US sues German bank for being fooled by US

US suing German bank for being fooled by US government

Kommentar auf Deutsch: http://laiglesforum.com/4004-2

http://laiglesforum.com/4004-2

by Don Hank

The US has just sued Deutsche Bank for around $14 billion [over a $3 billion loss, so kind of exaggerated – but the Fed and US are broke and ths is a desperate measure], and this has triggered a crisis that will affect the world economy.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-deutsche-bank-lawsuit-idUSKCN0VC2NY

Deutsche Bank AG must face a U.S. lawsuit seeking to hold it liable for causing $3.1 billion of investor losses by failing to properly monitor 10 trusts backed by toxic residential mortgages, a federal judge ruled on Wednesday.

U.S. District Judge Alison Nathan in Manhattan said Belgium’s Royal Park Investments SA/NV may pursue claims that the trustee Deutsche Bank National Trust Co ignored “widespread” deficiencies in how the underlying loans were underwritten and serviced, and failed to require that bad loans be repurchased.

If you read the entire report linked above you will see that the root cause of the toxic mortgages sold by Deutsche Bank is not mentioned. No Western news outlet will tell you or remind you of why DB had these mortgages on its balance sheet, because, as usual, corruption in the US government kicked this all off. This is not to say that DB is blameless. But it was fraud on the part of US rating agencies Standard  & Poor and Moody’s that led up to this debacle (and caused the financial crisis of 2008). Some of these securities had been bought from the Fed in 2012 as a result of the bailout of AIG. Obviously, these were represented by the Fed as having more value than they actually had. Otherwise, DB would not have bought them. Please read the citations linked to below to learn the background of what happened.

German banks flooded with 75-90 billion euros worth of bad US mortgage-backed derivatives (from focus.de in 2008):

http://www.focus.de/finanzen/boerse/finanzkrise/finanzkrise_aid_267350.html

My translation of opening paragraph:

The Financial market crisis triggered in the US could, according to media reports, cost German credit institutes up to 90 billion euros. [And this was a report from 2008. The toxic derivatives have never been purged from the German system since then and now threaten to bring down Deutsche Bank, one of the biggest banks in Europe!—Don Hank]

ORIGINAL: Die in den USA ausgelöste Finanzmarktkrise könnte die deutschen Kreditinstitute nach Medienberichten mit bis zu 90 Milliarden Euro belasten

 

http://www.zeit.de/wirtschaft/2012-04/deutsche-bank-hypothekenanleihen

April 2012

My translation: Deutsche Bank has purchased a bundle of structured securities [mostly mortgage-backed derivatives] valued in the billions belonging to the one-time world’s biggest insurer AIG [bailed out by the Fed]. The Institute has, together with Barclays, reportedly won a bid for collateralized debt obligations (CDOs), which were dubbed toxic securities in the financial crisis.

ORIGINAL: Die Deutsche Bank hat der US-Notenbank Federal Reserve ein milliardenschweres Paket strukturierter Wertpapiere des einst weltgrößten Versicherers AIG abgekauft. Das Institut habe zusammen mit der britischen Großbank Barclays den Zuschlag für strukturierte Hypothekenpapiere (Collateralized Debt Obligation, CDO), die in der Finanzkrise als Giftpapiere bezeichnet wurden.

 

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-last-mystery-of-the-financial-crisis-20130619

QUOTE

But the financial crisis happened because AAA ratings stopped being something that had to be earned and turned into something that could be paid for. [In other words, these agencies rated these securities as AAA but they could not have really earned that rating because, thanks to the bursting of the housing bubble, many of the lendees were no longer paying because their homes were no longer worth anywhere near the face value of their mortgages—Don Hank].

That this happened is even more amazing because these companies naturally have powerful leverage over their clients, as they are part of a quasi-protected industry that enjoys massive de facto state subsidies. Largely that’s because government agencies like the Securities and Exchange Commission often force private companies to fulfill regulatory requirements by retaining or keeping in reserve certain fixed quantities of assets – bonds, securities, whatever – that have been rated highly by a “Nationally Recognized” ratings agency, like the “Big Three” of Moody’s, S&P and Fitch. So while they’re not quite part of the official regulatory infrastructure, they might as well be. [Yes, and something else: The SEC had to know that these agencies were faking these ratings because they knew about the housing bubble even before it popped. The SEC is equally to blame but no one can sue them, so the government scapegoated the rating agencies that were, de facto, pressured into faking the ratings—Don Hank]

 

Thus you will see that the US is suing DB essentially for something that was set in motion by the above-named US rating agencies, which were allowed to get away with their fraud by the criminally derelict SEC, a government agency responsible for final oversight, independently of rating agencies.

How interesting that so much of the pain in the world is caused by our corrupt government trying desperately to get money by hook or by crook instead of cutting spending by putting people back to work and staying out of other countries’ affairs.

Like a boomerang, you can expect the aftershocks of the German crisis to hit you right square in the pocket book at some future date.

 

 

 

More works than fireworks

More works than fireworks

Don Hank

I want to call your attention to an article by Chuck Baldwin that briefly explains how the international banking cabal has seized the reins of United States politics, media and finance and now controls us. Please save it for reference, read it, reread it, ponder it and let it motivate you to work and fight for the real independence day that awaits America and the world.

Sorry, Folks, but this is no time to celebrate. America is not independent of its tormentors, far from it, as you will see from Chuck’s article. We are truly less free than in colonial times under the British.

The US was actually independent for a few short years after the revolution, but shortly thereafter, the international banking community seized the reins and after a brief but valiant fight by President Andrew Jackson in the 1830s, We the People lost all control to these Satanic parasites, who have been grabbing increasing amounts of power and treasure ever since and now their minions in the Fed have impoverished the middle class, you and me.

But the bankers Chuck Baldwin speaks about here are also the Neocons who control our foreign policy, a senseless Satanic matrix that only kills and is not intended to bring even a moment of peace, let alone lasting peace. Once the Satanic bankers have been removed from power, Washington’s insane killing machine will be powerless to harm our friends and assist our enemies, killing Christians in the Middle East and Kosovo, founding and funding terrorists like the Taliban, Al-Qaeda and ISIS. (Note that John McCain, the Satanist who sends arms to terrorists in Syria, is mentioned below as a member of the CFR, clearly indicating that the banking elite that controls our government is the same Neocon elite that deliberately kills Christians abroad).

But recently, the peoples of the world, including the middle classes in the US and Europe and both the people and the entire hierarchy in Russia and its allies, have gotten awake and started fighting back, simply by learning and speaking the truth. What I call the “Trump phenomenon” in the US and the Brexit in the UK are the first rumblings and the first steps forward out of the darkness.

But without you and your successful search for the truth about the enemy that holds us in thrall, there is no way out. We will simply perish.

It is your duty to know the truth, because as Jesus rightly said, you shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free. Only through knowledge of the truth can we be free. And even though we be in chains, we can be truly free in the knowledge that Jesus spoke of and the message He gave us of salvation.

It is all one and the same thing, the spiritual in a perfect marriage with the material.

But if you still feel like celebrating this Fourth, then celebrate our future independence, which we are just now beginning to see in the faintest of outlines. It could be a glorious thing.

But before we can glimpse the Kingdom, we all have work to do, and the mother of all battles ahead of us. More works than fireworks.

 

Russian sanctions hurt (II)

Russian sanctions hurt (II)

 

by Don Hank

I have shown in a previous commentary that sanctions against Russia have really hurt. But not the Russians. They boomeranged on the US. How? By strengthening economic and military relations between Russia/Eurasian region and the rest of the world (eg, the accession of almost all US allies to the AIIB), military and economic coalition with China, lucrative contracts with the Saudis, India, etc.

As the icing on the cake, today I was translating an article in the Chinese economic daily finance.sina.com which shows that Russia in June sold a record amount of oil to China, and this, according to the article, for two reasons:

1—The Saudis obligingly raised their Asian benchmark oil prices selectively for Asia only, giving Russia the edge as an oil seller. (See the below time line for clues as to why the Saudis did this).

2—These oil deals with China are settled in yuan (RMB) making them more attractive to China in terms of both monetary policy (strengthening the RMB) and economics.

The latter fact is bad news for the dollar. The main thing propping up the USD is country-to-country trade settled in USD. The whole purpose of the petrodollar agreement with the Saudis in 1973 was to oblige them to accept payment only in USD for the purpose of maintaining an artificially high value of the dollar. Now Saudi Arabia itself is in fact sabotaging that deal, while sticking to the letter of it. This was a stroke of genius on someone’s part, and I think that someone was Russian President Putin.

Look at what Putin had been up to since no later than the end of 2014:

Timeline of Russia-Saudi negotiations.

1—December 2014, Putin meets with Saudi Intel Chief in Moscow

http://en.trend.az/world/arab/2218066.html

2—April 2015 King Salman bin Abdulazziz el-Saud calls Putin, sets up visit in June. (Was this motivated by the outcome of the Dec meeting?)

http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/49304

3—June 2015, Saudis raise benchmark oil price for Asia

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/06/05/us-saudi-oil-price-idUSKBN0OL04720150605

4—June 2015, Russia signs 6 nuclear energy contracts with the Saudis (quid pro quo for the raised Asian oil prices?)

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2015/06/19/uk-saudi-russia-nuclear-idUKKBN0OZ10R20150619

5—July 2015, Russia announces sale of Iskander missiles to Saudis (more quid pro quo for the raised Asian oil prices?)

http://www.presstv.com/Detail/2015/07/04/418758/Russia-Saudi-Arabia-Iskander-missile-Yemen

There are no coincidences in events involving Russia. The tit-for-tat here is obvious. The Saudis got beefed up defenses and nuclear energy deals. Russia got a chance to sell more oil. Of course, for obvious reasons, the paper trail here omits the main details. The Saudis never disclose all the details of their agreements with other countries. But anyone who pays attention and knows what to look for can easily extrapolate the hidden details of these bargains.

Watch for more surprises soon.

As Donald Trump said: The decision makers in US policy are stupid.

Don Hank

 

PS: Speaking of stupid policy, did you happen to read about that fist fight that broke out in the Japanese Parliament over the latest change in the Japanese constitution allowing their armed forces to join with the US in its military adventures? An increasing number of Japanese are waking up to the insanity of US military policy and want nothing to do with US wars designed to be lost. Yet establishment thugs managed to pass this potentially disastrous piece of legislation, almost certainly under pressure from the war hawks in Washington.

Russian and US tactics are as different as day and night. Russia makes offers that tempt and reward. The US applies pressure and threats to punish.

Which side is winning?

Russian Sanctions hurt

Sanctions against Russia hurt

 

Don Hank

 

A reader tells me that the sanctions against Russia have been hurting them financially.

This is the perception throughout the West so far, unless you read reports from off the beaten trail. And then you see can easily through the lies.

You see, Western oligarchs are focused on keeping the world poor while robbing the little guy, and that is becoming an open secret. Eastern leaders can see this as a huge opportunity for doing business in ways that make everyone richer and better off. All they need to do is avoid the clumsy mistakes of the US oligarchs, and that is easy.

I have been forwarding articles showing that sanctions are not hurting Russia at all. They are gaining ground much faster than we are. Almost every one of our allies turned their backs on the World Bank (US based and led) and went over to the Chinese AIIB. This is a step toward dedollarization of world trade, which the Western press ignores pointedly (I pointed this out here http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/hank/141009)

In fact, the drop in the ruble is a huge boon for Russia, enabling them to sell more competitively to trade partners.

Then the Saudis struck deals with Russia for more powerful arms than we had ever sold them. That too is money in Russia’s bank.

Then about a week ago, almost every Middle Eastern leader met with Putin in Moscow, showing that they are pivoting away from the US and trusting Russia. For Putin that was like taking candy from a baby, because when a country’s government and oligarchs have cheated and lied repeatedly, eventually no lone trusts them. And that government is Washington.

In June Russia broke a record, selling more oil to China than the Saudis ever had sold them! The trade with China bypasses the dollar, using RMB only. Another major step toward dedollarization and loss of prestige for the dollar.

The Saudis are cooperating by charging more for their oil sold to Asia than is sold to the West. This helps Russia tremendously and is a clear signal that those closed door deals with the Saudis involved concessions to Russia in exchange for those weapons deals.

Now Russia is making deals with India for joint oil projects. These will almost certainly be denominated in currencies other than the dollar, another step in devaluing the USD.

Then there is the New Silk Route, a joint project with China to connect far flung regions for trade. Will the trade deals be in dollars? What do you think?

Rather than harming Russia, the sanctions drove them into the arms of our one-time allies. I don’t think they are coming back. My communications with Europeans shows they no longer trust the US, particularly since the bogus US subprime paper sold all over Europe, which set the stage for the current crisis there. Virtually every educated European knows this and, while their leaders remain discrete, they are waiting patiently for Washington to fall.

Russia’s new deals and sales of arms and oil are an indirect product of our sanctions and Russia is stronger now in trade and in world prestige than it ever was before.

Sanctions not only failed but they wound up greatly strengthening Russia!

The old Wolfowitz policy of encircling Russia has failed miserably as any fool knew it would. Russia is quickly emerging as the winner. Our policy makers are, to paraphrase Trump, STUPID!

It all reminds me of the Japanese emperor Hirohito in the last days of the war. He refused to believe that Japan could lose, even after the first nuke fell on one of his cities.

So the US dropped another.

Each of Putin’s actions is like one of those nukes, greatly curtailing US strength and prestige. Yet, Washington, caught in a paroxysm of normalcy bias, continues to forge ahead with its horrible policies, somehow convincing itself that it will win.

Let us hope and pray that whoever is elected our next president will start reversing these disastrous fraudulent foreign and financial policies that make America poor and garner the ridicule of nations.

And you know what? He may not have much choice.

The elites are doing an about face

 

by Don Hank   August 25, 2015

 

George Friedman, CEO of Stratfor, seems to be following the lead of other prominent Neocon elites. Recently, Kissinger and Soros both warned against taunting the Russian bear or escalating the Ukraine conflict. This was remarkable for them, because they had always generally supported, at least by their actions and words, the Wolfowitz doctrine of encircling Russia, and indeed, Soros even admitted that one of his foundations had aided in the Maidan coup, as I pointed out here.

Now comes George Friedman and joins them in backtracking, reluctantly admitting here that maybe attacking the Russian ally Iran was never such a brilliant idea. He says the problem with this idea is that the plan might fail and thereby strengthen the Iranian position while weakening Israel’s position. No kidding.

I wrote to George via his Stratfor site and asked why no one ever mentions Daniel Greenfield’s famous speech on the MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) principle, which that author skillfully demonstrates would effectively prevent a nuclear power (he doesn’t explicitly mention Iran) from attacking another. Israel is known to possess a nuclear arsenal.

I had mentioned Greenfield’s comments on MAD here in the context of the rush to war against Iran – which, nota bene, even the Israeli military leaders knew to be an unnecessarily risky idea.

So when you say “I stand with Israel,” are you saying you stand with these wise military leaders who oppose war with Iran or with the minority who want to take that needless risk?

See the problem with that slogan?

Below is my response to George:

 

Thank you for this report.

I find it intriguing that no commentator ever mentions, in the context of Israel vs Iran, Daniel Greenfield’s speech on the MAD principle, which prevents nuclear powers from attacking each other. The Israeli government is aware of Greenfield’s writings and certainly, many have read this speech and know this theory makes common sense. Since it is known that Israel and the US are nuclear powers and that neither would sit back and let Iran attack Israel, Iran, in the real world, would never nuke Israel. Further, any nuclear explosion in Israel would kill and harm millions of Palestinians and other Arab neighbors. The whole world would turn against Iran and that would end Iran’s ability to ever trade with any country again. It would, in a word, be suicide. In other words, the war hawks in Israel are directing an inordinate and unjustified amount of time and energy at preventing an impossibility.

It is obvious to me that the only reason Israeli war hawks keep beating the drums in Iran’s direction is that they want to stay on the good side of the Saudis, who they perceive as having the power to crush them via their protégés like ISIS.

Why not address this side of the story some time? It would not hurt your credibility and would almost certainly boost your readership.

END OF LETTER

 

When you see the elites distancing themselves from their past strongly held positions, it’s not because they had a change of heart or “saw the light.” It’s because an external force or forces have made it impossible to sustain those positions and they woke up to this reality.

Despite all the setbacks that Eurasia (mostly Russia and China) have suffered (such as the recent collapse of the Chinese stock market), this region has so far avoided, for the most part, the extravagance of Western Keynesianism – unbridled money printing, borrowing more than they can ever pay down or back to pay for reckless spending – and despite the “socialist” tag, neither of them spends, as a percentage of GDP, even a fraction of what Western “developed” countries spend on welfare or social programs. The Neocons haven’t a leg to stand on, and now the upper echelons aren’t in fact standing.

Further, Eurasia has managed to demonstrate the vast potential of its economic power and prestige, for example, via the new investment bank, the AIIB, to most of our “allies,” over 50 of which became founding members, as I pointed out here.

On top of that, Russia and China have been doing impressive joint military exercises lately, demonstrating not only that they possess the hardware to back down any opponent, but that they are a team. I am amused at analysts who discuss Russian military capability in great detail without ever mentioning that there is in fact no such thing as the “Russian” military. In today’s world, there is only a joint Russian-Chinese military that we must contend with – and get along with, like it or not. And while there are still US “allies,” most are only reluctant and leaning away from the constant wars made in USA.

I say all that to remind you of why the elites, like Soros, Kissinger and Friedman, are changing their tune. They simply have no choice. Reality is facing them like a brick wall, foiling their schemes of world dominance. I say this cautiously, but it would seem that Neoconservatism is dead for all practical purposes.

The elites, who had everything to lose, were the first to notice the tectonic plate shift in geopolitics.

The rest of America needs to pay attention.

 

Chinese monetary policy expert spills the beans, but not to the West

Warning from top Chinese monetary policy maker

My translation of a report in Economic Daily (Jingji Ribao) on the July 20, 2014 interview with Chen Yulu re. RMB internationalization follows below.

Note: RMB is the acronym for China’s national currency, the renminbi, also known as the yuan (not to be confused with the Japanese yen). Renmin means “the People” in Chinese, while “bi” means currency – hence, the People’s currency.

Background: As of 2013, the RMB has been convertible in current accounts (but not capital accounts). Until then, if you wanted to convert the RMB into one of the non-dollar currencies, you generally had to first convert your RMB into dollars, a cumbersome process that discouraged investors from making many transactions.

Why I decided to translate this article:

I first found this article in a Japanese language translation and decided to find the original, linked below.

Not at all surprisingly, I found no translation of it into English anywhere (except for an atrocious machine rendition that does not merit the descriptor “translation”). Why no surprise? I had already had experience with the huge black holes in the Western financial press, as reported here (the term “dedollarization” in that report is for all intents and purposes synonymous with “RMB internationalization”as used hereinbelow).

Why this article was not run in the Western press:

While many of the facts cited by Mr. Chen are to be found in the Western press and also in English language articles posted in China (for example, by the Bank of China), the time frames of Mr. Chen’s predictions of the RMB’s internationalization growth differ shockingly even from those reported in Chinese publications posted in English. Obviously, the Chinese don’t dare tell us the truth and I can’t blame them.

Mr. Chen tells his Asian audience that the RMB internationalization index (RII) will exceed that of all currencies except the US dollar and the euro within anywhere from 3 to 5 years, whereas other forecasts in English language journals estimate that time frame at 15 or more years. The idea seems to mitigate what most will see as bad news and to avoid any counter-measures from the Western central bankers (although it could be that they are also in on the plot). It strikes me that if Mr. Chen were just spouting hype to sell the rmb, then he and the rest of the economic bosses, eg, at the Bank of China, would post these things in English. But since they post them only in Chinese (and also allowed on Japanese site to post a translation of this interview), it seems that the West is being kept in the dark. The fact that rmb clearing centers are opening all over Europe is also an important, and ominous clue as to what is happening behind the curtain. One could make the case that the vast majority of our ‘allies’ are in fact quietly sabotaging the dollar. And if you were a European and your finances had been wrecked by the US derivatives bubble, you  would understand the sentiment behind that. In fact, the sanctions against Russia also dealt Europe a dangerous blow, and yet, their governments don’t dare defy Washington and go their own way. Think about it. France’s BNP Paribas was fined by the US for a misdemeanor that is perfectly legal in Europe and they lost 9 billion dollars to an increasingly ruthless hegemon. Who today is truly sympathetic to the US government?

The World Bank had estimated in 2013 that China’s economy “will become the [world’s] largest by 2030.” Well, that happened last week. Can you see that we are being kept in the dark? 

This article was translated by an ordinary citizen (who happens to be a professional translator) free of charge, for both investors and ordinary middle class citizens who will need to be prepared for a collapse of the dollar sooner than most would expect, at least if we trust the media that are being paid good money to prepare us but refuse to do so or are perhaps also hapless victims of normalcy bias.

Finally, while Mr. Chen says the RMB is not intended to challenge the dollar, now that the Chinese economy exceeds ours, guess what will happen to the dollar once the RMB internationalization index surpasses the dollar’s.

Hint: the main ingredient in the value of any currency is trust. Western monetary policy aims at 2% annual inflation and cheekily calls that “stabilization,” routinely causes bubbles in various markets and fosters the creation of essentially worthless derivatives denominated in the US dollar. Chinese policy has, so far at least, not fallen into anything resembling this kind of irresponsible behavior. European markets were hit hard by this corrupt US monetary policy and they are not happy. This is, in my judgment, why the RMB clearing centers have been established all over Europe (as well as elsewhere) but not in the US, whose investors apparently want to go down with their own ship.

I am convinced that all or most of our allies have lost all trust in the US government and are quietly deserting the ship.

My only question is: what took them so long?

Don Hank

Author’s email: zoilandon@msn.com

http://finance.sina.com.cn/money/forex/20140722/054019778623.shtml

Internationalization of the RMB is not a challenge to other currencies

05:40, July 22, 2014 Economic Daily, I have something to say (11 participants)

Staff reporter: Zhang Wei Zhang Lichen

On July 20, the Renmin University of China issued the “2014 Renminbi (6.1546, 0.0044, 0.07%) internationalization report,” which shows that in 2013 the rmb internationalization index (RII) further accelerated. The report notes that the internationalization of the RMB is not intended to challenge the US dollar or other international currencies; the renminbi is taking on more international monetary functions, rooted in the internal demands of the international market.

Since the beginning of 2012, the People’s [Renmin] University of China has been releasing a series of annual research reports on the internationalization of the RMB, and has proposed an RMB internationalization Index (RII), which objectively describes of the extent of Chinese yuan use in overall international economic activities. The index not only tracks trends in 3 areas, namely, global renminbi-denominated trade, financial transactions and foreign exchange reserves, but enables a convenient horizontal comparison with other major international currencies. On July 20, upon release of the “2014 RMB internationalization Report,” Economic Daily reporters on issues relating to the internationalization of the RMB were granted an exclusive interview with Chen Yulu, a member of the Central bank Monetary Policy Committee and president of Renmin University of China.

According to data in a recently released report, by the end of 2013, the RII reached 1.69, as compared to 0.92 at the beginning of the year, a gain of 84%. What is the reason for this rapid growth?

Chen Yulu: The RMB internationalization Index (RII) accelerated further in 2012, due to high-growth, reaching 1.69 by the end of 2013. In contrast, over the same period the international status of the dollar remained stable, while the euro, and British pound rose only moderately, and the internationalization of the yen declined slightly.

This is because China is number one in global trade, and currently has the world’s second largest FDI (Foreign Direct Investment) inflows and the third largest direct investment outflows. In cross-border trade, more and more companies are using RMB settlement. In 2013 the share of trade in goods settled in RMB exceeded 10%. In terms of investment, foreign direct investment in RMB 448.13 was billion while overseas direct investment amounted to 85.61 billion RMB, the total reached 1.9 times over the same period last year. This is the main reason for the rapid growth in the RII.

According to the latest data, in 2014, the first and second quarter RII’s were 1.74 and 1.96, respectively. By the end of this year, based on a conservative estimate, the RII is expected to climb to 2.40. Following system reform and the release of dividend policy, RMB direct investment and credit in international markets will significantly increase. If the  BRICS Development Bank and the China Latin America Cooperation Forum proceed smoothly, an optimistic forecast for the RII by the end of 2014 might be in excess of three. Barring any major adverse events, the international use of the renminbi will exceed the levels of the yen and the British pound in anywhere from 3 to 5 years, with the RMB becoming the world’s third largest currency after the dollar and the euro.

The accelerated process of RMB internationalization seems to suggest a challenge to the status of dollar, the euro and other international currencies. What do you think?

Chen Yulu: The internationalization of the RMB is not going to challenge the dollar or other international currencies. In fact, the RMB is assuming more international monetary functions as a result of internal demand in the international market. In particular, the international financial crisis in 2008 demonstrated that there are significant contradictions in the current international monetary and financial landscape. For example, the United States accounts for 20% of the global total economy, but supplies 52% of international currency as a public good. The spirit is willing but the flesh is weak. In the last two years, a number of international financial centers in Europe have been actively showing intensive demand for RMB-traded products, and have signed RMB clearing agreements with China. This shows that the RMB internationalization is a phenomenon that has developed in response to adjustments in international economic and trade patterns, with the chief motivation coming from international market demand. China’s push can be seen as an echo of this demand.

Secondly, China has become the world’s second largest economy, and this entails a greater responsibility and obligation to provide global public goods, including the response to the global liquidity shortage. Thus it has become the lender of last resort, participating in global currency market rate pricing, establishment of a stable international currency exchange rates system and so on. Due to China’s own increased economic strength, this is the default option for creating a stable monetary and financial environment for global economic development.

We also need to note that the yuan is far from becoming a core international currency, and does not pose a threat to the status of the dollar or the euro. Therefore, we need to consider the larger pattern and see the internationalization of the RMB as a natural response to adjustments in the international economic and financial situation, without assigning it too many other interpretations.

Currently, the establishment of offshore markets is the main thrust of the RMB internationalization process. Can you give us an overview of the global offshore RMB market? How will it impact the development of Chinese enterprises and financial institutions

Chen Yulu: Hong Kong is still the world’s largest offshore yuan market, where we find not only the most important clearing platform of cross-border trade in RMB, but also the largest pool of offshore renminbi funds. The central government has expressed clear support for entering a new stage of domestic development following the construction of offshore financial centers in Hong Kong. Elsewhere in Asia, in addition to Singapore and Taiwan and Macau, Seoul has followed suit with the signing of an RMB clearing agreement.

A number of international financial centers in Europe, such as London, Frankfurt, Luxembourg, Paris and Zurich are actively expressing the desire to establish offshore financial centers. This year, China signed RMB clearing agreements with Germany, Britain, France, Luxembourg and other countries. This is likely to cause a reversal, with the size of the European market lagging significantly behind Asia. In addition, almost all international financial centers are being established on fears of falling behind in the offshore renminbi business. This means that in addition to Asian high yield and European new markets, the RMB offshore market development will be a fast-growing trend in the global situation.

From a domestic perspective, the offshore market provides domestic enterprises new financing channels, and allows companies to take advantage of low-cost funds in overseas markets, solving difficult financing problems; at the same time, it also provides a financing platform for enterprises “going offshore,” and is conducive to fostering international competitiveness in local multinational companies. In addition, the offshore market can encourage Chinese financial institutions to accept otherwise-daunting international competition, improve service levels and innovation capacity as quickly as possible, and for China’s benefit, create favorable conditions for carrying forward capital account reform.

What challenges is the establishment of current offshore yuan markets facing?

Chen Yulu: Right.  Although the establishment of offshore renminbi markets is accelerating, some of the main obstacles must be overcome as quickly as possible. First, we  lack an efficient, secure and cost-effective offshore renminbi clearing system. This affects the willingness of domestic and foreign enterprises and financial institutions to use the renminbi and restricts the scope of offshore renminbi transactions. We need to set up a global offshore RMB clearing system of international scope as soon as possible, transforming it into a gross settlement system functioning in real time corresponding to the operating time.

Second, the current legal framework for offshore RMB market system has not yet been established. The establishment of the offshore RMB market must tackle conflicts in the field of international law, improving as soon as possible the terms of confidentiality, and implementing strict anti-money laundering procedures to curb the use of offshore financial centers to achieve illicit transfer of funds abroad. We also need to strengthen tax collection of international taxes on Chinese territory, to combat tax evasion and prevent loss of tax revenue.

Third, the offshore renminbi financial product chain and financial service capabilities of financial institutions are not yet ideal. The offshore business of Chinese financial institutions in general is still restricted to the traditional deposits, loans and international settlement business. There is an urgent need to achieve breakthrough innovation in financial product development. In addition to requiring more Chinese financial institutions to take on added functions, we must also encourage foreign financial institutions to develop businesses and innovative products.

Fourth, once the offshore financial market reaches a certain size, it will impact on the mechanism of onshore market interest rate and exchange rate formation, which may weaken the effectiveness of monetary policy, creating new challenges for the domestic financial regulatory system. Offshore renminbi market transactions will make interest rate and exchange rate determining mechanism more complex, and even affect yuan pricing. This requires the combination of two-rate marketizing reform, and the application of the scientific method in research and in the regulation of the monetary policy system. Establishment of a new macro-prudential financial regulation mode, accommodation of the offshore market within the monitoring range, strengthening international cooperation in financial supervision, and ensuring a smooth-running offshore RMB markets, and rapid, sound development.

 

SOVEREIGNTY: BACK TO WESTPHALIAN PRINCIPLES

 

BACK TO WESTPHALIAN PRINCIPLES

By Bernard CHALUMEAU

The treaties of Westphalia and the genesis of International law.

 

Like all French school children, we are aware that the Treaties of Westphalia ended the Thirty Years War, which began with the defenestration of Prague in 1618, giving France the Three Bishopricks of Metz, Toul and Verdun  of the Holy Roman Empire.

However, let us take a closer look because there was much more to it than this:

These treaties are constituted of several agreements signed between the parties to the various conflicts:

– On January 30th, 1648, in Münster, the treaty between Spain and the United Provinces ended the war of Eighty Years.

– On October the 24th, in Münster, the treaty between France and the Holy Roman Empire ended the Thirty Years War, to which was added an act by which the Holy Empire gave to France the three Bishopricks of Alsace, Brisach and Pignerol, and another by which Emperor Ferdinand III, the archdukes of Austria, Charles, Ferdinand and Sigismund gave Alsace to France.

– On October 24, in Osnabrück, it also ended the 30 Years War.

-On July 2,1650, in Nuremberg, the two agreements between the Holy Empire and France and between the Holy Empire and Sweden relating to the enforcement of the peace.

These treaties were the bases for the organization of Germany up to the end of the Holy Roman Empire in 1806.

Unfortunately, most school texts fail to indicate that the principles of international law were born on the date these important treaties were signed.

The object of this article is not to describe the very complex progress of the Thirty Years War (1618-1848) where many conflicts pitted the Hapsburg of Spain and the Holy German Empire, supported by the Roman Catholic Church, against the Protestant German States of the Holy Empire allied with the nearby European powers with Protestant majorities, United Provinces and Scandinavian countries, as well as France, which intended to reduce the power of the Hapsburgs on the European continent.

However, one must bear in mind that it was the most dreadful slaughter of the entire 17th century, which killed several million men, women and children.

Since the demography of Europe was seriously affected, the belligerents thus looked for ways and means to avoid a recurrence of such horrific massacres.

The negotiations of these treaties lasted a long time (from 1644 till 1648), because it was necessary to establish new modes of relations between States with a view to limiting wars and to strengthen “the law of nations.”

In his work “The six books of the Republic”, published in 1576, the famous French lawyer Jean BODIN (1529-1596), had published his thoughts on public law, “res publica,” and on the powers of the king, as the first legal principles of sovereignty: “Sovereignty is the absolute  and perpetual power of the State, which is the greatest power to command. The State in the person of the monarch is supreme inside its territories, independent of any high authority, and legally equal to the other States”

Further, the Dutchman Hugo Grotius published in 1623 a work entitled “De Jure Belli et Pacis,” which proposed the establishment of a “mutual association” between nations, that is to say an international organization, thereby laying the groundwork for a code of public international law. Their ideas were intended to guide the negotiators of these treaties in establishing what has conventionally been called since that time “the Westphalian system” as a guideline for the concept of modern international relations.

– The balance of powers, meaning that any State, large or small, has the same importance on the international scene (For example, see the Article CXXII of the Münster Treaty in Old French below)

– The inviolability of national sovereign power (See article CXII of the Treaty below).

– The principle of non-intervention in the affairs of others (see article LXIV of the Treaty below).

Since the treaties of Wesphalia, a new actor succeeds the division of the power between villages, duchies and counties, namely, the modern State.  The world is organized with States whose sovereignty must be respected by the bordering states by virtue of the Westphalian concept of the border. International relations become interstate and the respected borders guarantee the peace.

These treaties proclaim the absolute sovereignty of the State as the fundamental principle of international law.

Europe becomes a set of States, having precise borders, recognized by others, in which the prince or monarch exercises his full and complete sovereignty. The characteristics of these modern States include the constitution of permanent armies and the expression by the elites of the fact of national existence. In these States, language appears as a factor of unity.

The Westphalian principles subsequently contributed to the emergence of the idea of the Nation States in the 19th century, as well as the principle of nationalities, where every National State enjoys, within its own borders, complete independence, being provided with the highest possible form of sovereign power with its own army, its own currency, its justice system, its police and an economy, allowing it to live as independently as possible of the other States.

Later the Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States, signed on December 26th 1933, would add four essential elements:

 

“To be sovereign, a State must have :

–          a permanent population.

–          a defined territory.

–          an operational government.

–          the capacity to enter directly in relation with other states.” 

 

It added a fundamental clause:

The political existence of a state is independent of its recognition by other states.

The United Nations, undoubtedly horrified by this measure, which it considered too Westphalian for its taste — since it paved the way for the emergence of multiple large or small States — then hurried to add notions of “internal sovereignty” and “external sovereignty,” so that, to be sovereign, States must have, in addition to their capacity to exercise their power over the population inside their territory without any outside constraint, the need to be recognized as sovereign States by the other States of the international system.

 

The law of nations (Jus gentium ) or public international law:

Established under the Treaties of Westphalia, this law governs the relations between the subjects of this legal system, which are States and international organizations.

A subject of international law must comply with this law and must be able to benefit from it. In the beginning, the State was the only subject of international law. But this concept became obsolete, because, after1815, the States found it necessary to join together in international organizations, gradually acquiring the status of legal subjects. Thus, the United Nations became, like the EU and other international organizations, subjects of derived law (generally referred to in American English as case law).

Introduction of the right of intervention in international relations:

Unfortunately, since the end of World War II, the increase in the number of treaties between States of the western world tended to suppress Westphalian principles by considerably developing their military, economic and financial interdependence.

At the end of the Cold War, the United States of America, an enormous consumer of energy and raw materials, desiring to extend its hegemony throughout the planet and to get energy and raw material at the lowest possible prices, noticed that the Westphalian ban on intervention in other States thwarted its designs.

The United States of America felt obliged to find a way to by-pass Paragraph 7 of Article 2 of the UN Charter, which stated:

“Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any State,” summing up the very Westphalian-sounding article 8 of the Agreement of Montevideo, which banned intervention in the internal affairs of a State.

Based on the ideas of persons such as the philosopher Jean-François Revel in 1979 and of Bernard Kouchner, a new “right” called the “right of intervention,” was concocted, i.e., the recognition of a right of one or more States to violate the sovereignty of another State, within the framework of a mandate granted by a supranational authority.

It was a wondrous invention which allowed:

–          to abolish Westphalian principles,

–          to add the notion of supranationality,

–          to intervene on the territory of any State even against the will of that State,

–          to establish world governance under the aegis of ad hoc international organizations,

–          to subjugate the weakest States to one or more stronger States,

–          to establish the hegemony of the US government.

The precious Westphalian principles were thereby overturned and the whole world returned essentially to the monstrous situation of the Thirty Years War.

The desired ad hoc international organization in the hands of United States of America was found, namely, the UN. All that was needed was the pretexts for war.

No problem:

– The US oligarchy rushes to the target State to be destabilized, a CIA team, which will increasingly include, or be supplanted by, a Soros foundation, USAID or the like, providing camouflage in the form of “private” intervention.

– This team, relying on existing opposition or opposition to be created from whole cloth in the current regime, develops a “National Liberation Front” or the equivalent thereof.

– It equips it with the necessary weapons and bolsters it with troops, usually drawn from the Islamic sphere of influence.

– Thanks to mass media under its control, it floods public opinion with information and images, often doctored, that overwhelm the government in power.

– All that remains is for the UN to pass a “resolution” allowing the armed forces of several States, mainly of the EU and the US, to come to the aid of the young “National Liberation Front” and oust the current regime.

This system worked very well for the interventions in Romania, Kosovo, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Darfur, Ivory Coast, Libya, Syria, Nigeria, Ukraine, etc., spreading war throughout the planet.

The right of the bankers replaces the right of the people :

Thanks to the “legality” of the UN ad hoc resolution, the armed forces deployed in the target State destroy a maximum of infrastructure, such as power plants, factories, bridges, roads, railways, airports, runways, and so on…

Thus, when the target State is “pacified,” American companies share in the juicy reconstruction contracts. The new leader of the regime, set up by the “liberators,” is very helpful in awarding these contracts to said companies. At that point, the target State, its population and resources are under the control of the US oligarchs.

These operations are managed behind the scenes by bankers, generally US bankers. The bankers finance both belligerent parties, enjoining the winner to honor the loser’s debts. They finance the military-industrial lobbies committed in the conflict and manage the process in such a way that it is drawn out as long as possible.

So, the bankers win every time!

The superiority of the right of the bankers over the right of the people was established in Europe by the Maastricht Treaty of 1992 by the introduction of a single currency, the “euro,” controlled by the European Central Bank, completely independently of the Member States’ governments under Article 108 of that treaty.

ARTICLE 108

 

When exercising the powers and carrying out the tasks and duties conferred upon them by this Treaty and the Statute of the ESCB, neither the ECB, nor a national central bank, nor any member of their decision-making bodies shall seek or take instructions from Community institutions or bodies, governments of the Member State or from any other body.”

All European treaties since then have reinforced those provisions, resulting in an impoverishment of populations subject to this single currency and complete submission to a new slavery for the benefit of bankers.

It is no longer states that control the banks, but the banks that control the states.

Evidence of this is on flagrant display throughout the world, notably in Cyprus where depositors were ruined by bankers with the support of the International Monetary Fund, the European Commission in Brussels and the Central Bank of the EU.

 

The objective of Mayer Amschel Rothschild, founder of the Rothschild banking dynasty, expressed below:

 

“Let me produce and control the issue of currency of a state, and I do not care who can make laws”

 

has been achieved!

Having succeeded in removing Westphalian principles from international law, the bankers rule the planet, start wars wherever and whenever they want and enslave the people of the world.

Conlusion:

The Westphalian system described herein clearly shows that whoever advocates it, in France or elsewhere, i.e., patriots and the sovereignists, are peace activists! They are the future of nations. That is why the banker-controlled mass media are bent on either contradicting them with outright lies, or silencing them.

To secure peace in the world, Wesphalian principles must be restored!

History in fact shows that, as long as these principles were respected, the world (ie, Europe initially and then throughout the world from the 19th century onward) experienced overall stability, but when they were abandoned by a State or group of States, horrific conflict occurred again.

Many historians believe that the Treaty of Versailles in 1919 was responsible for World War II by violating Westphalian principles, substituting a collective security.

That is why I urge all patriots and French sovereigntists, particularly French youth, to enter into Resistance.

I invite them to partner with the youth of Europe and the rest of the world to fight by all possible means to restore Westphalian principles everywhere based on respect for the inalienable sovereignty and independence of States.

There is not only an absolute necessity to recover their freedom, their way of life, the kind of society they want to live in to escape this new slavery, but also and above all, the need to preserve their property, their lives and those of their descendants, who are, as we can see today, physically threatened.

As for me, I remain at their disposal to help them while strength and breath shall last.

French patriots!

The wind of hope is rising! It is bringing back our France! It is bringing back our freedom!

Bernard CHALUMEAU

Translation by Bernard Chalumeau, translation editing by Don Hank

Dear Secular Humanist: Please Keep Your Religious Views about Abortion out of Politics!

In our country, there is a general feeling that only positions backed by actual fact should drive public policy.  ‘Religion’ is perceived to be the realm of personal opinion.   Even Christians tend to accept the view that people are allowed to have their opinion, but they aren’t allowed to impose that opinion on others.   The result is that many Christians refrain from acting ‘politically’ because they see their own beliefs as nothing more than ‘mere opinion.’

Secularists tend to be people who have dispensed with ‘religion’ altogether, and like to think that they are entirely ‘fact driven.’

When these ideas collide, we observe something very curious:  secular humanists conclude that they can advocate for anything that they want in the public sphere, because nothing they believe is ‘religious, ‘ while distinctly Christian viewpoints are forbidden from entering the public domain, since those will be, by definition, ‘religious.’  And again, even Christians gravitate to that view.

This tends to lead to debates and discussions and policy proposals that take the ‘facts’ of the secularists as the starting points.  We are expected to proceed on their terms.  And why not?  Surely without the ‘religious’ component, those ‘facts’ are as close to actually being real descriptions of the world as one could get, right?

But what if ‘religion’ and ‘fact’ are not opposites? Continue reading

Why the West is deliberately failing

by Don Hank

The prophets prophesy falsely, and the priests bear rule by their means; and my people love to have it so…

The scientific method, while still used in scientific experiments in the laboratory and clinic, has long been abandoned in the persuasive arts, notably journalism, but also in politics. Any journalist analyzing facts based on logic and science instead of accepting the interpretation of our universe handed down from above would soon lose their job. We have long lived in an anti-scientific, and hence, an anti-natural, world and are now reaping the inevitable rewards of our denial of truth.

If we were to be honest with ourselves for just a brief moment, we would admit that Western society is deeply sinful (or in secular terms, unwholesome) and even worships sin, celebrating it with carnivals and gay parades, and teaching young children how to perform sex acts in schools. And of course, the Western world routinely commits infanticide. Romans 1:25 describes the Western world to a “t” (Paul uses homosexuals as an example but this issue ranges far wider than that):

Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator…

The end of that discourse on sinners describes the outcome.

…men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

A graphic depiction of some of that recompense for this particular group of sinners can be found here. I referenced that site in my commentary “The recompence of their error.”

So why do people deliberately engage in self-destructive practices that our otherwise superior intelligence should be telling us to avoid for the purposes of self preservation? Or for that matter, why do they pursue Keynesian economics amassing mountains of debt that no one could ever repay in a headlong rush to destroy our economy, our means of survival? No animal species would do that.

The answer is right there in Paul’s discourse, and this is the part Christians need to focus on when analyzing the causes of Western society’s failure to manage its laws, its immigration, its social ills, its fruitless wars, its finances and economy, its moral code, etc:

Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts.

And several verses later:

God gave them over to a reprobate mind.

Did you ever consider what that means?

GOD facilitates the destruction of the disobedient and the ungrateful by abandoning the disobedient to their own sinful desires. Paul is talking about people who worship nature instead of the Creator because they were ungrateful to Him for the blessings of life. Why would people who once worshipped nature turn around and do something unnatural, as Paul calls this behavior in this same passage? A person analyzing this without spiritual discernment might say this incongruence makes no sense and would be at a loss to explain it in rational terms. Some spiritually blind (but otherwise intelligent) analysts say that for this reason, Paul couldn’t really have meant “unnatural” when describing this behavior, and they therefore tweak the translation from the original Greek to make it say something else. (They forget that in the 4th Century, Jerome, a fluent speaker of koine Greek, rendered this term as “contra naturam” in his translation  of the Vulgate Latin Bible).

The fact is, God routinely allows people to do the unnatural—committing acts outside the laws of nature that can’t be explained by any scientific (e.g., psychological) laws. Once you turn your back on God, He abandons you and you fall into a behavior pattern designed by Satan. There is nothing natural about sinful behavior because it was not designed by God.

So if it is not natural, then is it supernatural?

No, it is not. Since God performs supernatural works—that is, works that are above nature—then Satan’s works and the works of humans gone over to the dark side might best be considered as infranatural, or beneath nature. An animal would not destroy its own economy – its food stores, for example – the way Westerner “leaders” are now doing, most notablyin the Euro Zone and the US through irrational banking practices and eradication of home industry and cheap energy by legal and regulatory means (even as they encourage other nations, notably China, to use cheap energy and high carbon combustion in competing with the West). Nor would an animal devote itself almost solely to the pursuit of sex, especially homosex, the way many humans do (although bisexuality is known in the animal kingdom, there are no known strictly homosexual animal individuals that eschew all individuals of the opposite sex).

Such infranatural phenomena are exactly why we face an imminent worldwide economic collapse. Economists, supposedly specialists in math, no longer use mathematics in their convoluted Keynesian calculations. Likewise, otherwise educated people who understand human anatomy deliberately and routinely utilize as an inlet a bodily organ designed as an outlet, a lifestyle that often leads to horrific diseases and death (see here).

But as Paul says, amazingly, GOD facilitates this mindlessness by abandoning those who abandon God — including His scientific laws. Because people stopped trusting in Him and thought they could come up with their own answers. Look around you. How do you like the results of Western secularist, humanist political, diplomatic, economic, social, military, etc, behavior? Vote for either candidate and you will get more of the same. Look at Europe. An entire continent that thinks it is smarter than God is now drowning in debt and fighting for its economic life. If this is not sufficient evidence of the God that Paul describes, i.e., a God who deprives disobedient humans of their cognitive faculties, then I can’t imagine what is.

This is why the West does not need more laws or a better government.

It needs a spiritual revival. And that revival will not happen without Westerners accepting the love, forgiveness and righteousness that Jesus taught, making a sincere attempt to do what is morally right as dictated by our God-given conscience. Americans, including the best and otherwise most civil and decent of us, are beating each other up because we think this is about people or the lack of wisdom of individuals or leaders. If people do this or that, or if we make this or that law or elect this or that politician, then we can get back on track. “How can this group or that group be so stupid?” they say of those who disagree with them.

But again, they ignore Paul’s teachings, as recorded in another letter of his:

For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.

If you think this is too lofty and ethereal to relate to your life and the world around you, consider the antithesis, for example, in this article on John Maynard Keynes, a homosexual and pedophile who authored our current failed economic system (bailouts rewarding bad business and banking practices and other government interventions that kill free enterprise were his brain child):

http://www.keynesatharvard.org/book/KeynesatHarvard-ch09.html

If we take to heart Paul’s message in Romans 1:25-27, we can easily see it was no coincidence that Keynes was both a sexual deviant (pedophile, homosexual, etc) and the author of the most perverted economic system known to humankind.

There can be no logical or scientific explanation for Keynes’ self-destructive lifestyle and destructive teachings, or of an entire civilization deliberately patterning itself after him, destroying itself economically and morally with no apparent justification. These examples of a West deliberately weakening and sabotaging itself are the best examples of unqestionably infranatural phenomena.

As incredible as it may seem to those imbued with the rigid doctrinaire humanism that is foisted on Western society by an incessant drumbeat in media, schools and universities, in cinema and on the street, Paul’s brief discourse on a God having given people up to a reprobate mind is emerging as the default explanation of a civilization marching resolutely to its utter economic and moral ruin.

So why is this explanation for Western civilization’s failure never raised in the churches of our nation?

Perhaps because God is giving our clergy over to the very same reprobate mind that Paul spoke of. They interpret the scriptures as though they were hopelessly outdated when  in fact, these ancient writings offer the only glimpse of sanity–and hope–that is left in our reprobate world.

The EU expands further

Quote:

Prime Minister, Ted Heath when he said in a Government White Paper of July 1971, “There is no question of any erosion of essential national sovereignty”. (On a TV current affairs programme in 1990, he was asked if he had known that this statement was untrue. His answer was “Of course, yes”.)

There is a bit of history to this idea of politicians lying to the public to achieve what is supposed to be a noble end, a phenomenon we see on both sides of the pond. In the 1880s a group of wealthy English met in a private home in London to discuss how best to implement socialism and eliminate Christianity (which stands in the way). The group included Karl Marx’s sister, just to give you an idea of the ideology they represented.

They met later a number of times and eventually settled on a name for themselves: The Fabian Society, after a Roman general who had successfully used stealth to gain victory, thereby saving lives. They would do likewise, preferring stealth to usurp power over the violence used later in Russia.

But is stealth necessarily harmless?

Suppose you stop your car and ask me directions to a place. I direct you over a bridge, which happens to have collapsed in a recent hurricane. I tell you that it is narrow, so in order to avoid meeting another vehicle, you should speed up as you approach it. You do so and plunge to your death in the canyon below.

I didn’t harm you directly. But I caused you great violence through my stealthy and false directions.

So it is with the EU. It was sold as a community of states that would contribute to economic stability and greater harmony in Europe. No sovereignty would be lost and there would be a net gain for all.

But this community is now called a union and is a de facto empire with central control and almost no participation of the populace, with formidable power, ever-expanding boundaries (see Sonya Porter’s article below), a court, one of the largest bureaucracies in the world, and a growing military, and its economic policies are leading, by socialist wealth redistribution, to what is expected by many economists to be the greatest economic crisis of our age.

The Soviet Union has been reborn.

Don Hank

 

Sonya Jay Porter on the ever-expanding, rarely-asking EU

The creation of a European union of states was considered a noble aspiration following the destruction of the continent in two world wars. First proposed in the Schuman Declaration of 1950 by the then-French Foreign Minister Robert Schuman, it aimed to transform Europe through a “step-by-step” process, leading to the unification of Europe and so ensuring that the individual nations of Europe should never go to war with one other again. But although senior politicians may have been aware of the gradual subsuming of their countries into a Federal Europe, most of their populations were not.

In Britain, for instance FCO 30/1048 which was written in 1971 by civil servants at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office but only brought to light in 2001 under the 30 year rule, shows that the FCO was definitely aware of the gradual loss of Britain’s sovereignty that entry into the Common Market would entail. However, introducing the 1972 Bill, Geoffrey Rippon, the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, said “there would be no essential surrender of sovereignty” and this was echoed by the Prime Minister, Ted Heath when he said in a Government White Paper of July 1971, “There is no question of any erosion of essential national sovereignty”. (On a TV current affairs programme in 1990, he was asked if he had known that this statement was untrue. His answer was “Of course, yes”.) So it would be unwise to take what the EU authorities say at face value, including the fact that it is a strictly European union of nations or that any other countries brought into its fold would be there simply as trading partners.

Turkey is not a member of the European Union, and may never be. Yet on 30th March 2012, the members of the European Commission (who are appointed by the governments of member states rather than elected) quietly decided to grant Turkish citizens the same residency and labour rights as full members of the Union.

This accord will apply to Turkish workers who are or have been legally employed in the territory of a member state and who are or who have been subject to the legislation of one or more member states, and their survivors; to the members of the family of workers referred to above, provided that these family members are or have been legally resident with the worker concerned while the worker is employed in a member state. The text reads:

“It follows from Article 12 of the Agreement establishing an association between the European Economic Community and Turkey (the Ankara Agreement) and Article 36 of the Additional Protocol to the Ankara Agreement (the Additional Protocol) that freedom of movement for workers between the Union and Turkey is to be secured by progressive stages.”

It adds,

“This proposal is part of a package of proposals which includes similar proposals with regard to the Agreements with Albania, Montenegro and San Marino. A first package with similar proposals in respect of Algeria, Morocco, Tunisia, Croatia, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Israel was adopted by the Council in October 2010.”

As a mark of their devotion to openness and transparency, the following laconic note appears under the heading “Consultation of interested parties” –

“There was no need for external expertise.”

Later still, the following difficult-to-believe statement appears:

“The proposal has no implications for the Union budget.”

Algeria, Morocco, Tunisia, Croatia, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Israel are not in the EU but many of their citizens will now be allowed to live in, and benefit from, EU countries – which could cause many problems, not least that of how the EU is going to cope with yet more unemployed at a time when the Union’s financial situation is so parlous.

Read more:

http://www.quarterly-review.org/?p=919