A new Reserve currency to challenge the dollar – What’s really going on in The Straits of Hormuz.

[Starving Steve]

Re: A new Reserve currency to challenge the dollar – What’s really going on in The Straits of Hormuz.

There are assets in America, not just a mountain of debts. If there were not assets to cover liabilities, then America would be bankrupt..... But it is not.

And onto the asset-side of the ledger, just think of all that oil that the U.S. is drowning in now. The entire continent is floating on oil and gas. Plus, side-a-ways drilling is not too expensive, especially in the context of Iran and 9/11. And the price of drilling is coming down as the quantity of oil is increasing..... Very lovely!

Up in the oil-sands of northern Alberta, oil recovery is coming down in price, and the oil production is increasing. The entire picture in North America from southern Mexico to northern Alberta is very encouraging.

It had to come to this... Unfortunately, it took a 9/11 to really change the thinking here about energy security.
Hopefully, the UK and the nations of Europe will follow North America's lead, because the less oil we need to import from the Middle-East, the better it will be for us all.....

Imagine the arrogance of this bunch in Iran, and the civilized world let them get away with this until now!

[ProdigyofZen]

Re: A new Reserve currency to challenge the dollar – What’s really going on in The Straits of Hormuz.

You are not thinking too far ahead.

If the Saudi's decide to start selling their oil in any other currency but US dollar we are screwed. I think that is the pact we have had with the Saudi's for a long time. We allow them to play fundamental Wahhabist's and dominate their country without interference from the US and they sell their oil in Dollars and dictate to the world pertaining to oil supply.

If you notice the one country we do not have a problem with even though they have state sponsored terrorism is Saudi Arabia. Now why do you think that is? I mean werent 19 of the hijackers on 9/11 Saudi's? Why did we take out Iraq and not Saudi Arabia?

[Starving Steve]

Re: A new Reserve currency to challenge the dollar – What’s really going on in The Straits of Hormuz.

I know next-to-nothing about Saudi-Arabia, so I wish someone here who knows more than I do would answer your question.

The only thing I can say in Saudi-Arabia's favour is that their king is reasonable man, at least from a distance.
King Faisal apologized to America. He offered to pay the monetary damage of 9/11. He also is a friend of America. He also has tried to keep peace in the Middle-East, and even negotiate with the Israeli government. He also was a friend of Anwar Sadat and Mubarek. He also is a friend to the King of Jordan. He also was a good ally of America in helping to liberate Kuwait when George Bush Sr. was President; Saudi-Arabia helped with its military might.

Remember in the liberation of Kuwait, the UK allied with America, Egypt, Saudi-Arabia, Israel, Jordan, Turkey, Qatar, the U.A.E, Morocco, Canada, Denmark, France, Oman, Syria, among many other nations........ This in itself was remarkable, and again it reflects well on the King of Saudi-Arabia for his common-sense.

[bill]

Re: A new Reserve currency to challenge the dollar – What’s really going on in The Straits of Hormuz.

I know next-to-nothing about Saudi-Arabia, so I wish someone here who knows more than I do would answer your question.

The only thing I can say in Saudi-Arabia's favour is that their king is reasonable man, at least from a distance.
King Faisal apologized to America. He offered to pay the monetary damage of 9/11. He also is a friend of America. He also has tried to keep peace in the Middle-East, and even negotiate with the Israeli government. He also was a friend of Anwar Sadat and Mubarek. He also is a friend to the King of Jordan. He also was a good ally of America in helping to liberate Kuwait when George Bush Sr. was President; Saudi-Arabia helped with its military might.

Remember in the liberation of Kuwait, the UK allied with America, Egypt, Saudi-Arabia, Israel, Jordan, Turkey, Qatar, the U.A.E, Morocco, Canada, Denmark, France, Oman, Syria, among many other nations........ This in itself was remarkable, and again it reflects well on the King of Saudi-Arabia for his common-sense.

We shall soon find out if Saudi has production capacity to supply China and Japan oil. I think oil production is so tight extra production is not available to replace Iran’s 2.5mil/b/d export supply.
No easy solution.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-0...alls-rise.html

Jan 11, 2012 9:31 PM MT

Geithner’s meetings were part of a two-stop trip to Asia’s largest economies aimed at building support for tighter economic sanctions on Iran after international monitors detected an acceleration in the nation’s nuclear development program. China, which counts Iran as one of its top petroleum suppliers, yesterday snubbed the U.S., with a vice foreign minister saying his nation “opposes imposing pressure and sanctions.”
Crude for February delivery climbed 38 cents, or 0.4 percent, to $101.25 a barrel in electronic trading on the New York Mercantile Exchange as of 1:08 p.m. Tokyo time.
JX Nippon Oil & Energy Corp., Japan’s biggest refiner, is in talks with Saudi Arabia and other producers to replace crude shipments in the event of an embargo on Iranian supplies, according to an official who declined to be identified, citing company policy. JX buys about 90,000 barrels of Iranian oil a day, the official said.
‘Halfway Solution’

“Japan will try and seek a halfway solution where they’ll try and limit imports from Iran and boost imports from other Middle Eastern countries that are also U.S. allies,” said Razeen Sally, a professor at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy at the National University of Singapore. Given its military alliance with the U.S., Japan “is much more susceptible to U.S. pressure than China,” he said.


“Iran is one of China’s biggest petroleum suppliers,” Vice Foreign Minister Zhai Jun told reporters in Beijing yesterday. “China hopes that petroleum imports won’t be affected as petroleum is needed for China’s development and for ensuring the needs of its people.”
China stands to be the biggest beneficiary of U.S. and European plans for sanctions by taking advantage of the mounting pressure to demand better terms on Iranian crude, analysts said.
“The sanctions against Iran strengthen the Chinese hand at the negotiating table,” said Michael Wittner, head of oil- market research for Societe Generale SA in New York.
At the same time, the U.S. is bearing most of the cost of patrols and surveillance in the Strait of Hormuz, through which 17 million barrels a day of crude are transported. China, the No. 2 importer of oil after the U.S., enjoys protection for the shipping lanes for free, retired Admiral Dennis Blair, a former U.S. Director of National Intelligence, said in an interview.
South Korea Sanctions
South Korea, Asia’s fourth-largest economy, announced Dec. 16 that it would expand sanctions against Iran and cautioned companies against importing petrochemicals. Crude oil shipments weren’t affected.

Saudi relationship goes back a long ways with US. I think it continues going forward supporting dollars.
A classic photo taken after Yalta Conference 1945.


King Ibn Saud converses with President Franklin D. Roosevelt (right) through translator Colonel Bill Eddy, on board the USS Quincy, after the Yalta Conference. Fleet Admiral William D. Leahy (left) watches.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibn_Saud_of_Saudi_Arabia

[metalman]

Re: A new Reserve currency to challenge the dollar – What’s really going on in The Straits of Hormuz.

what's really going on the straits of hormuz?

[gnk]

Re: A new Reserve currency to challenge the dollar – What’s really going on in The Straits of Hormuz.

I know the Persians have been playing chess for over a thousand years, but do you really think the US is taking a gamble? It's a chess match - raw military power and a strong diplomatic effort on the US side, but Iran also has a few good moves as well - the Iranians are not as isolated as the US portrays. Geithner in China is indicative that a lot is still in the works. But can we trust China?

I can't see this being just about Iran. The recent breakdown of the global architecture of finance and trade may soon be followed by a breakdown in global diplomacy. Honestly, I have no idea of the outcome. There is a lot going on behind the scenes that we just don't know.

Edit - Sorry - I just read that China isn't playing along. Japan and the EU, is.

[don]

Re: A new Reserve currency to challenge the dollar – What’s really going on in The Straits of Hormuz.

Paul Craig Roberts take on what's going' on . . .

» The Next War on Washington’s Agenda

By: Paul Craig Roberts

Only the blind do not see that the US government is preparing to attack Iran. According to Professor Michel Chossudovsky, “Active war preparations directed against Iran (with the involvement of Israel and NATO) were initiated in May 2003.” http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.p...t=va&aid=28542

Washington has deployed missiles directed at Iran in its oil emirate puppet states, Oman and the UAE, and little doubt in the other US puppet states in the Middle East. Washington has beefed up Saudi Arabia’s jet fighter force. Most recently, Washington has deployed 9,000 US troops to Israel to participate in “war games” designed to test the US/Israeli air defense system. As Iran represents no threat unless attacked, Washington’s war preparations signal Washington’s intention to attack Iran.

Another signal that Washington has a new war on its agenda is the raised level of Washington’s rhetoric and demonization of Iran. Judging by polls Washington’s propaganda that Iran is threatening the US by developing a nuclear weapon has met with success. Half of the American public support a military attack on Iran in order to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear capability. Those of us who are trying to awaken our fellow citizens start from a deficit that the minds of half of the US population are under Big Brother’s control.

As the International Atomic Energy Agency’s reports from its inspectors on the ground in Iran have made clear for years, there is no evidence that Iran has diverted any enriched uranium from its nuclear energy program. The shrill hype coming from Washington and from the neoconservative media is groundless. it is the same level of lie as Washington’s claim that Saddam Hussein in Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. Every US soldier who died in that war died in behalf of a lie.

It could not be more obvious that Washington’s war preparations against Iran have nothing to do with deterring Iran from a nuclear weapon. So, what are the war preparations about?

In my judgment, the US government’s war preparations are driven by three factors.
One is the neoconservative ideology, adopted by the US government, that calls for the US to use its superior military and economic position to achieve world hegemony. This goal appeals to American hubris and to the power and profit that it serves.

A second factor is Israel’s desire to eliminate all support for the Palestinians and for Hezbollah in southern Lebanon. Israel’s goal is to seize all of Palestine and the water resources of southern Lebanon. Eliminating Iran removes all obstacles to Israel’s expansion.

A third factor is to deter or slow China’s rise as a military and economic power by controlling China’s access to energy. It was China’s oil investments in eastern Libya that led to the sudden move against Libya by the US and its NATO puppets, and it is China’s oil investments elsewhere in Africa that resulted in the Bush regime’s creation of the United States Africa Command, designed to counter China’s economic influence with US military influence. China has significant energy investments in Iran, and a substantial percentage of China’s oil imports are from Iran. Depriving China of independent access to oil is Washington’s way of restraining and boxing in China.

What we are witnessing is a replay of Washington’s policy toward Japan in the 1930s that provoked the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. Japan’s bank balances in the West were seized, and Japan’s access to oil and raw materials was restricted. The purpose was to prevent or to slow Japan’s rise. The result was war.

Despite the hubris in which it wallows, Washington understands the vulnerability of its Fifth Fleet in the Persian Gulf and would not risk losing a fleet and 20,000 US naval personnel unless it was to gain an excuse for a nuclear attack on Iran. A nuclear attack on Iran would alert both China and Russia that they could suffer the same fate. The consequence would be that the world would face a higher risk of nuclear armageddon than existed in the mutually assured destruction of the US-Soviet standoff.

Washington is getting all of us in over our heads. Washington has declared the “Asia-Pacific” and the South China Sea to be areas of “America’s national interest.” What sense does this make? It makes the same sense as if China declared the Gulf of Mexico and the Mediterranean Sea to be areas of China’s national interest.

Washington has deployed 2,500 Marines, promising more to come, to Australia in order to do what? Protect Australia from China or occupy Australia? Encircle China with 2,500 Marines? It would not mean anything to China if Washington deployed 25,000 Marines in Australia.

When you get right down to it, Washington’s tough talk is nothing but a silly pointless provocation of Washington’s largest creditor. What if Washington’s idiocy causes China to worry that Washington and its UK and European puppets will seize its bank balances and refuse to honor China’s holdings of $1 trillion in US Treasury bonds? Will China pull its balances from the weak US, UK, and European banks? Will China decide to strike first, not with nuclear weapons, but by selling its $1 trillion in Treasury bonds all at once?

It would be cheaper than war.

The Federal Reserve would have to quickly print another $1 trillion dollars with which to buy the bonds, or US interest rates would shoot up. What would China do with the $1 trillion in newly printed paper? In my opinion, China would dump it all at once in the currency market, because the Federal Reserve cannot print euros, UK pounds, Japanese yen, Swiss francs, Russian rubles, and Chinese yuan with which to buy up its newly printed currency.

The US dollar would take a beating. US import prices--which now include, thanks to offshoring, almost everything Americans consume--would rise. The hard-pressed 90% would take a further beating, endearing their Washington oppressors to them to an even greater extent. The rest of the world, anticipating nuclear war, would flee the dollar, as Washington would be a primary attack target.

If the missiles aren’t launched, Americans would wake up the next day a bankrupt third world country. If the missiles were launched, few Americans would wake up.

We, as Americans, need to ask ourselves what all this is about? Why is our government so provocative toward Islam, Russia, China, Iran? What purpose, whose purpose is being served? Certainly not ours.

Who benefits from our bankrupt government starting yet more wars, picking this time not on defenseless countries like Iraq and Libya, but on China and Russia? Do the idiots in Washington think the Russian government does not know why Russia is being surrounded with missile bases and radar systems? Do the Washington morons really believe that the Russian government will fall for its lie that the missiles are directed against Iran? Only American idiots who sit in front of Fox “news” could possible believe that the real issue is an Iranian nuclear weapon.

How much longer will the Russian government permit the US National Endowment for Democracy, a CIA front, to interfere in its elections by financing opposition parties led by the likes of Vladimir Kara-Murza, Boris Nemtsov, and Alexei Navalny, who organize protests of every election that Putin’s party wins, alleging without any evidence whatsoever, but providing propaganda for Washington, who no doubt pays well, that the election will be and was stolen? http://www.globalresearch.ca/PrintAr...rticleId=28571

In the US, such activists would be declared to be “domestic extremists” and be subjected to rough treatment. In Amerika even anti-war activists are subjected to home invasions by the FBI and grand jury investigations.

What this means is that “the criminal state of Russia” is a more tolerant democracy than the US, or for that matter, Amerika’s puppet states in Europe and the UK.

Where do we go from here? If not to nuclear destruction, Americans must wake up. Football games, porn, and shopping malls are one thing. Survival of human life is another. Washington, that is, “representative government,” consists only of a few powerful vested interests. These private interests, not the American people, control the US government.

That is why nothing that the US government does benefits the American people.

The current crop of presidential contenders, except for Ron Paul, represent the controlling interests. War and financial fraud are the only remaining American Values.

Will Americans again give the sheen of “democracy” to rule by a few by participating in the coming rigged elections?

If you have to vote, vote for Ron Paul or for a more extreme third party candidate. Show that you do not support the lie that is the system.

Stop watching television. Stop reading newspapers. Stop spending money. When you do any of these things, you are supporting evil.

http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/

[don]

Re: A new Reserve currency to challenge the dollar – What’s really going on in The Straits of Hormuz.

The war is with China, the battleground Africa
By Dieter Neumann

When United States President Barack Obama and Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta appeared together at the press conference at the Pentagon recently to reiterate America’s commitment to the Asia-Pacific region, the subject of Africa did not come up. Sometimes what is avoided can be a clue to what is most important on the agenda.

The obvious intent of the stated focus on the Asia-Pacific region is to remind the rising China that America is still the big dog. Recent arms sales to Taiwan and the agreement with Australia to station American troops there are but two symbolic gestures to that effect. But the real focus of the "focus on Asia-Pacific" is not the Asia-Pacific region at all. It is Africa.

The creation of Africom in 2006 by the US military was a signal that America would not simply lie back and allow the Chinese to become the hegemon for the continent. That signal by itself was not enough, however. By 2009 Chinese trade with Africa surpassed America’s for the first time.

Chinese economic involvement took many forms. Obviously resource development is a priority for the Chinese, as Africa is acknowledged to be the world’s greatest storehouse of precious and rare metals and has vast unexploited oil reserves. While Chinese companies, all proxies for the government of China, compete with western companies for those resources, they also enter into agreements to provide critical infrastructure in the transportation, education and medical fields, all of which provide an advantage when it comes to winning hearts and minds.

The Libya uprising provided America and its North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) allies the first opportunity to turn back Chinese influence in Africa. Chinese companies had an estimated US$20 billion in projects underway and had courted Muammar Gaddafi for many years.

As the NATO-enabled rebel tide overwhelmed the Gaddafi forces, 36,000 Chinese engineers, tradesmen, and technicians fled the country. Chinese infrastructure projects and its involvement in Libya’s oil sector lay in disarray.

The years ahead will be rife with African proxy wars between the US and China. The escalating violence in South Sudan is but the latest manifestation of this. Obama and Panetta correctly claimed the Asia Pacific as their next focus after having, in their terms, stabilized the middle east.

But while the focus may be on the Asia-Pacific region, it is in Africa that the bullets will fly and the bombs will drop.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/NA13Ad02.html

[makimanos]

Re: A new Reserve currency to challenge the dollar – What’s really going on in The Straits of Hormuz.

China's policy on energy calls for action but also is an excuse for the economic woes. The confrontation is active in South Sudan and now is Iran's turn.
China must be stopped early at any cost . NDAA is in place and HAARP now looks ready.

[charliebrown]

Re: A new Reserve currency to challenge the dollar – What’s really going on in The Straits of Hormuz.

i dont think nato would go nuclear if severe damage was done to one or more of the 5th fleet.
Iran would be carpet bombed however. If Iran has a nuke, which there is mumblings about, and uses it,
Then Tehran is a glass parking lot. What if ... before the hot war starts, Iran has a nuke test in the desert?

Would that back the West off, or be the final trigger of the hot war??

[Slimprofits]

Re: A new Reserve currency to challenge the dollar – What’s really going on in The Straits of Hormuz.

US seeking to 'close down' Iran central bank
(AFP) – 10 hours ago

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp...93aaae039f.621

"We do mean to close down the Central Bank of Iran (CBI)," the official told reporters on condition of anonymity, while adding that the United States is moving quickly to implement the sanctions, signed into law last month.
The sanctions, broadly aimed at forcing Tehran to shift course on its nuclear program, targeted Iran's crucial oil sector and required foreign firms to make a choice between doing business with Iran or the United States.
Foreign central banks that deal with the Iranian central bank on oil transactions could also face similar restrictions under the new law, which has sparked fears of damage to US ties with nations like Russia and China.
"If a correspondent bank of a US bank wants to do business with us and they're doing business with CBI or other designated Iranian banks... then they're going to get in trouble with us," the US official said.

[bill]

Re: A new Reserve currency to challenge the dollar – What’s really going on in The Straits of Hormuz.

US seeking to 'close down' Iran central bank
(... then they're going to get in trouble with us," the US official said.

Trouble there is.
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2012/0...80C0KZ20120113

Jan 13, 2012 10:12am GMT BEIJING (Reuters) - A Chinese firm hit by U.S. sanctions as Washington turns the screw on Iran's nuclear program was founded in the mid-1990s by a hard-drinking trader from a military background who regales dinner companions with how he spent much of his youth in a mental hospital.
Yang Qinglong, who calls himself "Crazy Yang," set up Zhuhai Zhenrong Corp in around 1995 after "high-level military friends" let it be known they wanted someone to formally import crude oil from Iran. At the time, Iran was supplying oil to China to pay for arms supplied by Beijing during the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war.
Zhuhai Zhenrong, now headed by Zhang Dongquan, an altogether steadier upstream oil man from China's Yumen oilfield, was the biggest supplier of refined petroleum products back to Iran, according to the U.S. State Department, which has also slapped sanctions on two other energy trading companies.
The Chinese oil trader - which for years imported Iranian crude to sell to state-run refiners such as China Petroleum and Chemical Corp (Sinopec) and PetroChina - brokered the delivery of more than $500 million (325 million pounds) in gasoline to Iran between July 2010 and January 2011, contravening U.S. sanctions law, the State Department said.
Analysts say the U.S. sanctions are largely symbolic given that Zhenrong is unlikely to have much U.S. business exposure.


When the military came calling for a conduit to Tehran, Yang, clad in his trademark army-green jacket and with a matching canvas bag slung over his shoulder, beat off rivals to become China's exclusive importer of Iranian oil.
Yang first visited Tehran in July 1995, and was introduced by China's military to Iran's oil ministry, National Iranian Oil Co (NIOC), the defence ministry and leading Iranian banks.

Asked about the potential impact from U.S. sanctions, current and former Zhenrong officials appear nonchalant.
"Sanctioning Zhenrong? How? The company does not have any U.S. assets. On foreign currency payments? They can easily find a solution on that," said the second former Zhenrong trader.

Good luck on getting oil to Zhenrongs proposed refinery in Myanmar.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...8CB7B220120112

Jan 12, 2012 5:20am EST
* Refinery likely be in southern Dawei port
* Size of refinery doubles Myanmar's current total refining capacity
* Expects no government opposition; Chinese firm is government-backed trader
By Chen Aizhu
BEIJING, Jan 12 (Reuters) - China's Guangdong Zhenrong Energy Co. Ltd, an oil and commodity trader partly owned by state-run Zhuhai Zhenrong Corp, is scouting for sites in Myanmar to build a 100,000 barrels-per-day (bpd) refinery, the company's chief executive said.
The project, estimated to cost $2.5 billion, is likely to be located in the southern port city of Dawei and built by 2015, chief executive Xiong Shaohui told Reuters by telephone from the company's headquarters in southern Guangzhou.
He did not elaborate, and it was not immediately clear if the project would be built in the multi-billion dollar Dawei Special Industrial Zone, which, once complete, will be Southeast Asia's largest industrial area and a vital source of revenue for a government seeking to overhaul Myanmar's economy.
"We're inspecting for the potential sites and have tentatively selected southern port city Dawei, near the Andaman Sea," Xiong said.
Guangdong Zhenrong will partner with two Myanmar firms -- privately run Htoo Group of Companies and a military-affiliated company which Xiong didn't give a name.
The project will be totally funded the Chinese firm and Xiong said his company would have no problem footing the bill. China is Myanmar's biggest ally.
The proposed refinery is tiny by Chinese standards but could meet 60 percent of the Myanmar market's demand for refined fuel, said Xiong. Myanmar has a total refining capacity of 51,000 bpd, and it imports almost all of its domestic fuel needs.
The 250 sq km (97 sq mile), $50 billion Dawei project will include an $8 billion deep-sea port, an oil refinery and a petrochemical factory, Myanmar officials have said.
The project is spearheaded by Thai building contractor Italian-Thai Development Pcl and is scheduled to be ready by 2019. It is located in the Tanintharyi region of southern Myanmar on the Indian Ocean.
This week, Myanmar's government abruptly halted constrution of a 4,000 megawatt coal-fired power plant at the Dawei zone following a domestic outcry over its environmental impact.
That decision follows the suspension last October, also on environmental grounds, of the Chinese-led $3.6 billion Myitsone dam, a move that stunned China but won President Thein Sein political credit among sceptics at home and abroad, who have doubted his government's commitment to reform.
Xiong said he was confident the refinery would not encounter any opposition.

"The way we run our business will be different from many other companies investing in Myanmar. We want to make inputs first," he said.

Other two
http://www.businesstimes.com.sg/sub/...473614,00.html

January 13, 2012, 7.06 am (Singapore time)

US sanctions Kuo Oil for Iran sales WASHINGTON - The United States on Thursday sanctioned China's state-run Zhuhai Zhenrong Corp, which it said was Iran's largest supplier of refined petroleum products, as it sought to impress on Beijing and Teheran its resolve to increase economic pressure over Iran's nuclear programme. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton also imposed sanctions on Singapore's Kuo Oil Pte Ltd and FAL Oil Company Ltd, an independent energy trader based in the United Arab Emirates, the State Department said in a notice. The State Department said Kuo Oil had provided over US$25 million in refined petroleum to Iran between late 2010 and early 2011, while FAL provided over US$70 million in refined petroleum to Iran over multiple shipments in late 2010.

[don]

Re: A new Reserve currency to challenge the dollar – What’s really going on in The Straits of Hormuz.

"Even before the crisis, there was a rebalancing of economic power – in fact, a correction of a 200-year historical anomaly, in which Asia's share of global GDP fell from nearly 50% to, at one point, below 10%. The pragmatic commitment to growth that one sees in Asia and other emerging markets today stands in contrast to the west's misguided policies, which, driven by a combination of ideology and vested interests, almost seem to reflect a commitment not to grow."

Alfred Stiglitz
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/e...ans-2012-worse

[cityqat]

Re: A new Reserve currency to challenge the dollar – What’s really going on in The Straits of Hormuz.

I miss you and your cans of fruit and veg, dad.

To contribute a response to your blog... No, the US dollar will not "collapse". It might only be worth $0.98 to the Canadian dollar, but it still has value. Lower or get rid of that big fat debt - it is the cancer of the US. It *is* possible to have an economy that includes healthcare and benefits without massive debt. Raising the debt ceiling is like raising a credit card limit on a consumer that can't pay their minimum payment - it's ridiculous.

[don]

Re: A new Reserve currency to challenge the dollar – What’s really going on in The Straits of Hormuz.

from Zerohedge . . .

as AFP reports today, there is another major motivation for the expanding wars:

The latest round of American sanctions are aimed at shutting down Iran’s central bank, a senior US official said Thursday, spelling out that intention directly for the first time.

“We do need to close down the Central Bank of Iran (CBI),” the official told reporters on condition of anonymity, while adding that the United States is moving quickly to implement the sanctions, signed into law last month.

***

Foreign central banks that deal with the Iranian central bank on oil transactions could also face similar restrictions under the new law, which has sparked fears of damage to US ties with nations like Russia and China.

“If a correspondent bank of a US bank wants to do business with us and they’re doing business with CBI or other designated Iranian banks… then they’re going to get in trouble with us,” the US official said.

Why is the U.S. targeting Iran’s central bank?

Well, multi-billionaire Hugo Salinas Price told King World News:

What happened to Mr. Gaddafi, many speculate the real reason he was ousted was that he was planning an all-African currency for conducting trade. The same thing happened to him that happened to Saddam because the US doesn’t want any solid competing currency out there vs the dollar. You know Gaddafi was talking about a gold dinar.

As I noted in August:

Ellen Brown argues in the Asia Times that there were even deeper reasons for the war than gold, oil or middle eastern regime change.

Brown argues that Libya – like Iraq under Hussein – challenged the supremacy of the dollar and the Western banks:

Later, the same general said they planned to take out seven countries in five years: Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Iran.

What do these seven countries have in common? In the context of banking, one that sticks out is that none of them is listed among the 56 member banks of the Bank for International Settlements (BIS). That evidently puts them outside the long regulatory arm of the central bankers’ central bank in Switzerland.

The most renegade of the lot could be Libya and Iraq, the two that have actually been attacked. Kenneth Schortgen Jr, writing on Examiner.com, noted that “[s]ix months before the US moved into Iraq to take down Saddam Hussein, the oil nation had made the move to accept euros instead of dollars for oil, and this became a threat to the global dominance of the dollar as the reserve currency, and its dominion as the petrodollar.”

According to a Russian article titled “Bombing of Libya – Punishment for Ghaddafi for His Attempt to Refuse US Dollar”, Gaddafi made a similarly bold move: he initiated a movement to refuse the dollar and the euro, and called on Arab and African nations to use a new currency instead, the gold dinar. Gaddafi suggested establishing a united African continent, with its 200 million people using this single currency.

***

And that brings us back to the puzzle of the Libyan central bank. In an article posted on the Market Oracle, Eric Encina observed:

One seldom mentioned fact by western politicians and media pundits: the Central Bank of Libya is 100% State Owned … Currently, the Libyan government creates its own money, the Libyan Dinar, through the facilities of its own central bank. Few can argue that Libya is a sovereign nation with its own great resources, able to sustain its own economic destiny. One major problem for globalist banking cartels is that in order to do business with Libya, they must go through the Libyan Central Bank and its national currency, a place where they have absolutely zero dominion or power-broking ability. Hence, taking down the Central Bank of Libya (CBL) may not appear in the speeches of Obama, Cameron and Sarkozy but this is certainly at the top of the globalist agenda for absorbing Libya into its hive of compliant nations.

Alex Newman wrote in November:

According to more than a few observers, Gadhafi’s plan to quit selling Libyan oil in U.S. dollars — demanding payment instead in gold-backed “dinars” (a single African currency made from gold) — was the real cause [of the Libyan war and killing of Gadhafi]. The regime, sitting on massive amounts of gold, estimated at close to 150 tons, was also pushing other African and Middle Eastern governments to follow suit.

And it literally had the potential to bring down the dollar and the world monetary system by extension, according to analysts. French President Nicolas Sarkozy reportedly went so far as to call Libya a “threat” to the financial security of the world. The “Insiders” were apparently panicking over Gadhafi’s plan.

“Any move such as that would certainly not be welcomed by the power elite today, who are responsible for controlling the world’s central banks,” noted financial analyst Anthony Wile, editor of the free market-oriented Daily Bell, in an interview with RT. “So yes, that would certainly be something that would cause his immediate dismissal and the need for other reasons to be brought forward [for] removing him from power.”

According to Wile, Gadhafi’s plan would have strengthened the whole continent of Africa in the eyes of economists backing sound money — not to mention investors. But it would have been especially devastating for the U.S. economy, the American dollar, and particularly the elite in charge of the system.

“The central banking Ponzi scheme requires an ever-increasing base of demand and the immediate silencing of those who would threaten its existence,” Wile noted in a piece entitled “Gaddafi Planned Gold Dinar, Now Under Attack” earlier this year. “Perhaps that is what the hurry [was] in removing Gaddafi in particular and those who might have been sympathetic to his monetary idea.”

Investor newsletters and commentaries have been buzzing for months with speculation about the link between Gadhafi’s gold dinar and the NATO-backed overthrow of the Libyan regime. Conservative analysts pounced on the potential relationship, too.

“In 2009 — in his capacity as head of the African Union — Libya’s Moammar Gadhafi had proposed that the economically crippled continent adopt the ‘Gold Dinar,’” noted Ilana Mercer in an August opinion piece for WorldNetDaily. “I do not know if Col. Gadhafi continued to agitate for ditching the dollar and adopting the Gold Dinar — or if the Agitator from Chicago got wind of Gadhafi’s (uncharacteristic) sanity about things monetary.”

But if Arab and African nations had begun adopting a gold-backed currency, it would have had major repercussions for debt-laden Western governments that would be far more significant than the purported “democratic” uprisings sweeping the region this year. And it would have spelled big trouble for the elite who benefit from “freshly counterfeited funny-money,” Mercer pointed out.

“Had Gadhafi sparked a gold-driven monetary revolution, he would have done well for his own people, and for the world at large,” she concluded. “A Gadhafi-driven gold revolution would have, however, imperiled the positions of central bankers and their political and media power-brokers.”

Adding credence to the theory about why Gadhafi had to be overthrown, as The New American reported in March, was the rebels’ odd decision to create a central bank to replace Gadhafi’s state-owned monetary authority. The decision was broadcast to the world in the early weeks of the conflict.

In a statement describing a March 19 meeting, the rebel council announced, among other things, the creation of a new oil company. And more importantly: “Designation of the Central Bank of Benghazi as a monetary authority competent in monetary policies in Libya and appointment of a Governor to the Central Bank of Libya, with a temporary headquarters in Benghazi.”

The creation of a new central bank, even more so than the new national oil regime, left analysts scratching their heads. “I have never before heard of a central bank being created in just a matter of weeks out of a popular uprising,” noted Robert Wenzel in an analysis for the Economic Policy Journal. “This suggests we have a bit more than a rag tag bunch of rebels running around and that there are some pretty sophisticated influences,” he added. Wenzel also noted that the uprising looked like a “major oil and money play, with the true disaffected rebels being used as puppets and cover” while the transfer of control over money and oil supplies takes place.

Other analysts, even in the mainstream press, were equally shocked. “Is this the first time a revolutionary group has created a central bank while it is still in the midst of fighting the entrenched political power?” wondered CNBC senior editor John Carney. “It certainly seems to indicate how extraordinarily powerful central bankers have become in our era.”

Similar scenarios involving the global monetary system — based on the U.S. dollar as a global reserve currency, backed by the fact that oil is traded in American money — have also been associated with other targets of the U.S. government. Some analysts even say a pattern is developing.

Iran, for example, is one of the few nations left in the world with a state-owned central bank. And Iraqi despot Saddam Hussein, once armed by the U.S. government to make war on Iran, was threatening to start selling oil in currencies other than the dollar just prior to the Bush administration’s “regime change” mission. While most of the establishment press in America has been silent on the issue of Gadhafi’s gold dinar scheme, in Russia, China, and the global alternative media, the theory has exploded in popularity.

A reader comments:

No one is paying attention to the petro-dollars and the current desperation of European and US banks. Even Iran prices oil in $$$s per the treaty after WWII, but no one wants $$$s any more because it has been such a poor investment vehicle. Gold has been much better. Iraq did not want $$$s, was invaded. Libya did not want $$$s, was invaded (I believe they wanted gold). Iran does not want $$$. The dollars are deposited in US and European banks. The dollars standing as the finacial reserve currency of the world was / is being threatened, and thus the Federal Reserve Banks ability to print unlimited dollars!