If There's Something Weird and it Don't Look Good, Who ya gonna Call? GHOSTBUSTERS!

• Print
• E-Mail

Yesterday, we relayed Mike's take on the psychology of conspiracy theories. It was as insightful as possible. We encourage you to revisit the article. Herewith, his latest post on the Great Non-Existent Gold and Silver Conspiracy. Long read, yes. Worth the read? Priceless. You have the long weekend to digest it. Then, send a missive to your favorite conspiracy advocate. Here goes Mike (please note that these are his observations and opinions on matters) :

" Gold and silver prices have crashed. Ted Butler, Rob Kirby, James Conrad and others are all blaming manipulation. Let's take a look at those manipulation theories starting with Ted Butler. Here are a few excerpts from Ted Butler's Lessons of a Lifetime

.

"The drastic sell-off in silver (and gold) is further proof of an ongoing manipulation to the downside."

My comment: That is a rather interesting statement. Gold and silver did not act as expected so somehow that constitutes proof in and of itself of an ongoing manipulation. However, Butler offers more proof as follows.

"The proof that this sell-off was criminal lies in public data provided in the Commitment of Traders Report (COT) and a basic understanding of how the futures market works. This has been the most extreme sell-off in the recent history of silver and gold. We are farther below the moving averages than at any point since I have been writing about silver. Price movements this severe are likely to be intentional and not accidental."

My Comment: Many stocks are far from moving averages. Nearly the entire financial sector is far from moving averages for example. Furthermore gold and silver have often been far above their moving averages, and not that long ago either. Is it only manipulation when gold and silver are below and not above their moving averages?

"Every criminal act must have a motive and an opportunity to commit the crime. By the simple process of elimination, those responsible for this crime are the concentrated commercial shorts on the COMEX. No one else fits the profile. They had the means (through their dominant and monopolistic position), the profit motive and the skill to cause the sell-off.

How is it possible that the commercials could buy back short positions on thousands of contracts at times of steep sell-offs, without triggering a rise in price? There is only one possible and plausible explanation - through discipline and collusion."