Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Gold Price Monitor -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: long-gone who wrote (83897)	3/29/2002 5:01:06 AM
From: Richnorth	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 116908

I agree 100% with you! Even though GATA "lost" the case, it is pretty obvious to many people that there was indeed manipulation. GATA lost not because there really was no manipulation but because Greenspan et al, being representatives of the government, simply happen to be "immune" before the law. And the more appropriate plaintiffs --- the mining companies --- did not sue because they have been compromised by the central banks which are their lifeline for funds. No matter how anti-GATA folks exult over GATA's "defeat", there is no gainsaying that GATA has actually "won" in that the case has drawn humongous attention to the manipulation of gold. To be sure, there are lots of folks who will now agree with what the English novelist Charles Dickens wrote about a century ago, "The law is an ass!", even though that statement was not made in relation to gold. From the way things have been going on in the markets, the humongous debt of the US, scandals and whatnot, gold will gradually reassert itself. And then in hindsight, it may be realized that the GATA suit was quite unnecessary to begin with.