Welcome to the Monday edition of The Morning Roar!Central Banks Investing In Equity MarketsThe stock market is rigged. There, I said it. Central banks are injecting money behind the scenes to keep the stock market bubble from bursting. Before you write me off as a wacky conspiracy nut, take a glance at the evidence behind my claim.Zerohedge discloses how conspiracy turns to fact:

Another conspiracy "theory" becomes conspiracy "fact" as  The FT reports " a cluster of central banking investors has become major players on world equity markets." The report, to be published this week by the  Official Monetary and Financial Institutions Forum (OMFIF), confirms  $29.1tn in market investments, held by 400 public sector institutions in 162 countries, which "could potentially contribute to overheated asset prices." China’s State Administration of Foreign Exchange has become “the world’s largest public sector holder of equities”, according to officials, and we suspect the Fed is close behind (courtesy of more levered positions at Citadel), as the world's banks try to diversify themselves and " counters the monopoly power of the dollar."  Which leaves us wondering where are the central bank 13Fs?While most have assumed that this is likely, the recent exuberance in stocks has largely been laid at the foot of another irrational un-economic actor - the corporate buyback machine. However,  as The FT reports, what we have speculated as fact for many years now (given the  death cross of irrationality, plunging volumes, lack of engagement, and of course dwindling credibility of central planners)... is now fact...

That’s twenty nine trillion (with a T.)  If the central banks keep up with policies like these, soon we’ll be counting their monopoly money in quadrillions.The central banks’ latest methods to prop up a failing global economy stink of desperation. Anyone with even a remote understanding of basic economics must understand the impending doom that awaits the global economy.The global equity markets are a giant Ponzi scheme. But there is a twist that makes this Ponzi scheme different from prior schemes. It doesn’t feature nefarious characters tricking gullible investors into pouring their hard-earned money into the scheme. Instead, the central banks serve multiple roles by both creating  and investing the money, and at the end of the day they’ll be the ones holding the bag when the whole thing comes crashing down. The central banks are playing the roles of both the nefarious character and the gullible investors in the Ponzi scheme!Unfortunately, when the central bankers go down, they’ll take the entire global fiat-based economy down with them. Do yourself a favor and buy some gold and silver while you still can.Rand Paul Not Opposed To Airstrikes In IraqRand Paul continues to disappoint libertarians.Politico reports on an interview with the Des Moines Register ahead of the Iowa GOP convention. Rand Paul reinforced that he remained opposed to sending U.S. troops back into Iraq on the ground, but he left arming the Iraqis and possible air strikes in the country on the table.

“I think we aided the Iraqi government for a long time, I’m not opposed to continuing to help them with arms,” said Paul, a libertarian-leaning lawmaker.“I would not rule out air strikes. But I would say, after 10 years, it is appalling to me that they are stripping their uniforms off and running. And it concerns me that we would have to do their fighting for them because they won’t fight for their own country, their own cities.”

If you were searching for a reminder as to why Rand Paul’s policies affect the future of the liberty movement, then look no further than how Politico describes the first term Senator from Kentucky. Politico calls Paul a libertarian-leaning lawmaker. It doesn’t matter if Rand calls himself a “constitutional conservative”; the mainstream media links him to libertarianism. As Rand’s policy positions become less and less in line with libertarian principles it is crucial to highlight Rand’s stated positions that do no align with liberty.The libertarian position on Iraq should be to close the embassy and pull out all remaining troops and government employees. It truly is that simple. To paraphrase Ron Paul, "we marched in, we can march out."The destruction that has been left in the wake of the U.S. occupation should act as a further deterrent to military action in Iraq, or anywhere else for that matter. Every dollar spent on the Iraq fiasco was misallocated and thus not productively spent as the market would determine. Furthermore, comparing the semantics of sending in ground troops or calling in air strikes is a foolish endeavor. Both are forms of aggression.Father’s Day was yesterday and it’s possible that Rand is in need of a refresher course in blowback from Ron Paul. Luckily, he can get a quick education by re-watching his father’s famous exchange with Rudy Giuliani during a debate in the run up to the 2008 Republican Presidential Primaries.Who will be the next Ron Paul speaking truth to power during a Presidential debate? It certainly doesn’t seem like it will be Rand.Iran Sends Troops To Help Iraqi ArmyIranian President Hassan Rouhani said on Saturday that Iran would assist with restoring security to Iraq if Washington confronted “terrorist groups in Iraq and elsewhere.” Then it was reported by Iraqi officials that Iranian forces had crossed the border.The Guardian reports:

The Iranian president, Hassan Rouhani, on Saturday  signalled an alignment of interests “if we see that the United States takes action against terrorist groups in Iraq”.On Saturday, Iraqi officials told the Guardian Iran had  sent 2,000 advance troops across the border.  General Qassem Suleimani, the commander of Iran's Qods Force, is  coordinating the defence of Baghdad. The US suspects the Qods Force of attacks on US troops during the Iraq war.Let’s get the facts of the situation straight first. Iraq devolves into chaos. Iran offers to help restore stability if the U.S. agrees to fight terrorists in Iraq and elsewhere. Iranian troops reported to be on the ground in Iraq.

Did the U.S. government just make a deal with Iran to escalate the “war on terror” that is contingent upon Iranian troops assisting with restoring order in Iraq?The White House has been silent on the issue, but it certainly appears that some sort of deal has been struck. If Obama did make a deal with Iran, then it would be tantamount to sending in ground troops or dialing up strategic air strikes on suspected ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and Syria) targets in Iraq. All three types of intervention are acts of aggression that will surely result in the infringement of the rights of individuals halfway across the globe.Read The Morning Roar every weekday Monday-Friday!The Lions of Liberty are on Twitter, Facebook & Google+Receive access to ALL of our EXCLUSIVE bonus audio content – including “Conspiracy Corner”, “Degenerate Gamblers” and the “League of Liberty Podcast” by joining the Lions of Liberty Pride and supporting us on Patreon!