Monday, February 29, 2016
Via Business Insider: A lot more money is leaving China than it should be. According to Deutsche Bank analysts led by Zhiwei Zhang, about $328 billion left China in secret between August 2015 and January this year. This is a huge number – about 78% of total capital outflows. Despite China running a trade surplus of about $60 billion a month, the country's FX reserves fell $420 billion in the last few months of 2015 as policymakers spent dollars to replace the missing yuan. It's a puzzle, but it's explained by the way Chinese importers overpay for imports to skirt around controls on capital flight.
Sunday, February 28, 2016
Via The Huffington Post: Her opponent, Bernie Sanders, had struggled to pick up enough support among black voters in the primary. Hillary Clinton won the Palmetto State’s Democratic presidential contest on Saturday, defeating Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) thanks to the strong support of African-American voters, who comprised over 60 percent of the primary electorate in the state. With 99 percent of precincts reporting, Clinton led Sanders 73.5 percent to 26 percent. Her huge victory was especially sweet since she had suffered a brutal defeat to then-Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois in the Democratic primary here eight years ago. Multiple networks immediately called the race for Clinton when the polls closed at 7 p.m. "Together, we can break down all the barriers holding our families and our country back", Clinton said at her victory party in Columbia. "We can build ladders of opportunity and empowerment so every single American can live up to his or her God-given potential. Then, and only then, can America live up to it's potential, too". Clinton, who is heading to Tennessee and Arkansas, said her campaign "goes national" Sunday. "We are going to compete for every vote in every state", she said. "We are not taking anything, and we're not taking anyone, for granted". Rep. Jim Clyburn, the highest-ranking Democrat in South Carolina, warmed up the crowd before Clinton spoke by saying that South Carolina's voters "have started Hillary Clinton on the way to the White House".
Saturday, February 27, 2016
Via Israel Hayom: Israeli official says defense establishment weighed possibility of building a new port in Gaza but no decisions have been made • There was no immediate comment from Turkey • "Gaza will explode" if Israeli blockade is not lifted, says Hamas official. Hamas says it is hopeful an emerging deal to restore ties between Israel and Turkey will result in the construction of a port on the coast of the impoverished Gaza Strip. Turkey has stipulated that it will not normalize ties with Israel, ruptured in 2010, unless Israel lifts its naval blockade on Gaza. Hamas, the rulers of the Gaza Strip, hope a seaport might be built if Israel does lift its restrictions. Israel insists, however, that the blockade is necessary to prevent weapons-making and tunnel building materials from entering the Strip, which would serve Hamas and other Gaza terrorist groups in targeting Israeli civilians. Hamas official Mushir al-Masri said Thursday that "Gaza will explode" if the blockade is not lifted. An Israeli official said defense officials have discussed the possibility of a port for Gaza, but no decisions have been made. The official, speaking on condition of anonymity, refused to say what Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's position was. Meanwhile, another senior Hamas official told the pan-Arab newspaper Al-Hayat on Thursday that "Israel is interested in easing the restrictions on the residents of the Strip, for fear of destabilizing the security situation in the south [of Israel]". There was no immediate comment from Turkey.
Thursday, February 25, 2016
Via Before It's News: The mainstream media is finally recognizing what the documentary THE PRINCIPLE has been saying since its release in 2014. When THE PRINCIPLE tried saying it in 2014, many top scientists freaked out, including some of the scientists who were featured in the documentary! Lawrence Krauss, followed by Kate Mulgrew (the documentary’s narrator) both came out against the film in April 2014 before the film was even complete, followed by some of the other participants. As the previous linked story shows the mass media outlets came down hard on THE PRINCIPLE for questioning the Copernican Principle. Now that THE PRINCIPLE is going viral, the scientific establishment and mass media know they can no longer hide the truth, so are joining THE PRINCIPLE (without mentionming it) in starting to spread the news: THE EARTH IS IN A SPECIAL PLACE! And the truth of this goes well beyond this exoplanet census; though this just adds a new dimension to the mounting evidence that mainstream science would prefer not to share, but has lost control of thanks to THE PRINCIPLE and the frank admissions by the scientists captured on camera. Remember, as you see stories spreading about earth in a special place, earth in a central place, etc, that it originated with THE PRINCIPLE. THE PRINCIPLE broke the story, and captured top scientists on film admitting to the current state of cosmology: Lawrence Krauss, Michio Kaku, George FR Ellis, Max Tegmark, Julian Barbour, Bernard Carr, etc. To understand the news in its truest form, be sure to watch THE PRINCIPLE. Establishment science wants to control the dialog, and by releasing news stories such as these, they are attempting to shape the story as they wish. THE PRINCIPLE is the limit of what they will explain at this time, so rather then wait for the story to trickle out, see THE PRINCIPLE now!
Wednesday, February 24, 2016
Via EUobserver: Hungary will hold a referendum on European Union plans for a system of mandatory quotas, prime minister Viktor Orban said on Wednesday (24 February) at a press conference. Voters will be asked to answer the question: "Do you want the EU to be able, without the consent of the Parliament, to prescribe the mandatory settlement of non-Hungarian citizens into Hungary?". Orban did not specify when the plebiscite would be held. The Hungarian prime minister said that nobody has asked the European people so far if they support, accept or reject the migrant quota system, which could fundamentally change their lives. "You cannot make decisions over people's heads, against the will of the European people on issues that seriously affect their lives and that of future generations", he said, arguing it is a question of European democracy. Orban also said the migrant quotas would redraw the ethnic, cultural, and religious map of Hungary and Europe. "The government is bowing to public sentiment. We feel that introducing resettlement quotas for migrants without the backing of the people amounts to an abuse of power", he argued. The maverick PM said he would recommend holding a referendum in other countries as well. Orban added that this is a fundamental and unavoidable question: "can anyone else decide for Hungarians who we Hungarians should or should not live with?" Hungary rejected the decision on mandatory relocation quotas for 120.000 asylum seekers decided by qualified majority in the EU Council last September, where Hungary was overruled. Along with Slovakia, Hungary has challenged the decision at the bloc's top court, the European Court of Justice. Under the council decision, Hungary would have had to take in 1.294 asylum seekers from Italy or Greece, but has refused to do so while the court case is pending. Orban earlier in the week told parliament that the EU plan to expand last year's one-off decision into an automatic mandatory resettlement programmewould top the agenda at the March EU summit. "What's at stake at the European Council meeting in March is whether to have the prime ministers' blessings on a mandatory resettlement quota system, as part of EU law, that would continuously transfer migrants here, that we don't want to allow in", he said in a speech on Tuesday. 'Common sense' Hungary has been criticized for erecting a fence last year along its southern border with Serbia and Croatia to stop the flow of migrants. Orban has also been advocating for months a strengthening of the EU's external borders and creation of a second line of filters for migrants at the Macedonian-Greek border. Earlier in the week, Orban said that at last week's summit the EU had accepted the Hungarian approach, namely stopping migrants as a priority. "In a political sense we are now where the EU should have been a year ago", he said. "The Balkan countries and Austria have taken the path of common sense", Orban told the parliament, referring to the decision of the countries along the Western Balkan migration route to tighten border restrictions.
Tuesday, February 23, 2016
Via Arutz Sheva: Figures from 2014, well before terror wave, reveal capital tops negative migration at 6.740, majority of them young. Due to building freeze? Figures released on Tuesday show a troubling trend, revealing that Israelis - and particularly young Israelis - have been abandoning the capital city of Jerusalem since well before the current terror wave, indicating the housing crisis may be to blame. The Central Bureau of Statistics figures published by Yedioth Aharonoth on Tuesday show that in 2014 Jerusalem led the country in negative migration - a phenomenon in which the number of residents leaving is greater than the number of incoming residents. The 2014 figures are from well before the beginning of the Arab terror wave that began last September, which has largely centered on the capital city in addition to Judea and Samaria. On the other hand they also come before an increased wave of immigration by Jews from France, which while focused on Netanya and other cities has also seen an increase in Jerusalem. Jerusalem in 2014 recorded a staggering loss of 6,740 residents. While 10.351 new residents moved to the city, a full 17.091 residents left. In a troubling caveat, most of those leaving were young, with 6.421 of them aged between 15-29. Only 4.393 of the new incoming residents were in that young age range, while 2.917 of the new residents were aged 30-64. This feature of young Israelis leaving Jerusalem may indicate the housing crisis has been a key factor, as young couples simply cannot afford the steep costs of the capital, where a construction freeze has limited building in neighborhoods over the 1949 Armistice lines and consequently ratcheted up prices. Recently at the municipal level there have been efforts to develop those parts of the city over the "Green Line" and strengthen the Jewish presence, and on Monday signs of a long awaited drop in housing prices were reported by the Bank of Israel, but it remains to be seen if the housing crisis in Jerusalem will be mitigated as construction remains stagnant in much of the city. It is worth noting that regarding population, Jerusalem has a large religious and haredi community, which in general has a higher birth rate meaning the figures on migration do not necessarily mean the Jewish population in the city is dropping. However, the trend could eventually have that effect if the capital continues to fail in attracting young people. Where is there positive migration? While Jerusalem may have led the way in negative migration in 2014, it was far from the only one, as nearly every large city recorded a high number of residents leaving as compared to new incoming residents. In Tel Aviv a loss of 930 residents was recorded, as 21,449 left and 20.519 entered the coastal city. In contrast to Jerusalem, most incoming residents were young, with 9.368 of them aged between 15-29. Most outgoing residents were older, as 11.387 of those leaving were aged 30-64. The northern coastal city of Haifa also saw a negative migration of 1.147 residents, with 7.708 moving to the city even as 8.855 left. Coming in second largest in terms of negative migration after Jerusalem was the southern coastal city of Ashdod, where the heavy rocket fire from Gaza terrorists in Operation Protective Edge during the summer of 2014 may possibly have constituted a factor. The city lost 2.280 residents, as only 3.627 new residents came in and 5.907 moved out. On the flip side, several cities managed to show a positive number in terms of migration, and leading the pack was Petah Tikva with a gain of 3.009 residents. While 6.086 left the city, 9.095 residents moved in. Netanya also showed a positive migration of 684, as 4.985 left as opposed to 5.669 who moved to the coastal city. Ashkelon also showed positive migration with an increase of 1.537 residents, as did Rehovot with 1.475 more residents coming in than those leaving. The report noted that figures from recent years have generally shown negative migration from large cities, and an increase in population recorded in more rural towns.
Monday, February 22, 2016
Via Business Insider: China has almost doubled its weapons exports in the past five years, a military think tank said on Monday, as the world's third-largest weapons exporter pours capital into developing an advanced arms manufacturing industry. In 2011 to 2015, China's arms imports fell 25 percent compared with the previous five year period, signaling a growing confidence in the country's homegrown weaponry despite key areas of weakness, the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) said in a report on global arms transfers. Chinese exports of major arms, which excludes most light weaponry, grew by 88 percent in 2011-2015 compared to the earlier five-year timeframe, SIPRI said. The country still accounted for only 5.9 percent of global arms exports from 2011-2015, well behind the United States and Russia, by far the world's two largest arms exporters. "The Chinese until ten years ago were only able to offer low tech equipment. That has changed", said Siemon Wezeman, Senior Researcher with the SIPRI Arms and Military Expenditure Programme. "The equipment that they produce is much more highly advanced than ten years ago, and attracts interest from some of the bigger markets". China has invested billions developing its homegrown weapons industry to support its growing maritime ambitions in the South China Sea and the Indian Ocean, and also with an eye toward foreign markets for its comparatively low cost technology. Its total military budget in 2015 was 886.9 billion yuan ($141.45 billion), up 10 percent from a year earlier. The U.S. and Russia saw weapons exports grow by 27 percent and 28 percent respectively, while exports of major arms by France and Germany, the fourth and fifth largest weapons exporters, fell over the same period. Most of China's arms sales went to countries in Asia and Oceania, the report found, with Pakistan accounting for 35 percent, followed by Bangladesh and Myanmar. Pakistan is a key Chinese ally, and close military ties between the two countries has sometimes stoked tensions with neighboring India, which is seeking to boost its own homegrown weapons industry. China still needs to import weapons including large transport aircraft, helicopters as well as engines for aircraft, vehicles and ships, according to the report. China, the world's second largest economy, signed deals in 2015 to buy air defense systems and two dozen combat jets from Russia, its largest arms supplier.
Sunday, February 21, 2016
Via Business Insider: Boris Johnson is expected to back a so-called Brexit — British exit from Europe — in his Daily Telegraph column published online at 10 p.m. GMT (5 p.m. ET) on Sunday. The Daily Telegraph is reporting that the Mayor of London and Member of Parliament will reveal his stance on the upcoming referendum on European Union membership in his weekly column for the paper. Johnson is understood to be a euroskeptic and several political journalists are tipping him to back the "leave" campaign, including The Sunday Times political editor Tim Shipman and ITV's Robert Peston.
Saturday, February 20, 2016
Via The Washington Post: Prime Minister David Cameron vowed late Friday to wage a relentless campaign to keep Britain in the European Union after striking a deal with fellow leaders that he said would transform the country’s relationship with the 28-member bloc. The deal, which followed two days of round-the-clock negotiations in Brussels, paves the way for a June referendum in Britain on the country’s long-ambivalent membership. If the country leaves the E.U., it would become the first country to do so, and its departure could trigger a broader unraveling at a time when the union faces greater challenges than at any point in decades. Cameron had demanded far-reaching concessions from his E.U. counterparts, saying that he needed to prove to increasingly populist voters that an institution often seen in Britain as an overbearing infringement on national sovereignty could loosen its grip. But continental leaders, who support keeping Britain in the club, drove a tough bargain, and some bridled at what they regarded as a British attempt to blackmail the bloc into giving the country a special deal. In the end, Cameron received significantly less than what he had initially sought. But he still claimed victory Friday night and immediately pivoted to what is certain to be an emotional and bitterly fought campaign over the country’s future in the body that has defined Europe’s postwar order. “The British people must now decide whether to stay in this reformed European Union or to leave”, he said. “This will be a once-in-a-generation moment to shape the destiny of our country”. Speaking at a Brussels news conference, Cameron then made a forceful case for Britain to stay, saying that the deal he had negotiated addressed the country’s — and his own — misgivings about an institution he has often derided as bureaucratic and dysfunctional. “I do not love Brussels; I love Britain”, he said. But staying in the bloc gives his country “the best of both worlds”, with the opportunity to keep the benefits of E.U. membership while “staying out of the parts of Europe that don’t work for us”. An exit, he said, represents “a leap in the dark”. Campaigners for a British exit — popularly known as Brexit — vehemently disagreed. Nigel Farage, leader of the anti-E.U. U.K. Independence Party, tweeted that the agreement was “a truly pathetic deal. Let’s Leave the EU, control our borders, run our own country and stop handing £55m [$80 million] every day to Brussels”. The Brexit campaigners are not limited to Cameron’s political foes. Some of his top ministers are expected to defy the prime minister and campaign for an exit, including Justice Secretary Michael Gove. London Mayor Boris Johnson, another leading Conservative who has made no secret that he covets Cameron’s job, has also toyed with supporting the “out” campaign — and will probably announce his allegiance on Saturday. Polls once showed a clear majority for “in”. But they have tightened markedly in recent months, and most now show that the contest could go either way. The United States and other major British allies have lined up in favor of Britain staying in the E.U., arguing the country’s influence would be vastly diminished if it leaves. Cameron did not give a date for the referendum Friday night, but it is widely expected to be held on June 23. The prime minister, who will convene a meeting of his cabinet and officially launch the campaign on Saturday morning, promised in last year’s general election that he would give voters an up-or-down choice by the end of 2017. If Cameron does opt for a June referendum, it will be because he and his top advisers believe that the risk of British exit only grows the longer the country goes without a vote. But holding the poll in the summer, when the continent could be inundated by hundreds of thousands of asylum seekers, is a risky bet. E.U. officials expressed hope Friday that they had given Cameron enough to secure an “in” vote. “I deeply believe that the United Kingdom needs Europe, and Europe needs the United Kingdom”, said European Council President Donald Tusk. “To break the link now would be totally against our mutual interest”. But Tusk also acknowledged that Britain has long been a special case, retaining its membership but staying out of the common currency and the free-movement Schengen zone. In a pointed reference to Cameron’s comments, Tusk concluded his remarks late Friday by saying, “I love Britain and I love Brussels”. Special exemption European leaders who gathered this week in Brussels, the E.U. headquarters, were reluctant to give Cameron the wide-ranging concessions he had demanded, and the result was 40 hours of talks that at times were heated. The deal was originally supposed to be sealed Friday over “an English breakfast”, with E.U. leaders gathered around a table piled high with bacon and beans. But as negotiations that began Thursday afternoon hit a series of snags overnight, plans for breakfast were pushed back to an English brunch. Then lunch. Then high tea. The presumably famished leaders finally sat down to a dinner of veal fillets and polenta late Friday night — and agreed on a document that bridged the wider-than-expected gaps. The deal gives Britain a special exemption from Europe’s vow of “ever-closer union”, establishes financial protections for countries that do not use the euro, creates a national veto over E.U. legislation and, most controversially, gives Britain permission to limit benefits paid to immigrants from within the E.U. All four measures would loosen the bonds of continental integration, and each proved a difficult sell to reach the unanimous agreement that the E.U. requires. The French pushed back against attempts to weaken financial regulations. Eastern Europeans called foul on restrictions to benefits. The Germans fretted that abandoning the goal of ever-closer union could scupper the European project. Other variables also came into play. Before signing off on a deal, Greek negotiators reportedly sought a promise that the E.U. would not shut the country’s northern border to migrants and refugees. Such a move, which several E.U. members have advocated, could effectively trap thousands in Greece and prevent them from reaching the countries in northern Europe where they hope to settle. ‘People’s show’ It remains an open question whether Cameron received enough to sway his electorate. Brexit advocates insist that the country is being weighed down by its ties to the continent, particularly by the open borders to European immigration that are required under E.U. treaties. Cameron said Friday that the benefits-related changes will help limit net migration to Britain, which is at an all-time high. Despite vigorous objections from Eastern European leaders, Cameron won the right to trigger “an emergency brake”, with workers having to pay into Britain’s system for four years before they can receive certain benefits. European leaders generally played down the extent of the changes, with European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker describing them as narrowly targeted. Experts agreed that the changes will not fundamentally alter the E.U. But much now depends on how they are received in Britain. European leaders are mindful that a British exit could be the start of a broader disintegration, with Euroskeptic forces in their own countries likely to be emboldened if one of the cornerstones of the E.U. project departs. Even before the negotiations were complete, Cameron was facing defections at home. One of the most senior members of his Cabinet, Gove, will join the “out” campaign, the BBC and other media outlets reported Friday evening. In his news conference late Friday, Cameron described Gove as one of his “oldest and closest friends”, who has wanted to get Britain out of the E.U. for decades. He said he was “disappointed but not surprised” by Gove’s decision. Most of the government’s other top officials were expected to stick with the prime minister and support the “in” campaign. But some leading Conservatives have yet to show their cards, including Johnson, who would give the “out” movement a charismatic leader. Cameron played down the impact that any one politician might have on the outcome, noting that the politics of in versus out cross party lines. “In the end, this isn’t the politicians’ show”, he said. “It is the people’s show”.
Thursday, February 18, 2016
Via Business Insider: It took just seven days for almost everyone in economics to agree that negative interest rates are a failure: They have not achieved their goal of flushing cash out of the banking system to fuel inflation and growth through cheap credit. That lesson will be difficult for conservatives to swallow. It was the right — Thatcher and Reagan, specifically — who convinced us all back in the 1980s that conducting economics via central bank monetary policy and not through fiscal government spending was the correct course. Now, with the negative interest rate experiment in tatters, it will be interesting to see if the Keynesians on the left can use this as a political victory to push for the kind of government-backed fiscal solutions that are beyond the powers of central banks. First, let's examine why negative interest rates have been such a failure, and then we'll turn to the political repercussions for the conservatives who are to blame for them. "Very costly for the national economy". On February 11, seven days ago, the Swedish central bank cut its interest rates more deeply into negative territory, and said it would cut further if need be. "There is still scope to cut the repo rate further", the Riksbank threatened, while simultaneously acknowledging that it ever-cheaper credit was blowing up the housing market in Sweden, and that "such a development could ultimately be very costly for the national economy". "Damn the torpedoes, we're diving deeper!" was the message everyone heard. The minus rates being applied by the ECB, Denmark, Switzerland, Sweden, and Japan have failed to juice growth, or stocks, or inflation (my colleague David Scutt has some charts on that here). Since then, investment bank analysts have been lining up to say that none of it is working: The pack was led by HSBC's James Pomeroy, who declared Sweden's efforts a failure back in early January. Goldman Sachs' Japan team thinks the negative rate there will have the opposite of the intended effect: "We believe the stimulatory impact on capex will be very limited in Japan, and the negative rate could even have a negative impact on spending", they told investors today. Credit Suisse's Helen Haworth and her team says negative rate expenses hurt bank profits, making them loathe to extend credit, thus exacerbating the problem they're intended to fix: "lending growth remains very low, and we think that margin pressure is just one part of the problem", according to CS today. Huw Van Steenis of Morgan Stanley, ex-head of the Minneapolis Federal Reserve Narayana Kocherlakota, and Chris Xiao and Vadim Iaralov at Bank of America Merrill Lynch, have all said, in one form or another, "this ain't working". David Bloom of HSBC said, "Policymakers have been disappointed. The simple fact is that negative rates have not prompted any lasting weakness in currencies". Malcolm Barr and his team at JPMorgan published a paper this week that says the effect of negative rates thus far has been so muted that banks ought to push them as low as -4.5%, an insanely low level. "Calibrations based on Swiss experience suggest that with modest changes to the reserve regime, the policy rate in the Euro area could, in principle, go as low as -4.5%", the JPMorgan paper says. (That last one is a weird policy idea: when it doesn't work, do more of it.) "Not sustainable". It isn't working because even though central banks are charging negative interest to commercial banks for storing cash, those commercial banks are refusing to pass on the charges to their customers. So the customers face no penalty for storing their cash and doing nothing with it. At the same time, banks that face negative interest rate exposure can avoid it by simply shifting their cash into anything that isn't negative — bonds, foreign currencies, whatever. In sum, negative interest isn't transferring through into consumer price inflation. Some of that extra, cheap cash is causing inflation, just the wrong kind of inflation. In Sweden, the Riksbank is obsessed with hitting its 2% inflation target. It seems not to care that the cheap mortgages its ultra-low rates have created are fuelling house-price inflation by 25% a year. All the inflation — except for today's 0.8% blip — is being pushed into houses, not consumer prices, in other words. HSBC's Pomeroy thinks this is "not sustainable". Ultra-low rates of interest have fueled steep property booms in London and Germany, and the Americans are pouring money into risky private tech startups at high valuations, even though some of those startups lose billions of dollars a year. In short, central banks have succeeded in creating inflation. Asset inflation, not consumer price index inflation. It's mostly Milton Friedman's fault. People forget that the reason we're in this pickle — with half a dozen central banks suddenly out of weapons just as China looks like really wobbly — is because of an argument that conservatives won in the 1980s. Prior to the election of Margaret Thatcher in the UK and Ronald Reagan in the US, the economic debate between left and right centred almost entirely on fiscal policy. The left favored government spending and wealth redistribution to make society more fair; the right favoured a reduction in both of those in order to keep government finances both balanced and small. Then Milton Friedman and monetarism came along. This conservative school of thought argued that fiscal spending was much less important than central bank policy. A central bank could spur growth and inflation by lowering interest rates and making cash cheap to borrow. The free market would then decide the most efficient way to deploy that capital. Economic policy need not rely on large government budgets to function. Over the next two decades, monetarism seemed to work really well. The 1990s in particular were a decade of peace and prosperity for the West. Sure, there were two big market crashes in 2000 and 2007, when the dot-com and property bubbles collapsed. But the monetarists said those could have been avoided if central banks had been more sophisticated, and quicker to increase rates in order to snuff out those bubbles. Economics was reduced to an argument over monetarist timing and technique, rather than the larger principle of who exactly should be in control of capitalism — a bank or a government. The power of monetary policy is that it works really well if interest or inflation is at 5%, for instance. You've got 500 basis points to play with, if you want to spur more growth; and even more above if you want to crush inflation. Once you get down to zero interest and zero inflation — where we are now — you're screwed. No more basis points to lower, no more weapons. You're sitting in a car with an empty tank, miles from the nearest petrol station. So, what type of economic policy would create growth, fuel CPI, and juice stocks? The obvious answer is to do it the old-fashioned way: fiscal stimulus from governments, in the form of government borrowing for spending on infrastructure. Railways, bridges, schools, hospitals, universities. All the things the free market is lousy at but that society needs anyway. All the things that provide the stable, civilized underpinning that a free market needs to function smoothly. And all that borrowing of new central bank cash might fuel a little inflation along the way. (The Chinese are trying that right now, in fact.) Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn suggested doing something like this back in September, and — surprisingly — there are a few economists who think that this is not a completely mad idea. It all depends on the quality of your government spending, of course. If a European government ramped up its debt to go war against Australia it would have a very different economic effect than if that debt were used to build new high-speed rail system. (Or a "garden bridge.") That issue — quality — has always been the left's weak spot in economics, of course. But with conservatives on the ropes due to monetary policy failures, there has never been a better opening for an anti-monetarist resurgence.
Wednesday, February 17, 2016
Via euobserver: EU leaders are preparing for a final push in the negotiations on the UK's renegotiation of its EU membership as fine tuning on cutting benefits for EU workers and eurozone governance remain the main sticking points. EU leaders will gather on Thursday (17 February) afternoon in Brussels to kick off the meeting from which British Prime Minister David Cameron hopes to produce a deal for the UK that would enable him to put the UK's EU membership to a referendum by June. "The intention of [EU Council president] Tusk is clear: he believes this week is the best timing to reach a new settlement for the UK and the EU", a senior EU official said. However, Donald Tusk in a letter to EU leaders on Wednesday warned that "there is still no guarantee that we will reach an agreement" and urged them to remain constructive. Highlighting the importance of the next 48 hours, he added: "There will not be a better time for a compromise". Curbing benefits Leaders at the summit will be armed with a "war room of lawyers", as one EU source put it, to tackle the remaining political and legal issues in the draft deal. Several sticking points remain, with curbing in-work benefits and the indexation of child benefit for EU workers in Britain still raising serious political concerns among eastern European member states. "We see it as a UK-specific problem, that should not create possibilities for other member states to restrict access to free movement", a source said. Eastern diplomats want to "ring-fence indirectly" the so-called safeguard mechanism that would allow Britain to curb benefits, by making it specific to the British public service system, in order to make sure other member states will not try to imitate the UK's restrictions. "We would need a document that makes this clear. It's going to be in the text in some shape or form", said another diplomat, quipping it should be possible as "we have all night" on Thursday night to discuss it. Eastern Europeans would also like to see guarantees that restricting in-work benefits would only be applicable to newcomers and not to workers already in Britain. They are also keen on making sure that the indexation of child benefit - lowering benefits in cases where the children do not live in Britain, though the parent does - will not apply to other benefits, such as pensions and unemployment support, and will also only be applicable to newcomers. "I don't have a feeling the UK has a problem with that", a source said. The UK argues the proposals are aimed at tackling the abuse of Britain's generous welfare system. Leaders will also have to decide for how long the UK can use this mechanism and curb benefits, an issue so sensitive, it was not even touched by diplomats and lawyers who prepared the draft texts for the negotiations. Eurozone safeguards Another issue to be dealt with at the two-day summit is eurozone governance, on which the UK has asked for safeguards, in particular, the opportunity to bring discussions on proposed decisions by the 19-member group to EU summits if they endanger the economic interests of those countries outside of the single currency union. On this point, the French lead the countries concerned that the UK might be able to delay or even veto crucial economic and financial decisions in the euro area. "We have to ensure integrity of the internal market and avoid that non-euro countries can block further integration, have a veto. The question of how many non-euro countries can raise specific issues to a higher level still needs to be discussed", a source said. The UK on the other hand argues that the safeguard is not a veto, not a holding brake, and not a change in the legislative procedures of the eurozone. 'Ever closer union' The UK's request to be left out of what the EU treaty defines as "ever closer union" is another issue to be discussed by leaders, where different interpretations of deeper EU integration might clash. "For some it does mean deeper integration, for others it does not, we have to find a common position", an EU official said. Some countries, like Belgium, are concerned negotiations will open the door for an 'a la carte' union, and that European integration might be stalled. Others - less concerned about future integration, in some cases simply because in their original language the phrase means more of an alliance than a close political union - don't see the phrase as a problem. Treaty change Incorporating the UK's requests into the EU treaty is also a tricky point. While the deal with the UK will be legally binding and carved in international law, Cameron wants to make sure some elements are incorporated into the EU treaties at a later point, as he has promised British voters. "All four issues are addressed and must be addressed in respect of the current treaty. We modify nothing in the treaties and we do not start any treaty revision procedure", said a source, reluctant to take Cameron's wish on board. Good will On Thursday afternoon leaders, along with European Parliament President Martin Schulz, will hold a first discussion on the UK's requests based on the draft deal put together by Tusk's team. Then they are expected to discuss migration over dinner, while Tusk and his negotiators hold bilateral meetings and hammer out a new draft. Leaders will then come back to the 'Brexit' issue to discuss it overnight, and again on Friday morning for what an EU official called "English breakfast that can turn into brunch". Many are unhappy that Cameron is risking the UK's EU membership, that he is requesting more special treatment for the UK and that he is using the politically charged term "migrants" for EU citizens. "It's the first time we use treaties to solve the problems in one political party in one member state", a diplomat said. "It's a miracle we could come all this way, when we see the different positions". But the official said "there is good will" among EU officials and diplomats to make sure Cameron gets a legally binding deal he can campaign on successfully. "What we can do is to have a fair deal, which would allow Cameron to campaign. And he will get it. It will be up to him now how he can translate it to British voters", another source said. He added: "The aim is that he [Cameron] can go home from Brussels with a deal that would be sellable to voters". Tusk issued a warning in his letter: "It is our unity that gives us strength and we must not lose this. It would be a defeat both for the UK and the European Union, but a geopolitical victory for those who seek to divide us".
Tuesday, February 16, 2016
Via Business Insider: The UK's top official in charge of financial stability has given a clear description of the biggest risks to the system out there at the moment. It's to do with liquidity – a word which relates to both the ability to buy and sell assets freely on a functioning market, and also get your money back from an investment fund. Speaking at the Financial Times' Regulation in Asset Management conference on Tuesday, Alex Brazier, executive director for financial stability at the Bank of England, described the doom-laden relationship between the two. If a sell-off in the bond markets leads to investors pulling their money from loss-making funds investing in bonds, the sell-off will intensify further and the panic among investors will worsen too. "At worst this results in complete market dysfunction", said Brazier. "It could happen because of a number of feedback loops in the system. Investors are behaving in increasingly pro-cyclical ways. You’ve got this relationship between prices and redemptions. Funds need to have a sense of the systemic rather than a sense of their own funds". A systemic collapse of liquidity has been among the biggest fears of regulators for a few years, and came to the fore since high-yield bond fund Third Avenue shut its doors in December. Brazier saw that investors reacted badly to Third Avenue gating funds – placing restrictions on them pulling their money out – as the high-yield bond market plummeted. "If fund A suddenly gates [stops investors pulling money], what happens to fund B? Third Avenue closing was a signal there can be contagion effects. What can make sense for an individual fund, might increase risks to the system". Barclays put out a research paper last week that said that since 2008, hedge funds have been shortening the amount of time it takes for their investors to redeem their money. But, as BI's Matt Turner noted, hedge funds are increasingly in a position where they can't sell assets quickly to get that money to return to their investors.
Monday, February 15, 2016
Via Disclose.tv: During a recent appearance on the Ellen DeGeneres Show, President Obama was asked by a six-year-old if aliens are real and offered a nuanced answer that raised eyebrows in UFO research circles. The plucky youngster, named Macey Hensley, told the President that she had come to believe in the existence of ETs after watching a program about aliens on television. In response, Obama thoughtfully replied, “the truth is, Macey, we haven’t actually made direct contact with aliens yet”, promising to let the young girl know when such a fantastic event occurs. As can be expected, UFO enthusiasts carefully parsed the President’s words and focused on one key aspect of his answer: “direct contact”. Some have suggested that this is a tacit admission that the United States has made indirect contact with ETs, although what that might exactly mean remains up for debate. One other facet of Obama’s response which bears noting is his body language when the subject of aliens came up in conversation. The President appears to roll his eyes when Macy first mentioned aliens, suggesting that this may be a question he gets asked far more frequently than one might expect. Or it could be interpreted that he finds the subject either so silly or, conversely, exopolitically potent that he isn’t exactly thrilled to delve into the topic on national television. Perhaps the most troubling question coming out of the President’s appearance might be why the only ‘media members’ to quiz the President on UFOs and aliens have been a late night comedian and a six-year-old girl.
Sunday, February 14, 2016
Via The Swedish Wire: The New York Times reports that the top administrator of one of Europe’s leading medical universities – the Karolinska Institute – resigned on Friday. Anders Hamsten, who as vice chancellor led the Stockholm-based Karolinska Institute, said in a statement published by Swedish newspaper Dagens Nyheter, that he was stepping down because of growing criticism of his and the institute’s handling of the scandal swirling around Paolo Macchiarini, a surgeon who was hired as a visiting professor in 2010. “I failed to see the warning signs. Confidence in me as Vice-Chancellor of KI has been impaired both among the public, the research community and KI's staff and students. It will be difficult for me to continue to act as Vice-Chancellor of Sweden's most successful university with credibility and effectiveness”, Anders Hamsten said. “For that reason I am resigning my post”. It becoming the latest casualty of a scandal involving a prominent surgeon in the field of regenerative medicine, the NYT said. Paolo Macchiarini is a thoracic surgeon and a former professor of Regenerative Medicine at Karolinska Institutet in Stockholm, and is now being investigated for research fraud.
Saturday, February 13, 2016
Via euobserver: EU states have piled the pressure on Greece to sort out its frontiers or risk extending internal controls throughout the passport-free Schengen zone for up to two years. Ministers on Friday (12 February) issued Athens some 50 demands following EU Commission criticism that Greece had "seriously neglected its obligations" on border management when it came to migrant inflows. The ministerial demands are part of the larger so-called Schengen Evaluation Report that now will be sent to the European Parliament for adoption. Greece will have three months to sort out the issues once the report is adopted by the EU assembly. The timing coincides with the expiration of German border checks in May that, should Greece fail to implement the recommendations, could allow Berlin to then extend its temporary controls beyond current maximum limits set under EU law. Extending the checks for two years would require the European Commission to trigger the procedure in Article 26 of the Schengen borders code. The article allows states to reintroduce controls at all or specific parts of their borders. It means passport-free travel in the Schengen border zone would be more severely restricted, possibly jeopardising the EU's cherished right to freedom of movement. Around half a dozen states have imposed border checks in an effort to stem and better manage large migratory flows. Germany first imposed a ten-day control at its Austrian border at the start of September after having announced an open door policy for Syrian nationals. Germany's interior minister, Thomas de Maiziere, then appeared to pre-empt the Schengen report when he announced indefinite border checks on German radio MDR Info last month. Three day probe The Schengen report is based entirely on an unannounced three-day on-site visit in early November to the Chios and Samos islands as well as to several land border crossings with Turkey. Greece, in a statement, said the November visits had failed to prove anything and that the agents sent by the EU border agency Frontex had shown "no evidence" that it had neglected its duties. Some 880.000 people landed in Greece from Turkey last year. Despite the winter weather, Greece is averaging 2.000 daily landings. The International Organization for Migration said on Friday around 77.303 people had crossed from Turkey to Greece since the start of the year. Ministers wants Greece to prioritize registration gaps, sea border surveillance, risk analysis, and international cooperation. Among the more specific demands, it wants Greece to improve security features on 'temporary stay' documents, reinforce the Hellenic police force, carry out systematic checks of irregular migrants' travel documents, and improve registration and fingerprinting of arrivals. They also demand that Greece set up a coastal surveillance system that covers "the whole sea border between Greece and Turkey". This includes offshore patrol boats, vessels, helicopters, planes "and other means". Greece voted against the Schengen report in an economic and financial affairs council. Both Bulgaria and Cyprus abstained. Everyone else backed the report.
Thursday, February 11, 2016
Via euobserver: Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdogan lashed out against the EU on Thursday (11 February) and threatened to send millions of refugees in Turkey to the bloc’s member states, just as NATO agreed to deploy ships in the Aegean Sea to ease the migrant crisis. In a speech in Ankara Erdogan confirmed an earlier leaked report in which he made clear to EU leaders late last year that he could open the gates for the estimated 2.7 million refugees to enter Europe. “We do not have the word 'idiot' written on our foreheads. We will be patient, but we will do what we have to. Don't think that the planes and the buses are there for nothing”, Erdogan said in a speech, signalling Turkey was running out of patience. Earlier this week, the Greek website euro2day.gr reported that Erdogan told EU Commission president Jean-Claude Juncker at the G20 summit in Antalya: “We can open the doors to Greece and Bulgaria any time and put the refugees on buses”. Erdogan confirmed the report, saying he was proud he made those comments. “I am proud of what I said. We have defended the rights of Turkey and the refugees. And we told them [the Europeans]: 'Sorry, we will open the doors and say "goodbye" to the migrants' ", AFP quoted Erdogan as saying. Under the EU-Turkey deal last November, Ankara pledged to slow the influx of migrants, crack down on people smugglers in exchange for €3 billion aid for refugees stuck in Turkey, a faster visa liberalization process and opening chapters in its EU membership negotiations. The EU Commission in a report released on Wednesday, while acknowledging that some progress had been made, urged Turkey to do more to stop the flow of migrants, patrol its sea and clamp down on smugglers. On the other hand, Turkey is also under pressure from Europe and the UN to open up its borders to the tens of thousands stranded at the Turkish-Syrian border after fleeing the Russian-backed push by the Syrian regime into the city of Aleppo. “It is hypocritical to remind Turkey of its international responsibilities”, Erdogan said, rebuffing criticism. “There is a chance the new wave of refugees will reach 600.000 if air strikes continue”, he warned. ‘Shame on you!’ The Turkish president also lashed out against the UN for not doing more to protect refugees. “Shame on you! Shame on you!” said Erdogan, adding that the UN should be telling countries to take in refugees from Turkey. Turkey has spent more than €8 billion on refugees since the civil war started in Syria five years ago. Erdogan’s fiery comments came as Nato decided to deploy ships immediately to the Aegean sea, under German command, to help with surveillance and patrolling Turkey's shores. By 7 February, 70.365 migrants arrived by sea in Greece from Turkey, on average 2.000 per day, while 319 died on the way, according to data from the International Organization for Migration. Russian ceasefire Russia has proposed a 1 March ceasefire in Syria, as officials from more than a dozen countries meet in Munich to try to put an end to the raging civil war. The conflict has already claimed the lives of over 470.000 Syrians, according to the Syrian Center for Policy Research, a non-governmental organization. But US officials, arguing for an immediate stop to the fighting, believe that Moscow is only trying to buy time to allow its ally in Syria, president Bashar Al-Assad, to gain more control and crush rebel groups, AP reported. Such a move would help the Islamist group ISIS, they argue. US secretary of state, John Kerry, is due to meet his Russian counterpart, Sergei Lavrov, in Munich on Thursday. Peace talks are supposed to resume by 25 February.
Wednesday, February 10, 2016
Via euobserver: The European Commission continues to defend EU agreements, broadly ignored by member states, to better manage migrant inflows. Dimitris Avramopoulos, the commissioner in charge of migration, on Wednesday (10 February) said national governments are lagging behind on overall efforts. "If all member states had done what they were supposed to do the landscape of the situation would be different than today", he said. The former Greek defense minister evoked vague threats of a Europe returning to the "dark sides, the dark memories of our recent history" should the plans fail. "From the moment this system [the hotspots to register migrants] starts working, things will be totally different", he said. Avramopoulos' statements followed the commission publication of a series of so-called progress reports on how agreements tailored to ease the migratory pressure on the Western Balkans, Greece and Italy are being implemented. With exceptions on the recent uptake of asylum registrations in Greece and Italy, the EU executive's overall assessment remains dire. The wider prognosis comes as little surprise given the political and logistical problems that have dogged the EU-level agreements for months. EU summit The release of the documents is meant to stir debate among EU leaders ahead of an EU summit in Brussels next week. Leaked draft summit conclusions seen by this website places emphasis on shoring up external borders and refusing entry even to those "who have not made an asylum application despite having had the opportunity to do so". Avramopoulos, for his part, said he had sent letters to all EU interior ministers to pressure them into relocating some 160.000 people from Greece and Italy over the next two years. "So far, only 497 migrants were relocated", he said of a plan launched last September. Fifteen EU states offered 1.081 places to relocate some 66.400 people from Greece. Only 218 have been filled. Italy's relocation target is 39.600 but only 279 have been dispatched. Over 880.000 people landed in Greece from Turkey last year alone with projected figures suggesting many more will arrive. But of those, Greece managed to return less than 20.000. Italy, for its part, returned around 14.000. The return problem, is due in part, to bi-lateral readmission agreements not being respected by countries like Pakistan and Turkey. Avramopoulos noted, among other things, that Greece will have a month to improve asylum reception conditions so that other states can start transferring migrants back to Athens under the strained Dublin asylum rule. Greece in 2011 was booted out of Dublin, which says a country through which asylum seekers first entered the EU have to handle applications for asylum on behalf of all other member states. The policy is set for a big overhaul in March. But it will still have to go through the normal EU co-legislative procedures, a process that could take years given past reform efforts on Dublin. Greece and Italy improve fingerprinting Meanwhile, Greece and Italy have made some improvements. Fingerprints registered in the Eurodac asylum database in Greece went from 8 percent last September to 78 percent this January. Italy went from 36 percent to 87 percent over the same period. But both have yet to get all their respective migrant arrival screening zones up and running. Known as hotspots, the zones underpin EU's stalled relocation scheme. Out of the five designated hotspots in Greece, only the one in Lesbos is operational. The Greek Army is aiming to get others ready by next Monday. Greece is able to house around 17.600 arrivals but committed to accommodating 50.000. In Italy, out of six announced, only one in Lampedusa and another in Pozzallo are running. The Western Balkans are also coming up short. Less than half of the 50.000 additional reception places have been made available.
Tuesday, February 09, 2016
Via euobserver: Five months after the European Commission floated the idea of buying dairy products from struggling European farmers to distribute to refugees, the plan still has not been implemented. A commission spokesperson told this website in November that the plan was “being finalized”, which usually indicates it will be made public soon. But more time has now passed since that comment than between the comment and the announcement of the plan in September. The commission said on Tuesday (9 February) that it was still working out the details, but would not comment on the question of what its definition of “being finalised” was. In fact, it did not wish to say anything on record about why the €30 million milk-to-migrant scheme had not yet been launched. The commission also failed to seize the opportunity to answer basic questions, put forward by EUobserver, including: how will the commission select the farmers to buy dairy products from; what type of products will be bought; in what countries will the products be distributed; how long will refugees be able to benefit from the scheme? The silence stands in sharp contrast with comments made by commissioners after the announcement of the scheme, which is part of a larger package of aid measures for European farmers. Most of the other elements of the €500 million aid package have already been carried out, mostly in the form of direct aid via member states. Its broad contents were announced on 7 September, when the commission said: "There are ways of addressing the nutritional needs of refugees, for example through the distribution of dairy products". A week later, on 15 September, agriculture commissioner Phil Hogan presented a more detailed plan, which included a promise “to ensure that a measure of around €30 million will be devoted to ensuring that EU milk will made available for the nutritional needs of refugees, in particular those displaced in difficult conditions in our neighbouring countries”. On 1 October, agriculture commissioner Phil Hogan said he was “delighted that we have been able to move so quickly” on changing the rules so that member states were more flexible in providing the direct payments to farmers. However, he has since said little about the speed of the implementation of his promise on the milk-for-migrants plan. Synergy The plan came out of a desire to think beyond traditional silos in policymaking. Back in September, commission vice-president Jyrki Katainen, in charge of economic growth, said that the difficult market situation for Europe's dairy farmers, and the refugee crises, both “must be addressed at a European level”. The Finnish official added that “synergies between responses” were needed. While the scheme is small compared to the EU's existing aid efforts – last week the EU and its member states pledged €3 billion to Syrian refugees and people in Syria – it appears that Katainen's call for synergy between the agriculture and humanitarian aid departments of the European Commission was easier said than done. Meanwhile, two farmers lobby groups in Brussels say they have not yet heard anything from the commission about the plan. 'Publicity thing'? “They haven't been in touch”, said Silvia Daeberitz, spokesperson for the Brussels-based European Milk Board, which lobbies EU institutions on behalf of milk producers. Daeberitz said the scheme was “in principle not a bad idea to try to solve two issues at once, but it will solve neither”. “I would imagine it is more of a publicity thing”, noted Daeberitz. A policy officer for Copa-Cogeca, a broader agricultural lobbying organisation, said it also had not been consulted yet. The World Food Program's (WFP) office in Brussels commented that “there is no news from the WFP front as this topic is being discussed amongst the member states/EU”. The UN body said it “has no update on their plans and what they intend to propose, nor whether this fits our operations”. The European Council on Refugees and Exiles (ECRE), a Brussels-based network of NGOs, said in a comment that it needed more details before it could assess the plan's impact. “If this will assist families with children, who are seeking international protection after fleeing war or persecution in their home country, then it looks quite positive”, said spokesperson Thorfinnur Omarsson. “But as we don’t know the details of the plan, nor its implementation, it’s a bit premature for ECRE to comment on that”. As for the commission, its most recent timetable given to this website was in a comment in December, when it said the “details of this measure are currently being worked on. We will know more in early 2016”. Agriculture ministers are meeting in Brussels next Monday (15 February), but the milk-for-migrants scheme is not on the official agenda.
Monday, February 08, 2016
Sunday, February 07, 2016
Via Before It's News: Anthony Patch is back with an urgent update. I say its urgent due to the timing of the dream he has had, a dream that centred around this years Superbowl 50 which is set to take place tomorrow. Anthony, in collaboration with JD from NepTUNEDiaries, have released the following video containing information about the recent dream Anthony experienced. In the above video, as i mentioned at the start of the article, Anthony Patch shares details of his recent dream concerning Lady Gaga, the Superbowl and disclosure. Let me state on Anthony’s behalf that he is not making any predictions here, merely sharing a dream that he feels is timely and worthy of note. We are not stating that anything will happen at all, merely sharing visions & ideas, and starting a discussion that needs to be had! Lady Gaga is working with Intel on a project that they have deemed “top-secret” and that is to be unveiled at this years Grammy awards in Germany later in the month. Gaga released an ad about the event and talks about making “the uninventable, inventable”, “the unseeable, seeable” & “imagining the unimaginable”! It literally sounds like she and intel are going to manifest things from another dimension. In the ad itself, Gaga talks to the audience from within a spinning holographic cube, placed in a hangar. This has led Anthony and others to speculate as to some kind of holographic event that could be a test for Project Blue Beam technology, with Gaga being projected into the heavens. In Tony’s dream however, we start at the Superbowl, where the illuminati chosen one herself, the Gaga, is set to sing the national anthem before the game. Tony talks about the possibility of Gaga turning up with Beyonce & Coldplay during the half time mega-ritual via holographic projection. Then, to the amazement of the crowd, it will appear as if Gaga and her dancers (angels), are “ascending” into the heavens. All of this of course is done with the use of technology, but don’t let facts like that get in the way of a good psy-op! The ascension itself will be symbolic of the Rapture, and will have many questioning their faith and even reality itself. Think im going too far? Well, not so long ago, Tupac Shakur appeared via hologram at a gig long after his death. This actually had members of the audience questioning whether he had ever died at all, or had been resurrected, so good was the image of the dead artist performing on stage. Lady Gaga is a central figure in the death cult elites plans, and she is being used to usher in a new race of beings incapable of prejudice and hate… not my words, hers! She is a tool of the Luciferians running this planet, steering the naive minds of her fawning supporters into a mindset ready to welcome, and beg for, their Luciferian new world order. Remember, the veil between this world and that of the dark entities has never been thinner as the forces of evil gather around the planet at this time. KEV’S TWIST… How about during the singing of the national anthem, with no prior warnings, or any talk of holographic technology being used, Gaga just disappears from stage! Or she starts to ascend like Tony said. Heres where my twist comes…. She doesn’t come back! The media start hyping the hell out of this “rapture” event. People will be talking about how it is all a publicity stunt, but it will fall on deaf ears as her fans and the masses struggle to comprehend the events that have unfolded. Then, at the Grammys, she reappears, above major cities, as a massive “sighting”! Could she bring with her the “good guys”? All just woo and speculation, or is it….. Remember everything we have covered with Tony previously. We have had CERN pummeling the veil in order to create a portal for these entities to come through into this plane of existence. We have scientists that are able to create life in the laboratory from four bottles of chemicals. Could they have an army of “skin suits” awaiting inter-dimensional hosts? PROJECT BLUE BEAM Who can deny that if the above events unfolded the majority of people wouldnt fall for it. There are many who wouldnt even question what they are seeing or being told. This is exactly what Project Blue Beam can be such and effective tool if the elites decide to play it in conjuncion with a fake disclosure event. Could we see space craft appearing over all the capitol cities of the world? Will it be the voice of God? Blue Beam would utilise both audio and visual effects to trick the populous into believing anything they choose. Just recently we have had massive rainbow clouds appearing over Ireland and around the world. Could they be filling the sky with particulaties that will be activated come “show time”? Who knows? What I do know, as stated previously, is that the masses will just lap it all up! However, the masses are going to be decieved into thinking that these entities that are being summoned up and ushered in are the good guys that are showing up to save the day! Be on your toes, for we might just be looking up into a sky overhead sometime real soon and seeing the “arrival” of these beings. Only, not everything is as it seems. Let me correct that…. Not ANYTHING is as it seems!
Thursday, February 04, 2016
Via Zero Hedge: Back in April 2013, we showed for the first time something few were aware of, namely that "At $72.8 Trillion, The Bank With The Biggest Derivative Exposure In The World" was not JPMorgan as some had expected, but Germany's banking behemoth, Deutsche bank. Some brushed it off, saying one should never look at gross derivative exposure but merely net, to which we had one simple response: net immediately becomes gross when just one counterparty in the collateral chains fails - case in point, the Lehman and AIG failures and the resulting scramble to bailout the entire world which cost trillions in taxpayer funds. We then followed it up one year later with "The Elephant In The Room: Deutsche Bank's $75 Trillion In Derivatives Is 20 Times Greater Than German GDP". Then, last June, we asked the most pointed question yet: "Is Deutsche Bank The Next Lehman?"
Wednesday, February 03, 2016
Via Reuters: The first known case of Zika virus transmission in the United States was reported in Texas on Tuesday by local health officials, who said it likely was contracted through sex and not a mosquito bite, a day after the World Health Organization declared an international public health emergency. The virus, linked to severe birth defects in thousands of babies in Brazil, is spreading rapidly in the Americas, and WHO officials on Tuesday expressed concern that it could hit Africa and Asia as well. Zika had been thought to be spread by the bite of mosquitoes of the Aedes genus, so sexual contact as a mode of transmission would be a potentially alarming development. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention confirmed it was the first U.S. Zika case in someone who had not traveled abroad in the current outbreak, said CDC Director Dr. Tom Frieden on Twitter. However, the CDC has not investigated how the virus was transmitted. After this case, the CDC advised men to consider using condoms after traveling to areas with the Zika virus. Pregnant women should avoid contact with semen from men exposed to the virus. The Dallas County Department of health said on Twitter that the person was infected through sexual contact with someone who had traveled to Venezuela. The person infected did not travel to the South American country, county health officials said. The Texas Department of State Health Services was slightly more cautious in its assessment, saying in a statement, "Case details are being evaluated, but the possibility of sexual transmission from an infected person to a non-infected person is likely in this case". County authorities said there were no reports of the virus being transmitted by mosquitoes in the Texas county. Previously, international health officials had noted one U.S. case of possible person-to-person sexual transmission. But the Pan American Health Organization said more evidence was needed to confirm sexual contact as a means of Zika transmission. The medical literature also has one case in which the virus was detected in semen. The virus has been reported in more than 30 countries and linked to microcephaly, in which babies have abnormally small heads and improperly developed brains. The American Red Cross on Tuesday asked blood donors who have traveled to Zika virus outbreak areas such as Mexico, the Caribbean, or Central or South America to wait at least 28 days before donating. However, the risk of transmitting the virus through blood donations remained "extremely" low in the continental United States, the disaster relief agency said. The Dow Jones transportation average ended 2.9 percent lower following news of the first U.S. transmission of the Zika virus. MONITORING NEEDED The WHO has said the virus could infect 4 million people in the Americas. It said on Tuesday it launched a global response unit to fight the mosquito-borne virus. "Most important, we need to set up surveillance sites in low- and middle-income countries so that we can detect any change in the reporting patterns of microcephaly at an early stage", Dr. Anthony Costello said in Geneva. Costello is WHO's director for maternal, child and adolescent health. Twenty to 30 sites could be established worldwide, mainly in poor countries without robust healthcare systems, Costello said. Brazil is the country hardest hit by Zika. In an address to a joint session of Brazil's Congress, President Dilma Rousseff said her government will spare no resources in mobilizing to combat the mosquito that transmits the virus. With no vaccine or treatment for Zika, efforts to curb its spread have focused on eradicating mosquito breeding sites. Brazil, which has more than 4.000 suspected cases of microcephaly that may be linked to Zika, is scheduled to host the Olympics in Rio de Janeiro in August. Rousseff also said Brazil and the United States will enter a partnership to develop a Zika vaccine as soon as possible to stem the spread of the virus. VACCINE EFFORTS French drugmaker Sanofi SA on Tuesday announced that it has launched a project to develop a vaccine against the virus, the most decisive commitment yet by a major vaccine maker. The company said its Sanofi Pasteur vaccines division would use its expertise in developing vaccines for similar viruses such as yellow fever, Japanese encephalitis and dengue. Other companies also joined the race on Tuesday to develop a vaccine. The University of South Australia said it was working on a Zika vaccine with Australian biotech Sementis Ltd. U.S. drug developer NewLink Genetics Corp said it has started a project to develop Zika treatment options. Experts have said a Zika vaccine for widespread use is months if not years away. Costello said the Aedes mosquitoes that carry the Zika virus "are present ... through Africa, parts of southern Europe and many parts of Asia, particularly South Asia". Africa and Asia have the world's highest birth rates. WHO Director-General Margaret Chan said on Monday it was "strongly suspected but not yet scientifically proven" that Zika causes microcephaly. The first Irish cases of Zika virus have been detected in two people with a history of traveling to a country affected by the mosquito-borne infection, the Health Service Executive of Ireland said. Chilean health officials said they have confirmed three cases in Chile of people infected with the Zika virus, all of whom were infected while traveling elsewhere in Latin America. An Australian state health service said two Australians were diagnosed with the virus after returning from the Caribbean, confirming the first cases of the virus in the country this year.
Tuesday, February 02, 2016
Via Before It's News: We want the closest translation to the truth available and we will go to extremes to find it! So we keep looking for the most ancient manuscripts that have ever been found because the probability of them being tampered with is much lower then the newer translations. All who seek truth and understanding will be floored with this video because it will change your life forever.
Monday, February 01, 2016
Here's Why Winning Iowa Could Break The Election Wide Open For Bernie Sanders Or Donald Trump, Frankly
Via The Huffington Post: In the fall of 2007, Hillary Clinton held a 24-point lead over Barack Obama among black voters in a CNN national poll. By Jan. 18, 10 days after the New Hampshire primary, Obama was winning blacks by 28 points in the same poll, a 52-point swing. This time around, Clinton again holds a commanding lead among black voters headed into Iowa. She boasts a roughly 45-point lead nationally, which her campaign refers to as a firewall. The assumption fueling that fire is that Obama was able to win over the black vote because, put simply, he was black. If that's the case, the uber-white Vermonter Bernie Sanders isn't a serious threat to that firewall, and the Clinton camp can bank on a South Carolina victory no matter what happens in Iowa or New Hampshire. But that strategy may rest on a misreading of why the black vote shifted so rapidly to Obama the last time around. Indeed, Obama was just as black in October, when black voters were backing Clinton, as he was in January, when the vote shifted his way. What changed? His viability. After Obama's resounding victory in Iowa, the perception of him changed. All of a sudden, black voters saw that Obama could actually win. The connection between Obama and the black vote is obviously a unique one, but the phenomenon is universal: Voters prefer to back a winner, and candidates appear more attractive the more likely they are to win. The Iowa caucus may only be a venue for some 250,000 or so Iowans -- a minuscule fraction of the national voting population -- but the decisions those caucus-goers make can send a signal that reverberates far beyond the state. If Bernie Sanders or Donald Trump comes out on top in Iowa, it will be the first time that millions of people waking up on Tuesday morning seriously think of those men as presidential material. (The shock to the global audience, particularly if Trump wins, will be off the scale.) If Obama's experience is any guide, winning Iowa could possibly unlock significant additional support.