I see many of your points. But in fact, if I'm the first person who you read that Banking originated with Babylon priesthood, then you might not be reading enough .

http://www.historyworld.net/wrldhis/PlainTextHistories.asp?historyid=ac19

The reason that money is failing and America is going broke is precisely that... it over exported money in form of loans (to china and middle east) and thus enjoyed a rich domestic economy with strong military as an expensive, yet run by borrowed money asset.

So that money that you are claiming US "bought" the middle east, was actually worthless to begin with (beginning in 1971, following the Breton Woods), just like any make believe currency that is backed up by nothing but the ability of the government to pay back. Since then, ALL of the money supply of the United States existed in form of DEBT.

Money comes into existence when the loans are made, and money is destroyed when the loans are payed back. So we have banks which prosper enormously by means of fractional reserve banking, and people who live like (and at times better) than royalty... until they can't afford to pay interest. In which case they learn from the banks to take out more loans to pay out the old ones with no hopes of paying back the debt.

As a result the national monetary supply is expanding exponentially, rendering the currency worthless because the products base and demand were not growing to catch up with exceeding money supply.

Not only I see such system as IMMORAL, because it robs its own citizens, and people of the world of their savings via inflation... But it also let US enjoy that "prosperity" over a very short period of time. I also allows a small class of people who manipulate money to grow emmencely rich by making, keeping track, and calling on loans.

You are absolutely correct about US running out of assets to put as collateral, as it already collateralized the labor of its citizens, and most of the national property, which are now not enough to even cover the interest payments on the enormous debt.

Neverless, those "assets" that US gave to the oil producing countries of Middle East, of course came with Oil being sold in dollars, which was one of the reasons that dollar took off on the international markets... and allowed US enjoy the life of "prosperity" that it enjoyed for a while. As far as I see it, you have those Islamists to thank for buying back some of that bad debt and keeping the dollar afloat for that long. Without them trading in dollars, the international market would dump the dollar much faster.

What are we accomplishing here? It seems we are just pushing Bolivia to join our enemies. And for what? Because he won't do things our way? (Look up John Perkins on YouTube.)

"US Suspends Trade Benefits to Bolivia

"In news from Latin America, the Bush administration has suspended longtime trade benefits to Bolivia as tension continues to rise between the two countries. Washington cited the failure of President Evo Morales’s administration to cooperate in the so-called war on drugs as the main motivation for the move. Bolivia, Ecuador, Peru and Colombia have received duty-free status for most of their goods under a program dating to 1991 to help fight the illegal drug trade. But now Bolivia will have to pay more to get exports like textiles into the United States. Morales said Bolivia would immediately start looking for new outlets for exports.

"Evo Morales: “I’ve asked the economic team and foreign ministry to urgently open markets with China, Iran and Libya. It’s just a question of producing more and starting negotiations.”

[Democracy Now!]

If image is worth a thousand words...

>>I see many of your points. But in fact, if I'm the first person who you read that Banking originated with Babylon priesthood, then you might not be reading enough .<<

Indeed. I should read more; however, you probably missed my “you are practically the only person...”. That noted, I’ve previously posted to that fact

on this forum.

Makes one wonder about the Vatican-is-Babylon bruit...

>>So that money that you are claiming US "bought" the middle east,<<

I don’t recall saying that the US “bought” the Middle East.

>>...was actually worthless to begin with (beginning in 1971, following the Breton Woods), just like any make believe currency that is backed up by nothing but the ability of the government to pay back.<<

I remember France converting dollar$ for gold – forcing Nixon to close the gold window. And I remember the dollar becoming the reserve currency of so much of the world.

>>ALL of the money supply of the United States existed in form of DEBT.<<

Largely, I agree. I would tend to emphasize the fractional aspect of debt and its velocity.

I think the fact that China remained the largest credit/debt-free population (one-sixth of global population) that American and International Banks drew her into its sphere – beginning with the Nixon Administration – and realized by the tremendous influx of Western Capital. Every dollar extended as credit went on the Bank’s digital tapes as a dollar asset enabling them to lend upwards of 90% value of that same dollar with a velocity of upwards of thirteen times a year. Good for the banks and good for those desiring to see our factories shipped overseas in return for goods better manufactured here.

Preceding, David Rockefeller made an exploratory visit to China. Returning to America, he addressed our Chambers of Commerce, manufacturers, financial groups, etc – with guarantees of a stable work force – which translated to: no strikes, no OSHA, no health benefits, no sick leave pay, no..., etc. Capitalism at its finest. Perhaps, that is why

wherever communism was established – the heavy hand of capitalism was hidden, lending that not-so-friendly push...

For example: Chiang Kai-shek had encircled Mao and was about to deliver the coup de grâce when Marshall (yes, that same Marshall of the Marshall plan of European fame), well, to paraphrase him,

“I cut that b&%#*&d off at the knees.” He did so by cutting off all ordinance and materiel – no fuel, no ammunition, no artillery shells, etc. Marshall saved Mao’s sorry fundament – ipso..., Communist China.

(Communism, in fact, is capitalism arrived; that is, the establishment of monopoly)

>>Not only I see such system as IMMORAL, because it robs its own citizens, and people of the world of their savings via inflation... But it also let US enjoy that "prosperity" over a very short period of time. I also allows a small class of people who manipulate money to grow emmencely rich by making, keeping track, and calling on loans.<<

I think one perusing Writ finds that Gd, likewise, finds such a system immoral. He made it a capital offense – and ‘Babylon’ made it a cup of abominations and filthiness...

>>Neverless, those "assets" that US gave to the oil producing countries of Middle East, of course came with Oil being sold in dollars,<<

Subsequently, yes; however, at the points of nationalization – there were no quids pro quo.

>>As far as I see it, you have those Islamists to thank for buying back some of that bad debt and keeping the dollar afloat for that long.<<

That “bad debt” is only ‘bad’ as long as it cannot be turned into hard assets and if held through its depreciating cycle too long – which is what those ‘sovereign wealth funds’ are all about.

It’s kinda like that children’s game where the ‘bad card’ keeps getting passed around. The trick is to not be the last one caught holding it.

>>Without them trading in dollars, the international market would dump the dollar much faster.<<

It is rumoured that the dollar may be split into a two-tier system – one ‘in country’ with the other never seeing our borders. Guess which one would first prove utterly worthless?

Addendum: I am somewhat dubious re the extent which the Islamic participants had in the Twin Towers bombing, the Pentagon, and the Penn field. That said, to expand requires another format.