CPI or Customer Price Index is the official measure of inflation of consumer prices of the United Kingdom. It can also be referred to as the Harmonised Index of Consumer Prices (HICP). The CPI calculates the average price increase as a percentage for a basket of 600 different goods and services. Around the middle of each month it collects information on prices of these commodities from 120,000 different retailing outlets.

Now bare with me, although it all sounds quite boring it gets interesting if you look at history. The basket of goods that they use to calculate CPI, or what was the RPI or RPIX changes over time and goods are added or removed. This can be done if goods are no longer relevant but it can also be done to replace items that are rising in price. They are then replaced for alternate and cheaper goods. This then impacts on the inflation figure keeping it lower than what it is. I’m not saying it happens on all products but from a political stand point, keeping inflation low is a priority.

Consider the below chart, the inflation figure is derived from the BLS (Bureau of Labour Statistics). How inflation is calculated was changed in the early 80’s and again in the 90’s with the change to the RPIX. The blue chart is how inflation is calculated now and the grey chart is how inflation would be calculated with pre 82 measurements. 9% inflation sounds about right.


Is the inflation figure reported properly? In my opinion, no it isn’t. The costs of many essential purchases have risen much more steeply than what is reported. In the last 5 years, vehicle tax and insurance has gone up 88%, petrol 56%, electricity and gas 46%, bus and rail fares 32%, food 30% and water 24%. These are not discretionary items but costs you have to pay to just survive. These rises cannot be ignored and need to be represented in actual inflation figures, civil servants need to be doing a better job and held to account, rather than worrying about opinion polls.

I can see the direct impact of inflation in my life, instead of finding crisp notes in my pocket I’m just jingling change these days. Though one thing to consider, it is not a wedge of notes that makes me happy, but its my friends and family that make me richer than any paper billionaire.

UK’s Current Debt Based Economic System

The current economic model is a debt based system using fractional reserve banking and fiat currency. What does that mean and what does it look like?

Money is created almost exclusivley by commercial banks who create the money supply through debt, this is called fractional reserve banking. By issuing more debt and loans they increase the money supply but only keep a fraction of the paper money in reserve. The majority of money now is digital money…numbers on a screen.

Currency is termed fiat because it is intrinsically worthless and derives it value from confidence in the currency only. The alternative would be to have a gold or silver backed currency.


I’ll explain fractional reserve banking by giving an example:

Imagine you deposit £100 into Bank A. Assuming a 10% fractional reserve ratio, Bank A then takes 10 percent of it, £10, and sets it aside as reserves and then loans out the remaining 90 percent, or £90. At this point there is actually a total of £190 in the system, not £100. The bank has loaned out £90, kept £10 in reserve, and substituted a newly created £90 IOU claim for the depositor which charges interest and is a profit loan for the bank. At this point Bank A still holds £100 reserves on its books, but £90 of those reserves are soon going to be needed to satisfy the loan recipient. The loan recipient soon spends the £90. The receiver of the £90 then deposits it into Bank B. Bank B demands £90 to be delivered from Bank A to Bank B.

Bank B is now in the same situation as Bank A started with, except it has a deposit of £90 instead of £100. Similar to Bank A, Bank B sets aside 10 percent of that £90, or £9, as reserves and lends out the remaining £81 thus creating £81 of IOUs to its depositors. As the process continues, more electronic number money is created.

Fractional reserve banking and its effects on the money supply have reaching consequences for the business cycle, monetary inflation, price inflation and interest rates. What disturbs me is that the banks are creating and benefiting from the interest generated from creating new money, rather than the UK itself. Should we as a country not issue the money and charge the banks for the privilege?

A study by Huber and Robertson ‘Creating New Money‘ (2000) suggested that the loss to the government of allowing commercial banks to create money was in the order of £49bn per annum. Plus the cost of servicing the national debt, at £32bn per annum and the cost of stimulating a recovery during recession after inevitable recession, runs to hundreds of billions, if not trillions.

What does our debt based system look like compared to other countries and is it working?


The UK as a country is no longer in control of its finances. We have a GDP/Debt ratio of over 900% and with bank debt over 600% of GDP. Our financial sector is disgustingly over-leveraged, couple that with close to zero percent interest rates which allows banks to speculate for free. They take riskier and riskier bets and its the UK public who pick up the tab if it all goes wrong! Iceland had a debt to GDP ratio of 1000% before it collapsed.

We need to be in charge of our currency, move on from a debt based currency and return to sound economic principles. The system hasn’t failed, its just coming to its logical conclusion and history has plenty of examples how this will play out.

Tories explore possibility of temporary withdrawal from European convention on human rights

As reported in the Guardian and the Mirror, the UK is considering temporary withdrawal from the European convention of human rights. Why would they need to withdraw and when would it be re-instated?

The issue stems from Abu Qatada and the governments inability to deport him. The inability stems from the fact that the European Court of Human Rights and our own British courts both believe and have found Qatada shouldn’t be deported. Both courts believe that he should not be deported to Jordan because he may be tried with evidence obtained under torture. For anyone who has watched Zero Dark Thirty recently enhanced interrogation techniques = torture, banned under the ECHR and rightfully so.


Abu Qatada is a minor issue in himself but a political nightmare for Cameron and May. I personally can’t believe what they are suggesting and what it says to the rest of the world about Britain. It is a massive step back in freedom and policy, not forward. How can we claim to be spreading democracy and freedom through the world when we are withdrawing basic human rights for our own citizens? We cannot opt out of human rights when it suits us!

What are the articles of the ECHR and are they relevant? Here’s just section 1 listed and there are 13 Protocols filled with articles:

Article 1: Obligation to respect human rights
Article 2: Right to life
Article 3: Prohibition of torture
Article 4: Prohibition of slavery and forced labour
Article 5: Right to liberty and security
Article 6: Right to a fair trial
Article 7: No punishment without law
Article 8: Right to respect for private and family life
Article 9: Freedom of thought, conscience and religion
Article 10: Freedom of expression
Article 11: Freedom of assembly and association
Article 12: Right to marry
Article 13: Right to an effective remedy
Article 14: Prohibition of discrimination
Article 15: Derogation in time of emergency
Article 16: Restrictions on political activity of aliens
Article 17: Prohibition of abuse of rights
Article 18: Limitation on use of restrictions on rights

I’ve read through all the articles and protocols and they make sense if we live in a democratic free society. To remove them in order to save face and deport 1 man, maybe 2, maybe more, is a petty act of a desperate government. What it says to me is it would be willing to void your rights to make a point and avoid political embarrassment. The government no longer serves the people, it seems to serve a different agenda.

Is all hope lost? Certainly not, speak to your friends and family, social network and write to your MP and MEP. I use Write to them as they are rated on their ability to write back and in a timely manor. Raise awareness and let people know the truth about human rights. They can never be suspended if we do in fact live in a fair and free society. From an international perspective, the claim of spreading freedom and democracy while removing domestic freedoms is a hypocritical and despotic act.

Monsanto trying to outlaw organic seeds in the EU

I have pretty strong feelings when it comes to GM food and Monsanto! There’s countless evidence on the web that GM food is carcinogenic and nutritionally substandard than food produced by organic or natural seeds.


I intend to write a piece on GM food soon but picked this up from Greenreview blog. Monsanto have already had legislation passed ‘The Monsanto Protection Act’ in the USA which essentially makes it impossible to sue and leads them to be above the law. Not mentioning the 300,000 Indian farmers that have committed suicide because of these faceless feckless morally bankrupt poor excuses for sub-human beings, the board of Monsanto.

A question I have to ask is why is this not receiving media attention in the UK?

Article in full:

‘The European Union minions in Brussels/Strasbourg are working on controlling what foods we can eat. No, I am not jesting.

They are aiming to ban, as in outlaw, all heirloom and non-hybrid seeds, even for personal garden use, as well as the growing of such plants, the retention of their seeds (and seeds also from hybrid seeds for future use) and the taking and passing on of cuttings.

This way they will regulate what kinds of vegetables we can buy and even grow ourselves, and those will all have to be approved hybrid varieties and thus all only and rare vegetables will no longer have a chance.

As the collection and keeping of seeds and passing on from one gardener to another will also be punishable by law it means that we will have to – annually – go to authorized seeds merchants and buy our seeds for our garden.

Agribusiness, especially the big plant breeders, such as Monsanto, have been lobbying the EU commissioners for the last five plus years to create law that will do this and thus make it impossible for the people to avoid buying seeds from that company and others.

They have been working out, one can but guess, that people were voting with their feet and decided to grow their own food and especially here gardeners were aiming to use non-hybrid seeds and also to keep seeds from the harvests back for future use and also to share with other gardeners.

Therefore the EU commissioners have been lobbied hard to outlaw this practice and if the revised proposed seed regulation becomes EU law then we will all be forced to, if we wish to grow our own food, to grow only what they permit and keeping seeds back from the harvest for use next year will be punishable by this law.

How they are going to enforce this is, obviously, a question but if heirloom varieties are no longer available and organic seeds – for it would appear that they also will fall foul of this proposed legislation – then policing will be hardly necessary anyway.

This proposed legislation from Brussels proves yet again that the European Union is far from being a good thing for the people of Europe; the opposite rather, and the sooner it is put to death the better.

While this issue is all over the news in Germany and some other continental EU countries not a single word is mentioned of this issue in the media in the UK or Eire.

Time for a serious change to our system is needed…’

When this comes to parliament or to the EU parliament we need to rally against this, we get out of our body what we put in!