Technical analyst Clive Maund today takes a crack at those who complain about the rigging of the monetary metals markets.
In commentary headlined "Controlled Demolition of the Markets -- Dollar, Next Treasuries, Then Stocks -- Gold, Silver, and PM Stocks to Soar" --
https://www.clivemaund.com/article.php?id=4517
-- Maund asserts: "The extensive talk about manipulation suppressing prices of gold and silver is largely 'sour grapes' by those who were too slow-witted to 'get with the plot' and jump on the bandwagons that were rolling elsewhere, in biotech, in bitcoin, in the FANGs, in the broad market itself, etc."
Of course GATA hasn't been the only one to complain about manipulation of the monetary metals markets. More and more people are complaining about it every day. But GATA
has been the only one to complain about and document this manipulation since January 1999, nearly 20 years, through uptrends and downtrends alike for the monetary metals, and giving trading advice and making money have not been the organization's objectives.
Rather GATA was founded, has been maintained, and has been formally recognized by the U.S. Internal Revenue Service as a civil rights and educational organization.
So those who would criticize GATA are obliged to examine what it does, not to attribute to the organization what they themselves try to do.
Disparaging complaints of gold and silver market manipulation as "largely 'sour grapes,'" Maund suggests that there is nothing to them. Yet he does not dispute even one bit of the extensive documentation compiled by GATA here:
http://www.gata.org/taxonomy/term/21
Nor does Maund try to answer the crucial questions GATA long has put to those who sneer at its work without ever really confronting it:
1) Are governments and central banks active in the monetary metals markets or not?
2) Are the documents compiled by GATA from government archives and other official sources asserting such activity genuine or forgeries?
3) If governments and central banks are active in the monetary metals markets, is it just for fun or is it for policy purposes?
4) If such activity by governments and central banks is for policy purposes, do those purposes involve the traditional objectives of defeating an independent world currency that competes with government currencies and interferes with government control of interest rates and, indeed, interferes with control of the entire economy and society itself?
Those questions are fairly put regardless of how pleased or disappointed anyone is by how much money he has made. They are not fairly ignored just to duck a challenge to the technical analysis by which Maund makes a living, as much as all investors in the monetary metals may hope that it's right this time.
