(LOL) Why it is better not to assume hallucinogen mushrooms (even if they may make you invulnerable to tasers and pepper spray, you might find rats in your backhole)

Live5news SENECA, SC (WCSC) - A burglary call for Oconee County sheriff's deputies turned bizarre Monday morning when their suspect was found naked with a mouse in his rectum and apparently drugged, an incident report shows.

Authorities responded to Bernwood Circle near the town of Seneca late Monday morning after a resident complained of a burglar. When deputies arrived, they found Noah Smith, 24, lying face down and naked inside the doorway of the victim's home, the report stated.

When the deputy tried to make contact with Smith, he slapped the deputy. In return, the deputy deployed his taser, which had no effect on Smith, the report stated.

With reinforcements, deputies approached Smith again in the victim's bedroom. A deputy managed to handcuff Smith before he jumped off the victim's bed and tried to kick other deputies in the room, the report stated.

Then, according to the report, Smith was pepper sprayed. Undeterred, Smith continued to kick at the officers and otherwise evade capture. He was struck with a police baton several times, and Smith attempted to bite the deputy.

Smith's head and mouth were covered with a blanket to prevent him from biting. He was wrestled down so shackles could be placed on his legs and his arms were hog-tied, the report stated. An EMS crew responded and provided a stretcher to which Smith was also tied.

Deputies and officers from the Seneca Police Department opined that Smith might have been high on mushrooms, and identified equipment that could be used to get high in the victim's home.

During a medical exam at a nearby hospital, medical personnel found a mouse tail hanging from Smith's rectum. An X-ray revealed a mouse lodged inside Smith.

He told emergency room personnel that he could not remember what had happened to him.

After the medical exam, he was charged with resisting arrest, 1st and 3rd degree assault a battery charges, and indecent exposure. Smith was transported to the Oconee County Detention Center.

Copyright 2010 WCSC. All rights reserved.

How to Print Your Own Money, Build Community & Not Get Arrested by the Feds

From Wake Up From Your Slumber:

I want anyone who’s got a joke on the tip of their tongue about ‘monopoly money’ to put it out of their mind. Printing your own local community currency is a perfectly legitimate thing to do—you can’t make your own local coins but bills are legal, at least in the US—and can be a great way to encourage shopping at local businesses. It doesn’t replace federal printed currency, but augments it by getting people to make the practical and symbolic gesture of supporting local businesses before national chains.

Think it’s tough to get started, to convince businesses to accept the currency and for people to attach value to it, you may be right. But here are a few examples of places which have taken their local monetary system into their own hands:

Ithaca Hours: Ithaca, New York Region
Around since 1991, Ithaca Hours has been called the “original” hour-based scrip. When founded the average hourly wage in the region was $10, so that was decided to be the baseline to establish the currency. The idea in choosing ‘hours’ as the name for the currency is to remind people that money is “in addition to being a medium of exchange for commodities, [it] represents someone’s labor, the time taken to provide a skill or perform a service. Your time is worth something to someone else”.

Currently Ithaca Hours has about 600 members, and has to date put about US$100,000 worth of Ithaca Hours into circulation.

More: Ithaca Hours

Toronto Dollars: Toronto, Canada
Dating back to 1998, the Toronto Dollar is valued on par with the Canadian Dollar. Accepted at over 150 businesses the idea behind them is similar to all local currencies: “Strengthening the local economy and supporting new businesses; keeping your money working and circulating locally; bringing decisions-making back to community.”

Toronto Dollars are available in denominations of 1, 2, 5, 10, and 20 dollars, and contain similar security features to prevent counterfeiting as any nationally circulating currency. Interestingly, Toronto Dollars are printed by the same company which prints Canadian federal currency.

Toronto Dollars also have a charitable component: 10% of Canadian Dollars exhanged for Toronto Dollars is put aside into a Community Fund which then gives out grants to community partners.

More: Toronto Dollar

REAL Dollars: Lawrence, Kansas
Begun in 2000, REAL dollars (which stands for Realizing Economic Alternatives in Lawrence) were issued in denominations of 1, 3, and 10 dollars with pictures of local Lawrence celebrities on them (William S. Burroughs, Langston Hughes to name two). Now no longer regularly circulating, the REAL dollar of Lawrence, Kansas shows some of the problems with establishing a local currency.

In an interview with Lawrence.com, REAL dollar creator Boog Highberger pointed out two practical obstacles all such currency have to face: 1) Modern businesses don’t have as much use for cash as they once did—how many places don’t accept credit or debit cards? Not many; and 2) Modern businesses rarely go to local suppliers anymore.

As Highberger said at the time, “If we revitalize [REAL dollars] what we need to do is institute some kind of banking system (that would allow users to debit or credit their accounts).”

Which is just what BerkShares is planning on doing...

BerkShares: Western Massachusetts
Launched in the fall of 2006, BerkShares circulate in the Berkshire region of Western Massachusetts. By some estimates BerkShares is largest circulating local currency in the world, with two million Berkshares issued to date. Bills are issued in denominations of 1, 5, 10, 20 and 50. Currently some 350 businesses accept the currency and 5 different banks offer exchange services at 12 locations. BerkShare checking accounts, ATMs and loans are planned.

According to their website, here’s how using BerkShares benefits the local economy:

Everyone benefits from using BerkShares. Consumers benefit from receiving a 10% discount on purchases. Businesses benefit from increased patronage. Local non-profit organizations can also benefit by purchasing BerkShares at the 10% discount rate and selling them at full face value to their supporters.

It will take citizens working in their own communities, region by region, to create the kind of systemic change that will lead to sustainable economic practices—practices that foster ecologically responsible production of goods and a more equitable distribution of wealth.  Local currencies are a tool to bring about such change.  BerkShares are about building community while building the local economy.

More on BerkShares: Local Currency for the Berkshire Region

Though these are just four examples of different ways to local currency programs can operate, the EF Schumacher Society has a listing of local currency programs throughout the world, both currently operating, planned and defunct. There are programs throughout the US, in Canada, Mexico, the UK, and Europe (including one that operates in Switzerland which trades against both the Swiss Franc and the Euro).

They also have plenty of resources for communities wanting to start printing their own money, as well as essays and book excerpts on the philosophy behind doing so and the legal principles involved.

http://www.treehugger.com/files/2009/01/print-your-own-money-build-com...

It is high-time to euthanize the statist quo

From BlacklistedNews 11-11-2010
By James Bovard - BLN Contributing Writer


Pervasive confusion over the nature of government and freedom has opened the gates to perhaps the greatest, most widespread increase in political power in history. If we are to regain and safeguard our liberty, we must reject the tenets of modern political thinking. We must repudiate the moral presumptions and prerogatives that allow some people to vastly expand their power over other people.


The state has been by far the largest recipient of intellectual charity during the past hundred years. The issue of government coercion has been taken off the radar screen of politically correct thought. The more government power has grown, the more unfashionable it becomes to discuss or recognize government abuses — as if it were bad form to count the dead brought about by government interventions. There seems to be a gentleman’s agreement among some contemporary political philosophers to pretend that government is something loftier than it actually is — to practice noblesse oblige and to wear white gloves when discussing the nature of the state.


The great political issue of our time is not liberalism versus conservatism, or capitalism versus socialism, but statism — the belief that government is inherently superior to the citizenry, that progress consists of extending the realm of compulsion, that vesting arbitrary power in government officials will make the people happy — eventually.


What type of entity is the state? Is it a highly efficient, purring engine, like a hovercraft sailing deftly above the lives of ordinary citizens? Or is it a lumbering giant bulldozer that rips open the soil and ends up clear-cutting the lives of people it was created to protect?


The effort to find a political mechanism to force government to serve the people is the modern search for the Holy Grail. No such mechanism has been found, and government power has been relentlessly expanded. Yet, to base political philosophy on the assumption that government is inherently benevolent makes as much sense as basing geography on the assumption that the Earth is flat. Too many political thinkers treat government like some Wizard of Oz, ordaining great things, enunciating high ideals, and symbolizing all that is good in society. However, for political philosophy to have any value, it must begin by pulling back the curtain to bare the nature of the state.
Trusting contemporary governments means dividing humanity into two classes: those who can be trusted with power to run other people’s lives, and those who cannot even be trusted to run their own lives. Modern Leviathans give some people the power to play God with other people’s lives, property, and domestic tranquility. Modern political thinking presumes that restraints are bad for the government but good for the people. The first duty of the citizen is to assume the best of the government, while government officials assume the worst of him.


The history of the rise of the idealistic conception of the state is inevitably also the history of the decline of liberty. We cannot put the state on a pedestal without putting the people under the heel of the politician and bureaucrat. To glorify the state is to glorify coercion — the subjugation of some people to other people’s will and dictates.

Welfare-state freedom is based on the illusion that government can financially strip-mine the citizens’ lives without undermining their ability to stand on their own two feet. Citizens are assured that dependence on government is the same as self-reliance, only better. Today’s citizen is obliged to find his freedom only in the narrow ruts pre-approved by his bureaucratic overlords. In the name of freedom, the citizen is obliged to lower the drawbridges around his own life to any government employee who thinks he knows better.


The Supreme Court declared in a 1988 decision, “Servitude means ‘a condition in which a person lacks liberty especially to determine one’s course of action or way of life.’” Yet, despite the vast increase in the number of government decrees restricting people’s “course of action or way of life,” there is little recognition of the growing servitude of the American people to the federal government. Lives are made up of choices. Insofar as govern- ment nullifies or demolishes the choices that people can make, it effectively confiscates part of their lives.


Modern democracy
Nowadays, “democracy” serves mainly as a sheepskin for Leviathan, as a label to delude people into thinking that government’s big teeth will never bite them. Voting has changed from a process by which the citizen controls the government to a process that consecrates the gov-ernment’s control of the people. Elections have become largely futile exercises to reveal comparative popular contempt for competing professional politicians. The question of who nominally holds the leash has become far more important than whether government is actually leashed.


The ability to push a lever and register a protest once every few years is supposedly all the protection citizens’ liberties need — or deserve. Americans are implicitly taught in government schools that they will be able to control their government, regardless of how large it becomes. But the bigger government grows, the more irrelevant the individual voter becomes. The current theory of democracy is a relic of an era when government was a tiny fraction of its current size. The illusion of majority rule is now the great sanctifier of government abuses — and perhaps the single greatest barrier to people’s understanding the nature of government. No amount of patriotic appeals can hide the growing imbalance between the citizen’s power to bind the government and the government’s power to bind the citizen.


Modern democracy is now largely an over-glorified choice of caretakers and cage-keepers. Are citizens still free after they vote to make themselves wards of the state? Supposedly, as long as citizens are permitted to push the first domino, they are still self-governing — regardless of how many other government dominos subsequently fall on their heads. Democracy is further corrupted by a demagogy that portrays a right to vote as a license to steal.
Faith in the redemptive powers of government permeates contemporary political thinking. “Fairness” has become a bewitching word to lull people to sleep before politicians attach the lat-est “shackle of the month.” The more activities government crim-inalizes, the fairer society supposedly becomes. The tighter the regulatory thumbscrews are twisted, the higher citizens’ souls presumably rise.


Private citizens have become the moral underclass in the modern state. The values of politicians and bureaucrats are presumably so inherently superior that they have a right to coercively impose them on others, the same way that imperialists in the 1800s forcibly “saved” the backward natives in Africa and Asia. But now, instead of the “white man’s burden,” we have the “bureaucrat’s burden” — consisting of endless Federal Register notices, entrapment schemes, and abusive prosecutions. In practice, justice has become whatever serves the political or bureaucratic needs of the government. Every new definition of fairness becomes another trump card that politicians and bureaucrats play against private citizens. Public- policy disputes routinely degenerate into morality plays in which the government is almost always the “good guy.”


In the 19th century, socialists openly ridiculed the notion of a night-watchman state — a government limited to protecting the rights and safety of citizens. The night-watchman state has long since been junk-heaped, replaced by governments zealous to re-engineer society, control the econ-omy, and save persons from themselves. Unfortunately, rather than a triumph of idealism, we now have highway-robber states — gov-ernments in which no asset, no contract, no domain is safe from the fleeting whim of a bevy of politicians. Public policy today is a vast maze of payoffs and kickbacks, tangling everything that the state touches in political intrigue and bureaucratic dependence. Modern societies are increasingly dominated by political money laundering — by politicians commandeering scores of billions of dollars from one group to foist on another group, from one generation to another, or from the general populace to specific occupational groups (such as farmers). And when government defaults on its promises to the citizenry, it is not robbery, but merely sovereign immunity.


Paternalism and happiness
It was a common saying before the Civil War: “That government is best which governs least.” Nowadays, the rule appears to be “that government is best that penalizes most.” Salvation through increased state power means maximizing the number of swords of Damocles hanging over each citizen’s head — maximizing the number of individual lives that can be destroyed by political edicts and the number of people who can be locked away for possessing prohibited substances — people whose homes and cars and wallets can be seized without proof of wrongdoing, whose children can be taken away from them, who can be barred from using their own land, and whom the government devises pretexts to forcibly disarm.


The welfare state offers an “under my thumb” recipe for happiness. Paternalism presumes that the path to the citizen’s happiness consists in increasing the number of government restrictions imposed on him and the number of government employees above him. The more power government acquires, the more a symbol of the superiority of some people over others the state becomes. Every expansion of government budgets and statute books is another step towards the nationalization of the pursuit of happiness. While earlier types of government coerced people to keep them in their place, the welfare state uses coercion to make them happy — in their place. But the success of the welfare state cannot be measured by the number of citizens who rattle their tin cups when politicians pass by.


The issue is not whether government should or can be abolished; instead, the issue is whether the use of force should be minimized and limited. In the American colonies from the early 1700s onwards, fierce disputes raged between prerogative parties and anti-prerogative parties — between those that favored an expansive interpretation of the king of England’s power and those that sought to restrain or roll back the monarch’s power over colonists. In the future, the grand division in American politics will be between those who champion increased government power and those who demand that government power be slashed.


The notion that governments are inherently entitled to obedience is the most costly entitle-ment program of them all. Seventeenth-century English philosopher John Locke, who inspired the Founding Fathers, declared, “Tyranny is the exercise of Power beyond Right.” Locke recognized that governments that oppress citizens destroy their own legitimacy. Yet there now seems to be an irrefutable presumption of legitimacy for any exercise of government power not involving genocide or racial discrimination.


Modern political philosophy largely consists of glorifying poorly functioning political machinery — the threats, bribes, and legislative cattle prods by which some people are made to submit to other people. It is a delusion to think of the state as something loftier than all the edicts, penalties, prison sentences, and taxes that it imposes.


Have we transferred to government the rights that we previously condemned in slaveown-ers? If not, then we must radically reduce the power that some people have captured over everyone else.

Latests on the psycho-killers who still have the bad taste to go around lecturing the world on human rights

Special Prosecutor Declines to File Criminal Charges Over Destruction of CIA Torture Tapes
Jason Leopold

November 10, 2010 - Nearly three years after he was appointed to investigate the destruction of at least 92 interrogation videotapes, a dozen of which showed two high-value detainees being subjected to waterboarding and various other torture techniques by CIA interrogators, Special Prosecutor John Durham has determined that he does not have enough evidence to secure an indictment against anyone responsible for the purge. Department of Justice (DOJ) spokesman Matthew Miller said in a statement Tuesday that Durham, a US Attorney from Connecticut, has "concluded that he will not pursue criminal charges for the destruction of interrogation videotapes."... Afghan Air War Peaks With 1,000 Strikes in October By Noah Shachtman November 10, 2010 - The U.S. and its allies have unleashed a massive air campaign in Afghanistan, launching missiles and bombs from the sky at a rate rarely seen since the war’s earliest days. In October alone, NATO planes fired their weapons on 1,000 separate missions, U.S. Air Force statistics provided to Danger Room show. Since Gen. David Petraeus took command of the war effort in late June, coalition aircraft have flown 2,600 attack sorties. That’s 50% more than they did during the same period in 2009. Not surprisingly, civilian casualties are on the rise, as well... Five New UK Screenings of "Outside the Law: Stories from Guantánamo" - in Bangor, Oxford, London and Sheffield November 11, 2010 - ...One year ago, when Polly Nash and I launched our documentary film, "Outside the Law: Stories from Guantánamo," it still seemed just about conceivable that, by now, it would be something of a historical document. However, in January, President Obama failed to keep his promise to close Guantánamo within a year, and, ten months on, with no new deadline set, there is no sign of when, if ever, the prison will close, leaving the 174 remaining prisoners in a distressing limbo as the ninth anniversary of the prison's opening approaches. With Republicans once more in charge of the House of Representatives, the task of closing Guantánamo has become much more difficult, and it is a bitter disappointment that Obama and his party lacked the courage or the conviction to act more decisively on Guantánamo when they had the chance. Biden: US Support for Israel Must Continue ‘Forever’ WHILE YOU LOSE YOUR HOMES, THE US GOVERNMENT SPENDS YOUR TAXES TO ARM ISRAEL Afghan War To Continue Through 2014, White House America’s Devolution Into Dictatorship Backlash grows over TSA's 'naked strip searches' TSA porno-scanners: what they’re really looking for Must Study and Understand: How Feds Target International Connections Mike E Kasama, November 11, 2010  Each of us needs to understand the implications and dangers of these developments. First that we need to expose and help defeat attempts to criminalize internationalism. Second, while important solidarity work remains legal and urgent — but such efforts should not be "coordinated with" international groups. I.e.Specific international connections and coordination are being made legally "radioactive" and internationalist work within needs to be carefully independent (in planning, conception and finances) from people outside the country — no casual communications, no back and forth flow of suggestions, no appearance of mutual consultation on plans, no exchange of seemingly innocent help (skills, money, etc.) Any international communications by solidarity participants should be limited and careful scrutinized with these legal constraints in mind. Anyone who is approached by someone claiming to be from a proscribed group who claims to have suggestions (however innocent) should report the incident and not pursue the conversation — entrapment is a real tactic of sinister forces. Thanks to  Ka Frank for sending this. "…last June in Holder v. the Humanitarian Law Project [the Supreme Court] decided that non-violent First Amendment speech and advocacy 'coordinated with’ or 'under the direction of’ a foreign group listed by the Secretary of State as 'terrorist’ was a crime." "In 1996, Congress made it a crime then punishable by 10 years, later increased to 15 years, to anyone in the U.S. who provides "material support or resources to a foreign  terrorist organization or attempts or conspires to do so."  The present statute defines "material support or resources" as: 'any property, tangible or intangible, or service, including currency or monetary instruments or financial services, lodging training, expert advice or assistance, safe houses, false documentation or identification, communications equipment, facilities, weapons, lethal substances, explosives, personnel and transportation except medicine or religious materials.’" U.S. Justice Department Prepares for the Ominous Expansion of Law Prohibiting "Material Support" for Terrorism. By Michael Deutsch, People’s Law Office Chicago, Nov., 2010 — In late September the FBI carried out a series of raids of homes and anti-war offices of public activists in Minneapolis and Chicago.  Following the raids the Obama Justice Department subpoenaed 14 activists to a grand jury in Chicago and also subpoenaed the files of several anti-war and community organizations.  In carrying out these repressive actions, the Justice department was taking its lead from the Supreme Court’s 6-3 opinion last June in Holder v. the Humanitarian Law Project which decided that non-violent First Amendment speech and advocacy "coordinated with" or "under the direction of" a foreign group listed by the Secretary of State as "terrorist" was a crime. The search warrants and grand jury subpoenas make it quite clear that the federal prosecutors are intent on accusing public non-violent political organizers, many affiliated with Freedom Road Socialist Organization (FRSO), of providing "material support," through their public advocacy, for the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) and the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC).  The Secretary of State has determined that both the PFLP and the FARC  "threaten US national security, foreign policy or economic interests," a finding not reviewable by the Courts, and listed both groups as foreign terrorist organizations (FTO). In 1996, Congress made it a crime then punishable by 10 years, later increased to 15 years, to anyone in the U.S. who provides "material support or resources to a foreign  terrorist organization or attempts or conspires to do so."  The present statute defines "material support or resources" as: any property, tangible or intangible, or service, including currency or monetary instruments or financial services, lodging training, expert advice or assistance, safe houses, false documentation or identification, communications equipment, facilities, weapons, lethal substances, explosives, personnel and transportation except medicine or religious materials. In the Humanitarian Law Project case, human rights workers wanted to teach members of the Kurdistan PKK, which seeks an independent Kurdish state, and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), which sought an independent state in Sri Lanka, how to use humanitarian and international law to peacefully resolve disputes, and to obtain relief from the United Nations and other international bodies for human rights abuses by the governments of Turkey and Sri Lanka. Both organizations were designated as FTOs by the Secretary of State in a closed hearing, in which the evidence is heard secretly. Despite the non-violent, peacemaking goal of this speech and training, the majority of the Supreme Court nonetheless interpreted the law to make such conduct a crime.  Finding a whole new exception to the First Amendment, the Court decided that any support, even if it involves non-violent efforts towards peace, is illegal under the law since it "frees up other resources within the organization that may be put to violent ends," and also helps lend "legitimacy" to foreign terrorist groups.  Writing for the majority, Chief Justice Roberts, despite the lack of any evidence, further opined that the  FTO, could use the human rights law to "intimidate, harass or destruct" its  adversaries, and that even peace talks themselves could be used as a cover to re-arm for further attacks. Thus, the Court’s opinion criminalizes efforts by independent groups to work for peace if they in anyway cooperate or coordinate with designated FTOs. The Court distinguishes what it refers to "independent advocacy" which it finds is not prohibited by the statute, from "advocacy performed in coordination with, or at the direction of, a foreign terrorist organization, which is for the first time found to be a crime under the statute. The exact line as to where independent advocacy becomes impermissible coordination is left open and vague. Seizing on this over broad definition of "material support," the U.S. government is now moving on political groups and activists who are clearly exercising fundamental First Amendment rights in vocally opposing the government’s branding of foreign liberation movements as terrorist and support their struggles against U.S. backed repressive regimes and illegal occupations. Under the new definition of "material support," the efforts of President Jimmy Carter to monitor the elections in Lebanon and coordinate with the political parties there including the designated FTO, Hezbollah, could well be prosecuted as a crime.  Similarly, the publication of op-ed articles by FTO spokesmen from Hamas or other designated groups by the New York Timesor Washington Post, or the filing by human rights attorneys of amicus briefs arguing against a group’s terrorist designation or the statute itself could also now be prosecuted.  Of course, the first targets of this draconian expansion of the material support law will not be a former president or the establishment media, but members of a Marxist organization and vocal opponents of the governments of Israel and Colombia and the U.S. policies supporting these repressive governments. President Obama in his foreword to the recent autobiography of Nelson Mandela, Conversations with Myself, wrote that "Mandela’s sacrifice was so great that it called upon people everywhere to do what they could on behalf of human progress. [and] . . . [t]he first time I became politically active was during my college years, when I joined a campaign on behalf of divestment, and the effort to end apartheid in South Africa."   At the time of Mr. Obama’s First Amendment advocacy, Mr. Mandela and his organization the African National Congress (ANC) were denounced as terrorist by the U.S. government. The "material support" law, if in effect back then, would have opened Mr. Obama up to potential criminal prosecution.  It is ironic, and the height of hypocrisy that this same man who speaks with such reverence for Mr. Mandela and recalls his own support for the struggle against apartheid, now allows the Justice Department under his command to criminalize similar First Amendment advocacy against Israeli apartheid and repressive foreign governments. To provide financial support for the legal expenses those under attack contact: tax deductible checks can be sent to the National Lawyers Guild Foundation. c/o National Lawyers Guild, 132 Nassau St. Room 922, New York, N.Y. 10038

Much better than gold

See below how gold priced in silver is going down fast (that is: silver price is growing much, much faster than gold price). For reference, consider that the long-term historical average price ratio between gold and silver has been 1:15 (which is the proportion of gold/silver found in the earth) and now is still at 1:51, so silver price has still a lot of catch-up to do, even if gold price will stay steady, not to mention the silver world reserves much smaller than gold and its many industrial uses and demand.


My humble unqualified advice: buy physical silver with both of your hands with a sense of panic. I did it already (profiting handsomely), an I even sold some gold to buy silver recently (profiting too).
  
From The Big Picture:

_________-


Related:
Asian Buyers Have Silver Shorts Checkmated

A huge buying opportunity in silver could be coming

From Trader's Narrative:
... [Y]esterday the CME raised the margin requirements for silver from $5,000 to $6,500. While this is being credited with causing the reversal, I don't think it completely explains what happened. It definitely contributed to it but often we grasp at news or reasons for the market's moves when all you need to do is watch the price action itself.

Anyone paying even cursory attention would know the precious metal was already extremely overstretched to the upside and had been sporting extreme bullish sentiment for some time. I outlined just how extreme in late September when silver reached a new 30-year (nominal) high accompanied by a 95% bullish DSI.

Silver managed to shrugged that off and went on a parabolic rise peeking above $29. Personally, I was expecting it to reach the nice, round number $30 before reversing. But it doesn't look like it is going to now.

There is currently a rare technical occurrence in silver...

Read full article...

Doug Casey on Gold's New High, the Fed, and the Greater Depression
More On The Case Of Silver
When the Price of Silver Doubles in a Month

Grave Warnings to Precious Metal Investors

CrossTalk on G20: Bloated G8?

Very interesting on the big issues of the G20. Pepe Escobar is among the guests.

_______-

Related:
G-20 on collision course

One G20 Topic Out the Window

Pessimism pervades as G20 leaders show sharp split

President Obama can't close deals at G-20 summit

Posted: 11/11/2010 06:30:48

SEOUL - President Barack Obama failed to reach agreement on two international deals to help spur the U.S. economy, unexpected setbacks on an Asia trip that was supposed to emphasize his stature abroad and change the subject from last week’s electoral drubbin. G20 Planning On Doing Nothing This Weekend Besides Reaffirming Previous Statements The G20 are gearing up for their big meeting in Seoul, South Korea this weekend that was meant to solve the global "currency war" problem. It's more likely attendants will be buying nicknaks and drinking soju. From the looks of it, all the G20 leaders have been able to agree on is that they rather like where they stood a month ago, and see no reason to change their statements. That means no agreements on where the yuan will move, on competitive devaluations, or on targets for trade surpluses or deficits, according to the Wall Street Journal [http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704804504575606503406947416.html]. The result will be a pact where countries agree to move positively on these things, but with no targets. They'll likely all say no to protectionism, then go home and do what they want. Join the conversation about this story »

Eurointelligence Daily Briefing - 11 November 2010: Ireland going down

Ireland going down 

• Irish 10 year yields hit 8.7%, and the spread with German bonds is now 6.5%;
• LCH Clearnet imposes larger margin requirements for Irish trades;
• the Greek adjustment programme is collapsing, as the projected 2010 deficit is now put at 9.3%, as opposed to a projected 7.8%;
• Papademos insists on no restructuring;
• an increasing number of market participants now believe that Greece and Ireland will eventually default, as they are beginning to digest the implications of the German crisis resolution proposals;
• Portuguese yields also rise, while Spanish and Belgian yields hardly moved;
• Manuel Gonzales Paramo of the ECB picked a really great moment to explain that the ECB may soon raise interest rates;
• Bruegel has proposed its version of a European Crisis Resolution Mechanism;
• Mervyn King, meanwhile, says failure to agree on an agenda on imbalance will produce another crisis within twelve months.

______

This is the Daily Briefing from www.eurointelligence.com.