Telegraph Gobsmacked Why The BBC Would Dare Interview Someone Without Government Approval

Enthusiast trader / public speaker Alessio Rastani made headlines the other day when he appeared on the BBC to discuss the present state of the financial markets.

In the interview, he stated that  “Governments don’t rule the world, Goldman Sachs rules the world [and] Goldman Sachs does not care about the rescue package.”  As well as making the statement that a lot of money can be made during depressions if one knows how to trade correctly.

Obviously all true statements, but ones that the elite would rather not be spoke publicly on national television.

The video presently has nearly a half million hits on YouTube and was picked up by the financial blogosphere.

In response to the video, the mainstream press has had a virtual meltdown, even going so far as to conduct background investigations into Rastani trying to find something to discredit him with.

This Telegraph article openly states:

How a man who has never been authorised by the Financial Services Authority and has no discernible history working for a City institution ended up being interviewed by the BBC remains a mystery.

As if the only people qualified to speak on the economy are those who are “authorized” by some State authority.  Of course, if one is granted permission by the State to engage in trade, it stands to reason that one can be “unlicensed” rather quickly if one were to speak out against the State’s actions.  Thus, it would seem to me that anyone who is “authorized” by the State is going to be inherently biased.

It really boggles my mind why the mainstream press is so outraged over some apparent no-body’s opinion.  If he really is a no-body, then why should it matter what he says?  Could it be because what he said is the naked unvarnished truth?