Written by Jeff Nielson Thursday, 21 March 2013 12:04
There are many things which need to be said about the deliberately provocative move by European bankers to engage in a sovereign version of an “MF-Global” style bank-heist. Unfortunately none of these things are being said by anyone in the mainstream media.
To start with, this “plan” was intended to fail. It was simply another staged event. In this case, the goal was first to isolate Cyprus politically/economically, and then “make an example” out of it to other Western governments, and their peoples.
Regular readers will recall a previous commentary about how Iceland successfully stood up to the banksters, threw them out of their nation; and has since prospered economically. Since that time I have iterated the mantra of the Financial Oligarchs on many occasions “no more Icelands.”
Thus first these Oligarchs engage in a blatant act of theft which was intentionally intended to be as punitive as possible to the masses. This would ensure maximum outrage within the Cyprus population, and thus make it political suicide for any politician to support the measure. A Bloomberg article spells this out clearly:
…France’s Pierre Moscovici said he had wanted an exemption for accounts worth less than 100,000 euros ($129,500). Austria’s Maria Fekter said ECB demands made that impossible.
The central bank, Fekter said on Monday, wanted to lowball the tax on larger depositors, magnifying the hit on the smaller ones. [emphasis mine]
This is nothing less than a written confession. Individual European governments were pushing for the bank-robbery to at least be structured fairly – stealing the most from those who could most afford it. It was the ECB (the “front” organization for the Oligarchs) which vetoed those intentions, and insisted on “magnifying the hit” on ordinary people.
The final vote taken by the Cyprus government is ultimate, empirical proof of this staged event. Every member of the Opposition parties voted against the bank-robbery; every member of the government abstained. Obviously a proposal which fails to obtain the support of a single member of government was never a serious proposal to begin with.
Now (most likely) Cyprus will be driven out of the EU (i.e. separated from “the herd”), and then the jackals of the Western banking oligopoly will go to work. Forced to use its own currency (if it wants true, economic sovereignty); that currency will be manipulated to near-zero. Indeed with more than a decade of “competitive devaluation” under their belts, there is nothing that these banksters are better at than destroying the value of a currency.
Along with that will be more of the same fraudulent manipulation of interest rates on Cypriot debt (via the same credit-default swap fraud which Wall Street has used so successfully on the rest of Europe). With the capacity to drive those interest rates to any number they desire; they can totally freeze Cyprus out of international debt-markets.
With a virtually worthless currency, and no access to credit to help restructure its economy; the economic devastation of Cyprus will even dwarf what these same banksters had previously inflicted upon Greece. However, this is only one half of what is truly significant about this episode.
Written by Jeff Nielson Sunday, 17 March 2013 13:28
Bloomberg News and Federal Reserve Chairman Benjamin S. Bernanke have been at it again. Their own, little version of the legendary Abbott & Costello “Who’s On First…?” skit, which they call “exit strategy.”
In their latest installment of the skit from March 11th, we have Bloomberg in its role of straight-man “Abbott” trying to make four years of empty promises of a monetary “exit strategy” by “Costello” (played by Bernanke) sound admirable.
The best Bloomberg could do is to proclaim that Bernanke is “provoking mystery” with year after year of his double-talk. This is followed by paragraph-after-paragraph of the same (mandatory) “maybe he should/maybe he shouldn’t” drivel we have been subjected to since 2009. Time to update your Script!
Most if not all readers are familiar with the fable “The Boy Who Cried Wolf”. For amusement, a shepherd boy began periodically shouting out “wolf”, in order to rouse all the other villagers and force them to run all the way out to the sheep’s pasture before determining for themselves that there was no wolf.
However, the villagers soon caught onto this game; and less and less of them began heeding the boy’s (false) alarms. Finally and ironically, on the day a wolf actually appears in the pasture; no one at all responds to the boy’s wolf-call.
While the boy of the fable engaged in his serial-lying purely for the purposes of amusement, it’s certainly easy to ascribe other, probable motives for such lying. An obvious strategy would be to engage in such lies as a stalling tactic.
For example, as things started getting ugly on the Little Big Horn for General Custer and his men; one of his troops gets the idea to start shouting “the cavalry is coming.” At first; Crazy Horse and his warriors hesitate, or even pull back from their attack. But soon they start disregarding the shouts, and eventually ignore them altogether.
The previous hypothetical example is illustrative in another respect. Engaging in serial-lying as a stalling tactic changes nothing. It merely delays the inevitable.
Our economies have what is known as a “Business Cycle.” While “full business cycles” are generally deemed to stretch-out over roughly a decade, there are clear-and-obvious sub-cycles within these longer intervals. Specifically, throughout our modern economic history; the average length of any particular growth cycle is a little more than three years, with 40 months being the number most typically quoted.
Yet, with the current (supposed) “Recovery” in the U.S. now four years in length; we still see B. S. Bernanke engaging in the same, absurd song-and-dance. Going all the way back to the early months of this mythical recovery; B.S. Bernanke has been promising an “exit strategy” every few months – like a lethargic cuckoo-clock.
However, Bernanke’s game is actually a two-step. First he teases the slack-jawed yokels with another promise of an “exit strategy” (from the most extreme/insane monetary stimulus ever attempted by any government). Then, in the proud tradition of P.T. Barnum; he “provokes mystery” by telling the yokels he won’t actually deliver on this mythical exit strategy…yet.
Because (supposedly) it’s “too soon.” The Recovery “needs more time” to ‘gather strength’ and/or ‘build momentum’. Is this plausible?
What would we think if we saw a boy with a new bicycle, but four years later the boy is still riding around with the training wheels on his bike? A reasonable person would assume that the boy will never be able to ride the bike without training wheels – and should he remove them, he would instantly fall flat on his face.