May 1, 2013 · 18:01

The brutal end of an old man

We all have moments we are not proud of, we all have moments when something hits us and we do not realise it that it came, even though we were not involved or responsible. This happened to me this morning when I got my daily dose of Sky News at 05:00. Mr Mohammed Saleem Chaudry was stabbed to death less than 4 metres from his home in Birmingham. I remember Birmingham; it is a nice looking city. When I was there (I only saw it once) the city looked decently clean with plenty of pedestrian areas. One could say that it is a nice looking town. I visited the Walkabout and I had a gator tail steak. The last is hilarious, because I NEVER ate that in Australia. For football (soccer) fans there is the warning that this city is loaded with Ashton Villa fans, but what city is perfect nowadays. 😉

So, I have seen the place, and even though we see issues in every place we are, I feel happy that I am sensitive enough that the murder of this old man gets to me. He is described as an old man, walking with a cane on his way home from the Mosque. Is this an anti-Muslim attack? Was it just a drunk or doped up idiot not knowing what he was doing? All this is sheer speculation and I think it should be left up to investigators to find out what had happened and I hope they will find out with or without the assistance of crime stoppers (whose information had been added to the Sky News newscast).

Yet, there is a sense of fear that this is just the beginning. Is this all linked to the Six extremists who decided to attack the EDL? They failed because the rally ended early. Their admittance comes at almost the same time that the attack was. Is this what was linked? The timeline does not support this completely as there is a lap of 5 hours. Mr Chaundry was knifed 5 hours earlier, yet some idiot thinking that knifing an innocent old man walking with a cane is a solution?

It seems to me that there seems to be an interesting twist to this story at present.

When looking at the information the internet can give (so that I am as correct as possible) I initially found a BBC link that seemed to have been on the same route. The odd part was that the reference is pointing to February 2013.

This is the information the link gave: “Terrorism trial focus on Birmingham – BBC http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-21458869
Feb 21, 2013 – Irfan Naseer, Irfan Khalid and Ashik Ali, all from Birmingham, face life … November 2008: Rashid Rauf from Birmingham died in Pakistan in a US drone attack but his body was … “They have no experience of talking to Muslims at their level. … A 75-year-old man is stabbed to death near a primary school in …”

When looking at the link (as these summaries usually are automatically parsed), I found the page and there is NO mention at all of the 75-Year old. Now, I am very willing to consider that it was just another link to a current article, which makes perfect sense. Yet, this is not the case. There was no link. It is almost like the BBC either edited the story and forgot about the links already on the internet, or it is a second level of information.

There is supporting evidence of this.

UK NBC had this link to show:

“75-year-old man stabbed to death – News
news.uk.msn.com/uk/75-year-old-man-stabbed-to-death
23 hours ago – A 75-year-old man attacked as he returned from evening prayers had … in an attack just yards from his home in Small Heath, Birmingham, on Monday night. ….. dallying…..it was a hate crime…simply because he was a Muslim.”

The search engine provided the information above, yet the link takes you to the article with the headline “Murder victim stabbed three times”

It seems there are several levels of editing going on, which in reality might be fine enough. Articles get updated and edited all the time. There will always be an over-zealous writer who needs a little editing by his/her editor.
Consider the text “it was a hate crime…simply because he was a Muslim.” could even have been a valid response in anger. If it was my partner or father, I might have responded in similar ways. Could we blame the family for such feelings? Yet, I do not know whether it was or was not said.

Yet, this al shows another side of the press. This in my view is another notch on the barrel of press reform a-la Leveson. Why is information missing? The NBC article is only 234 words. As web space is next to free, the article could have been a lot more informative. If there was nothing more, then WHY is there such misinformation in the search engine? The press is not allowed mentions of ignorance on their side in this matter, considering the massive amounts of text they put on the internet. The fact that these events seem to have happened with BOTH the BBC and NBC gives food for thought that there is some level of managed information.
I cannot oppose the thought that some information might be suppressed for the need to keep the peace and not make issues escalate, why make things harder for the police? Yet, the press has shown too often that it is all about THEIR needs, the rest be damned. That much, the bulk of all people can agree on in the light of the Leveson report.

A 75-year-old man is stabbed to death near a primary school in Birmingham.

It is a sad event and no matter how sad the event, trying to manage information is often a bad idea.
I must add ‘IF THAT WAS THE CASE!’ The simple truth is that I cannot prove one side from the other, yet the evidence as the search engines bring them to me gives indication that information was edited, yet where and on what level is less certain. There was the report by the police as mentioned in more than one source that there was nothing to suspect that the attack was racially motivated. I doubt whether it could be disregarded at face value, but I am willing to take the police view at this point as they were on the scene and I was not.

Over the next few days we will likely hear more. Will the truth come out? This is less likely, but not because of the efforts of the Midlands Police. The reality is that when a man is walked upon and gets stabbed in the open road, there will likely be a lack of forensic evidence. I do not envy the work Detective superintendent Mark Payne has ahead of him, but no matter what. Should he find those behind this brutal and cowardly attack then the sweet taste of victory will definitely and well deserved be his.

A man, coming back from his place of worship is on his way home only to be stabbed to death pretty much in front of his home. It happened on the other side of the world, yet it saddened me more than usual.
What has this world come to?

 

1 Comment

Filed under Media

Tagged as , , , , , , , ,

April 27, 2013 · 13:22

The allegiance of Economists

If we are dependent on the future of the US and Europe, then we should require and should be given access to dependable numbers. I think we can all agree that certain predictions are hard to get, because we should all be able to agree on the fact that it is a lot harder then we bargained for.

Yet, if we look at the numbers before and after then good news is never as good as predicted and bad news is worse than they thought.

This can be seen in several fields, but nowhere as visible as today when the expected unemployment rate of Spain, which was expected to get as high as 26.5% has now surpassed 27.2%. We could consider that being off by 0.7% is not that bad, but these people are used to work in increments of a tenth of a percent, which mean they were off 7 times. On a population of 47.2 million this means that they ‘forgot’ about slightly more than 330,000 people. That is the size of Utrecht (Netherlands), Leicester (UK), Bonn (Germany), Nice (France), Bari (Italy) or Tarragona (Spain). That is not a small miscalculation at all. These cities are reasonable large by most definitions. In the US the closest city would be Santa Ana in California, currently ranked number 57 by size in the US.

Everyone awake at present? This is important, as both the politicians and all that press buzz comes from these kinds of predictions by economists. I am not stating that it is simple or easy. It is however the case that these people often cost a hell of a lot and many claim that they are needed. Yet, overall we see a collection of ‘miscalculations’ in a time where every budget is slashed from point X to the basement.

Another example was a prediction made by the Dutch CPB (Central Planning Desk). This document was made in 2010; please take that into consideration when looking at these numbers. It is expected that the further the future prediction goes, the more likely that a deviation is to be expected.

Unemployment rate was to decline from 6.5% in 2011 to 5.25% in 2015.
Consumer purchasing power was to increase annually by 0.25%.
The Government budget deficit would decline from 4.9% in 2011 to 2.9% in 2015.

We will take a look at later predictions, but I think it looks clear that none of these predictions panned out to be close to correct.

Interesting are the following statements on unemployment rates “De werkloosheid daalt van 6½% in 2011 naar 5¼% in 2015” This was in the initial document dated March 2010 as I wrote previously. Yet the second document, which was published in September 2011 writes “Naar verwachting daalt de werkloosheid in 2011 en 2012 niet verder en komt deze uit op gemiddeld 4¼% van de beroepsbevolking in beide jaren“.

[Translation]
The unemploymancy is not expected to decrease in 2011 and 2012 and this would amount to 4¼% of the professional population in both years.

So, we would think that this looks good. A much lower result then predicted which is good.

Yet the NOS (Dutch news broadcasting services) reported on the 16th of August 2012 that the unemployment rate had risen in July 2012 to 6½%. This shows not only the inaccuracy of the prediction; it also shows that predictions that go beyond 1 year in the current economic climate is not that reliable an act.

So what is the issue at hand?

When we read about all those cut backs, all those measures where we see a decline in legal aid, healthcare and a league of other needs now or soon no longer an option, should we be wasting large amounts of money on a document which seems to be a political presentation? We could even come to the conclusion that it has little value beyond its need as a political presentation.

In a day and age where the bulk of Europe is under such scrutiny of reducing cost, spending large amounts, resources and other additional costs on these debatable statistics should be regarded a little less then it currently is.

If you want to know a little more, then you should take a serious look at a book written by Darrell Huff. It was called ‘How to lie with statistics‘. It was initially written in 1954, and it saw the light of day again in 1991. It is an actual gem of much amazement! The book is really thin, so it will not take long to read it, but those pages offer a lot more insight then many books I have seen since then.

Darrell Huff, (1991) How to Lie with Statistics Penguin; New Ed edition, ISBN 0-14-013629-0

In 2010 Coen de Bruijn wrote a new book with plenty of examples. The book is thicker, yet remains light and amusing to read and as far as I know at present only available in Dutch, which is a shame as I feel certain that this book would be appreciated by both students and professionals all over the world. ‘Van tofu krijg je geheugenverlies‘ (translation: Tofu leads to memory loss). It has loads of examples where statistics were (mis)used, some quite unintentional I should add.

We should also look at these documents on the CPB. There is no evidence whatsoever that there was an intentional misrepresentation, yet, when we see the results and the effect as many newscasts all over the world use these numbers which results to either lull its population to sleep, or to soften the blows of bad news are things that should be regarded in some form.

Why should you care?

This is not just a Dutch issue. This issue is global! Too many use their national numbers in newscasts and live by these predicted percentages, whilst in reality they are in no way a representation of the facts. Even considering that most are nothing more than predictions and should not be regarded as factual, it seems that when the discussion moves to cutting back, too many nations seem to be focussing on the wrong presentations. It is actually quite fun (and I swear a complete coincidence) that only 5 hours after I started to work on today’s blog that Dutch newsgroup NOS announced a new director of the Dutch CPB. The new director will be Laura van Geest (who was formerly involved with the setting of the Dutch government budget). She was chosen by the same group that investigated the Dutch bank crises (Commission de Wit).

So back to these cut backs and more!

It is not just about cut backs and austerity. Spain is having riot issues and Greece is not in a state that much better. Harriet Alexander from the Telegraph commented in her piece on Greece holding a fire sale (source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/greece/10007606/Greeces-great-fire-sale.html).
This was a story that also made the news in the newspaper the Guardian by Rupert Neate. This also includes the Greek Embassy in London, so that place alone should take care of 0.000010714% of their debt (roughly). This means they only need 94,000 places of equal value to break even. The percentage should indicate that these acts are less than a drop of water on a hot plate. So instead of growing an option of income, it seems to show that the Greek government is bailing out, leaving a nation in utter bankruptcy and deserting its citizens.

I understand that they want to do something, yet what I am seeing is nothing less than a short term vision. When all is gone, when all possible ways of revenue, resources and incomes are gone, what is left? There are still the gold reserves for now, however when (or if) Spain, Cyprus and Italy sells theirs, what of value will be left?

It is time for governments to realise that they had given too much power to the industry and they are not getting them back unless they invoke a new way of thinking. If these companies continue to use a method of blatant outsourcing and under-pricing many for a tax reduced driven revenue that benefit just a dozen people, then it is time to change the game so that it is fair to its OWN citizens. My reasoning here is that their approach has even less morality then that of a mercenary, yet they claim to be the value to ‘that’ nation.

When we look at such overwhelming numbers of debt and unemployment rate, then we have an increasing responsibility to deal with that. Yes, in the first degree the governments need to get their budgets under control. They must more openly report the bad news and not sugar-coat it for whichever government is in office. It is also time to get back on the horse and wagon of in-sourcing! Consider the fact that too many companies are getting their Jeans, sport shoes and mobile phones from sweat shops and low cost places like Indonesia, Bangla Dash, China and a few alternatives, only to save a few dollars (of course per 100,000 units this results in a hefty saving). Yet on the other side those nations have hundreds of thousands without a job, and THAT bill is not with those companies. Even if they would only transfer 10% of these markets, we would see a decent reduction in unemployment rates and we see a local gain in trade. These are all good and essential things for Europe. The danger of not doing so would just set the end date of nations like Spain and Greece. In case you think that this will not happen, then think again. These economists will state on how things will turn for the better, and after they are proven wrong, then an excuse reasoning will surface and they walk on. Yet in the meantime a few with serious cash would have bought up areas of Greece and Spain for less than 10 cents on the dollar. Oldest rule in the book: “In confusion there is profit!”
Let us take the shown evidence that many placed online, so it is visible to all; let us all realise that WE hold our futures by work in actuality and they in debatable prediction do not.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media

Tagged as , , , , , , , ,

April 26, 2013 · 01:27

The press has another go

It is always fun to see a repeat of what has been there already. So I was not that surprised watching Sky News and getting another press approach for their regulations. They found another person to step in front of the camera. They made sure that this time there is an utter lack of arrogance. It turned into a casually moment of pointing blame on the politicians. In this case it was John Witherow from the Times. Well, the message is actually simple Mr Spokesperson we the people do not trust you at present!

All this is happening right when another editor of the Sun is being charged (Duncan Lacombe).

So we have the journalists in a corner for a change, oh goody! THEIR view of ‘the people have a right to know‘ has so far seemed to be nothing less than the option to overrule the people’s privacy at a moment’s notice.

It is of course an issue listening to Sky News for the simple reason that they are journalists themselves. Things seem to be pressed on one side and trivialised on the other. I still hang to the original idea that the Leveson report should completely be implemented with a (non-)political option of legislation.

Before you judge me to be against freedom of speech then you are wrong. I am all for freedom of the press, yet the Murdoch crowd (sorry for generalising this) has proven that their freedom to do whatever they like should not be an option even again. You see, one side we have the freedom of speech and on the other side we have the right to privacy, which too often is crushed by the press stating ‘the people have a right to know‘, whilst in reality it is just about making the quick visible exclusive visibility and their need of ego at the expense of anything else.

Issues that also surfaced (the Milly Dowler case) is yet another example. In that case not only was there no investigation, there is even more issues with a police force that as stated by sky news on April 25th ‘has a case of collective amnesia‘.

Or as quoting a line by the Guardian of April 24th 2013 “while a former senior officer from Surrey police said the press was ‘untouchable and all powerful’“. So not only is the press doing whatever it likes, it is interfering with police investigations, like they are the flipping ‘Special Branch’ (since 2006 known as SO15). Perhaps Commander Richard Walton could confirm whether the press is currently on their pay roll, which would allow for some awesome cost cutting solutions. Mr David Cameron would be so pleased.

We might never know what happened in the case of Milly Dowler. It is not unlikely that the phone hacking resulted in a loss of messages. Lost voice mail messages that could have assisted the Surrey Police department in their investigation. It is interesting that I read in the Guardian “An NoW journalist (name redacted)” It is interesting how that Journalist was redacted. So, Mr Witherow, how about the option of name redaction to be removed as a right for Journalists? How about an open name and shame issue where those people who seemed to have harassing the Surrey Police to be openly known to all. By your own words: ‘the people have a right to know‘.

My bigger issue is with some of the points mentioned (I will be playing the devil’s advocate here).

 1. A majority of independent members on all the bodies of the new regulator, with open and transparent appointments.
– My worry is that those appointments might not be as independent as we would like.

2. Public involvement in how the new Code of Practice will be framed.
– My worry is that this is one certain way to get loopholes placed and more of an issue is the delay that this public involvement brings. Delays the press would love to see going on and on and on.

I do agree that regulation should remain outside of the reach of politicians. Yet, adding regulations, even if it was a clear regulation to the conduct of the members of the press is needed. This is the part all media seem to be fighting, as they seem to prefer to remain footloose, fancy free and non-accountable. This is where I am no longer on their side (as the evidence over the last few has proved).

Yet, there is another side to journalism which I do not want to ignore. For every 500 half-baked phone mail chasers that call themselves ‘investigative jounalists’ there will be a real journalist like Paul Lewis or David Bergman (that group is larger than these two, but a lot smaller than most might realise). Here is the crux as they say. I would not want to hinder a journalist like David Bergman, or those hoping to step in his footsteps. Yet, the kind of ‘writers’ that many have been confronted with in the past, especially celebrities and victims of high profile cases there is one journalist that is there to dig into the shady sides of people, collecting specific information in whatever way they can to uncover the truth and the reality.

This reminds me of a scene in the West wing Season 2 episode ‘War Crimes’:
Will: “I don’t like being a stenographer. And I don’t like writing gossip. I read a column last week where a lady bemoaned the decade of scandals she’s had to cover, as if the news was to blame for the quality of journalism. I don’t know if there’s ever been a more important time to be good at what I do. Can you imagine how much I don’t give a damn about what Toby said to a staffer?“

It makes my point stronger then I could (it is Aaron Sorkin at his best). Too many Journalists are way too happy to cover gossip and get their stardom visibly shown in any way they can. The environment made them that way and it must change. I am still baffled by the issues, delays and opposition against the Leveson report. If anything, that report shows the weaknesses and also called for proper legislation and regulation to protect the privacy of people (without stopping the freedom of speech). Of course this is not what the press wants as they want to just do, post and publish whatever they like, especially when it is about ratings and circulation.

The only thing that is currently interesting is that at present politicians are trusted more than journalists are. Who would have ever thought that such a day would ever become a reality?

Leave a comment

Filed under Law, Media

Tagged as , , , , , , , , ,

April 18, 2013 · 17:15

Jamie Foxx showed more!

Even though there is a lot to talk about, and more will be talked about. This first part is something I feel quite strong about. It all started with the MTV movie awards. I used to be a movie buff. Being able to see one movie a week on the big screen is what I still consider the good life.
I was watching the awards, noticing Jamie Foxx wearing a t-shirt. The text as the letters ‘N’ and ‘O’ were in red would read as “Know Justice – Know Peace” and “No Justice – No Peace”. I thought it was a clever t-shirt the way it was brought. There were pictures on the t-shirt and that is all where I left it. That is, until the day after when I saw all over social media (Facebook/Google+) the racist remarks Jamie Foxx was subjected to. It was quite fascinating how that t-shirt turned a group of Americans in Racist Bigots, a statement that might be slightly too synonymous.

So this is how I learned that this is all linked to the Trayvon Martin case. I had heard of those events, as they even made the news here on our small island of Australia (only island with 35,876 km beach front). Jamie’s T-Shirt implies that he is speaking out for the deceased young man Trayvon Martin, and that is all fair and good. It is always good to see the Hollywood limelight take a decent look at social matters, so I started to take another look at this case.

The shortest (and not so correct) look would be that a Neighbourhood watch coordinator notices a suspicious person and calls the police. When the police arrives it turns out that the Neighbourhood watch coordinator has shot the man in self-defence. The dead person is Trayvon Martin. The man responsible for shooting him is let go after 5 hours at the police station.

This way too short story is the start of a lot of issues.

Now let us take a deeper look at the events as they are currently known.

Let us take a look at the victim. The young man Trayvon Martin (from now on referred as TM) was on that day still 17 years old. He was a High School student in Miami Gardens (which is in the North of Miami city). That day he was visiting that location with his father where his father was visiting his fiancée. He had been there a few times before. So, TM had a clear reason for being there and according to some of the information, he was walking back to his father’s Fiancée’s place coming from a convenience store.

There are all kinds of information coming from area’s regarding school suspensions (plural) and other issues. Yet, the question becomes on what this have to do with the actual case. Character assassination might be regarded as good form in the court. Yet, in my humble opinion, that is the approach you take when you need to get someone OFF the hook. Not when there is clear evidence of a transgression, where there was clear evidence of self-defence.

The information (as I have so far seen it):

  1. Shows that TM was unarmed
  2. Shows that he was on route back from a convenient store
  3. He had been there before and on route to the house of a ‘relative’ (he was shot less than 65 meters from that place).

 

These clear points seem to have been made.

The evidence against the shooter Mr George Zimmerman (from now on referred as GZ) is of another nature. No matter if he is a neighbourhood watch coordinator.

From that side we see that he noticed TM was noticed by GZ. He called the sighting in to the police and the report states that TM was very suspicious in his view and GZ made several emotional responses in regards to seeing TM.

From the information that I know now (the police might not have had all the information at that time) there is still a collection of facts that make it questionable why GZ would have been released after only 5 hours. This is at best manslaughter in defence, at worst this was cold blooded murder.

If GZ was a real neighbourhood watchman then chasing after him was pretty pointless. I agree that I am unfamiliar with that area. Yet, the police was called. The police would respond and his job would have been done. Unless he had ACTUAL knowledge that someone was in immediate danger, the only thing he should have done was waiting for the police. So we have a case where GZ had a 9mm semi-automatic weapon. TM had no weapon at all. This reads more than just amateur hour. This does not read like a case against gun control. It reads like a case against Neighbourhood watch looking to satisfy some quick justice.

But I am digressing.

On April 12th 2012 GZ was charged with second degree murder.

The media soon after took over and from part of the info I read it seems that this case is getting flooded with historical ‘evidence’ of many sides. The case will go to trial in June 2013, so June will see a lot of heated debates. From my view towards this case my points are the following:

  1. Why did GZ did not keep his distance? EVEN if TM was there with no good intentions, he knew he had been spotted so he would not stay there. If that had been done TM would be alive and there would be no issue at all.
  2. GZ was armed. By keeping a safe distance he would never have been in danger at any point. Even IF there was danger, he could have shot his attacker in the leg, which meant no fatalities, and people tend to stop being a threat when shot in the leg.
  3. The fact that TM was shot from a distance LESS than half a metre away.
  4. The statement that GZ was not to follow and the response that GZ did not have to follow TM was not a legally binding advice is an interesting approach.

I see this as debatable. It could be seen that GZ was out for ‘blood’. By inviting to be seen as a threat he could make TM act out as TM was in danger trying to defend himself and as such GZ had the option to shoot TM and look like a hero. I agree that I am speculating here. These facts and more are all to be spoken of the trial and it is up to a jury to decide whether he is guilty or innocent. The trial is where this comes to a point. This will flame a massive amount of racial outbursts.
If the social media is anything to go by, then the US will be in for a rough ride comes next June. It does not just stop with social media however. NBC fired several people involved with editing the tapes they had on the events (9-1-1 telephone call). In this it seems that they intended to paint Mr Zimmerman in a negative way. So, there seems to be little doubt in my mind that racial issues in America are still far from over. Having a Non-Caucasian President seems to have changed way too little.

The part I do feel strong about is that this is not, and should not be about gun control. From my view, whether right or wrong Mr George Zimmerman SHOULD have listened to the 9-1-1 dispatcher. I still believe that guns do not kill people. In this case stupid people kill people. Many people will see this as gun control. At that point consider. If TM was killed in ‘self-defence’ with an axe, does this mean the US will need to have Axe control?

Getting back to the Mr Jamie Foxx issue of social awareness. I think he had every right to wear that T-Shirt. I believe that being socially aware is a good thing. To wear it on such a day, where you can inspire an entire generation to be(come) socially aware is a good thing, and as such I say ‘Well done Mr Foxx!’

Leave a comment

Filed under Law, Media

Tagged as , , , , , ,

April 15, 2013 · 12:57

The Euro in intensive care?

It is always nice to see that the NOS news will not stop to give me the inspiration I need on a gruelling Monday morning. We have all heard on the image of the Euro, the need for bail outs left, right and centre and the impression that the events do not seem to worry too many people. Yet, perhaps this look on the matter at hand from the financial industry and their ‘beneficiaries’ are overly too not worried. What most seemed to have forgotten is that any government (especially in Western Europe) is dependent on voters and the way they think, or more precisely the way they fear!

With a possible new political party, leaning slightly to the right (or better stated slightly conservative) a new option will have arrived with one specific agenda. The intention to move Germany away from the Euro currency. In itself it is perhaps not the immediate worry. Consider that Western Europe was on a route to real or feigned restoration, which does require Germany to weather the storm as it was (I am not ignoring the work France did on this either). It was the immense amount of self-austerity that Germany performed on itself that made them the strongest economy at present.

The issue is the new party! Even if this new party gets a firm foothold, it does not mean that Chancellor Merkel is in danger as yet. The predictions are that this new party stands to get up to 24% of the votes (presently at maximum). So the Chancellor is still in a comfortable pace for now. There is however the issue that not much more is allowed to go wrong at present as this could change the game as is with Chancellor Merkel to become the loser in the next election.

Why is this so important?
Anyone who tries to trivialise this is clearly of their rocker (and out of their mind too). This event, should it take place is huge and the impact it will have is pretty much beyond what anyone can imagine.

Consider two scenarios.

In the first scenario we look at the one that had been an issue a few times in the past. This was the situation where those countries unable to pull their weight would be cast out of the Euro. Merkel united with the others to prevent this in the past. Greece was number one on that list, but at present Spain might actually end up getting added to that list, so there is a lot at stake and the new party might change all that.

The second one is the one that is most concerning to all non-Germans. If the new party gets the strong voice, and this chance is not that far-fetched at present, then there is a chance that they will move to remove Germany from the Euro and moves straight back into the Deutschmark.

There will be many voices on how this will never happen, and then carefully phrased denials on how the Euro is in serious danger. Make no mistake; they will be leading you on. The bulk of all Euro countries are in deficit. Most have NO concrete plan on recovery (they all claim it will happen, yet the events are against them). They all claim that they have which they obfuscate by overenthusiastic information on economic recovery NEXT year. Too many parties are in assumption mode and too few in a state of pragmatist optimism. I do not pretend to be the expert. I am not some PhD with the knowledge of economic events. I am a data miner. I have looked at data in many forms for most of my life. From this point I looked at data and no matter how complex some parties make it all out to be, some simple rules always apply.

First event to take into consideration is that America seems to be printing more and more money on a daily basis. Printed money, which does not seem to be set against anything tangible especially, taking into account a massive 17 trillion dollar debt. Funny enough Germany did something similar in the 1920’s. I remember it because I used to have one of those fünfhundert tausend Deutsch Mark bills (DM 500,000) which is now valued at less than $5. So is this where America is headed? No! I doubt that it will get THAT bad, yet a bankrupt America would be the definite death nail in the coffin now known as ‘the Euro’.

A second fact in this equation is the economical drop in several nations. The Netherlands, Italy, France are all in a not so good financial position. A nice little footnote to this is that the Dutch TV (NOS) reported that the Netherlands would see a more then 2% increase in their economy for 2014 on March 3rd 2013. Yet on the Dutch government site   (http://www.cpb.nl/persbericht/3213019/zwakke-groei-economie-door-achterblijven-consumptie) on 13th of March (10 days after my blog doubted that in my article ‘march Hare of Government’) it now states the increase to be only 1%. I still think it is slightly too high, but whatever, I had made my point. France is also toning down their near future predicaments for their economy. For now only Germany seems to have some reasonable strength (in the short foreseeable term). This is relative as it cannot pull the weight of Italy, France and the Netherlands. Should Germany pull out then the Euro will have a definite problem on several levels.

Before you consider calling Germany names consider that the Euro can only survive if ALL pull their weight. Most of the nation’s overspending the way have been doing for some time is not that. As stated in earlier blogs. When you overspend for well over a decade, at some point the invoice is due and too many are ignoring that little fact. So don’t blame Germany, blame your respective governments. If you have any doubts on that, look at how Cyprus needed 10 billion, an island with barely a million people living there. That is only one island. Several nations are in much higher debts. Granted is that they are not reliant on 80% of their GDP coming from the banks and financial industries.

So the Euro and the issues they might be getting.

It would be very incorrect to say that it is all about the value of the German Mark, yet this is not that incorrect. If you have a soccer team and you lose your star player, will that team survive? Yes, it usually does! However, in most cases that team will not end up as high because of the loss of their star player. When that team is pulled by 1-2 players a lesser result is usually the case. The issue becomes will that team continue on the same level (division) as the other teams. My thought is that this is not the case. That new German party does have a valid point. The other nations could survive if those weaker players are no longer there. What will happen in the immediate response is one from the markets and it will not be a positive one.

We are now left with two thoughts.

1. Should this direction be avoided?
I do not have a direct answer. Let us face it. The chance of Greece or Cyprus EVER paying back their debts is pretty much out of the question. There are off course the additional nations Spain and Ireland. What about them? So far they are coping, but consider that the economy will remain weak until at least the end of 2014. There is no true answer of what to do in that case. Throw out more and more nations? Will the Euro become a factor analyses under the leave-one-out approach? This seems a cold and very logical approach to deal with this matter. Have we loathed ourselves to such an affect that nations are now under the scrutiny of a spread sheet approach?

2. If we embrace this path what is the use of the Euro?
I personally still see the Euro as the means for America to do away with all these different currencies and have a nice go at corporate Europe by moving in with all their options and less as a solution to unite Europe. This is a personal feeling in this matter and the evidence seen in the last three years are clear that European unity is a nice theory and that is all it remained. A theory! If there was true unity then budgets would be kept in check on a European scale. Yet the Euro nations seem to remain a place of PowerPoint global and expedite ‘the local needs’ as it ever was. No matter what we read in the papers and propagated by all kinds of interested parties. The issues in play are kept in a vicious circle.

I wonder whether this is what the banks envisioned from the very beginning, a debt driven society that leaves them out of the equation to do whatever they wanted. This is how we get back to this new German party. Their most prominent speaker was Bernd Lucke, a professor of Macroeconomics from the University of Hamburg. Is he wrong? He definitely knows more about economy than I ever will, but so are the experts who are on the other side of that equation. So where should we stand? It was Bernd Lucke who mentioned in a German magazine ‘Spiegel’ (German for Mirror) in 2011 that all these collapses would end up in the German lap for an amount of 180 billion Euro. That is almost 2200 Euro for each German citizen. And it seems that so far his vision is slowly becoming reality. If someone has to pay 2200 for damages they never made, or issues they never ordered. Would you not get upset with that?

Governments do not seem to accept accountability, Banks and financial institutions are given free reigns to do for the most, whatever they like and the population end up having to pay for it all. How long until we have had enough? This is where the German population is at now. So when people start talking in a trivialising way consider your personal financial situation. Consider paying 2200 Euro for something that is not your fault, not your order and add to this that there is no guarantee that it will not happen again next year. Now consider that the amount is on average 15% of a Germans pre taxation annual income. With German economy losing strength not unlike other European countries, ask yourself how many Germans will consider an alternative to the vision of Merkel?

My views?

Europe should stick together, but there is a clear valid worry that leaving the bill to be paid by a few without clear regulations on what some are allowed to do is just not realistic. It is the present German fear and it is shared by too many people in Germany.

 

1 Comment

Filed under Finance

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , ,

April 13, 2013 · 14:47

Cold War Two?

When we look at the news and other media, then we see immigration issues on many levels and in many nations. There is no denying that every nation has its own issues with immigration.

Here in Australia there has been an uneasy issue with refugees for a long time. Many claim that options could be found, especially when processing off-shore, yet the initial issue was clear that this could never be done as it breached humanitarian law. Yet, only one year later PM Julia Gillard seems to look at additional options to press this solution once more.

The issue that brings this to the top of the list is the issue that the NOS reported in the case of the Russian Dolmatov, which was also reported by Fox News and the BBC. The BBC was even so clever to put the word suicide within quotes. Perhaps they have the same concerns I have. Was this truly just a suicide, or are these levels of miscommunications set to such an unusual level that more is going on? Perhaps some of the involved parties were doing Putin a personal favour? Before we consider this to be another thought of conspiracy theory, let us take a look at the facts involved.

First
The Dutch IND (Immigration and Naturalisation services) conveniently concluded that Dolmatov’s life was not in danger should he return to Russia. Perhaps they want to rethink their status? If a band like Pussy Riot, likely nothing more than a nuisance can get placed in a small cell, then someone with ACTUAL knowledge of Russian missile systems could be regarded as a more serious issue to Russia, only fuelling the evidence that wrong calls were made.

Additional evidence was shown by the Dutch Newspaper NRC where information was brought that there was information that the FSB tried to recruit Dolmatov. Whether that part can be proven, it does clearly indicate that Dolmatov’s return to Russia would have much further reaching consequences. There is no doubt in my mind that these facts should have been in the IND report and as such this entire immigration process would have taken another turn from day 1. If these facts were intentionally ignored or omitted, then the question becomes, were these facts tampered with, and by whom for what reason?

In the rebuttal, if those facts by NRC were incorrect then even so, the fact that he was a visible activist against the Putin administration was a known fact. The fact that the Russian police had been actively engaging anti-Putin protests is well known. Several newspapers had reported on some anti-Putin activists to be jailed for terms in excess of four years.

We see support to the status as it SHOULD have been in: “Handbook on Procedures and Criteria for Determining Refugee Status under the 1951 Convention and the 1967 Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees”

For this we look at the General principles (31).

“The inclusion clauses define the criteria that a person must satisfy in order to be a refugee. They form the positive basis upon which the determination of refugee status is made.”

That document also states that: “There is no universally accepted definition of “persecution”, and various attempts to formulate such a definition have met with little success. From Article 33 of the 1951 Convention “it may be inferred that a threat to life or freedom on account of race, religion, nationality, political opinion or membership of a particular social group is always persecution“.

So we seem to have a proven point. The Netherlands did sign that charter and it even specifically states that the Netherlands extended the application to Aruba. With additional evidence from Dutch press sources (the NRC is often regarded as one of the highest quality sources in Dutch Journalism), I can come to no other conclusion that this was NOT just an administrative (data entry) error.

Second
I was stated in the Dutch NOS newscast that the immigration police did not mention the right that he was allowed to have his own lawyer. Such a basic right omitted? Can we deduce that there is a structural problem?

This can be supported by a report in a case that was judged in November 2006 where was stated “in een geval waarin ervan wordt uitgegaan dat het aan verweerder – de IND of de politie – te wijten is dat geen advocaat bij het gehoor aanwezig was, sprake is van schending van het recht op rechtsbijstand. De rechtbank verwijst daartoe naar artikel 5.2, vijfde lid, Vreemdelingenbesluit 2000 en artikel 18 van de Grondwet.”

[Translation]: in a case where the defendant (the IND or police), that no legal representation was present at the interview is a transgression on the right of legal aid. The bench refers to article 5.2 paragraph 5 of the refugee act 2000 and article 18 of the constitution.

There is additional evidence to state that the IND has had its failings longer than that. Can we therefor reject the assumption that this is ‘just’ miscommunication as was reported? This gives a view by both Gertjan Bos (Chief inspector of Security and Justice) and Fred Teeven (Secretary of Security and Justice) as insincere and an utter fail. The words by Gertjan Bos where he was unable to answer whether better dealing with the situation would had a different result cannot be answered as something too funny to consider to be a serious response.

The first seems to clearly prove that Dolmatov did make pass the requirements of Refugee. As such, as the detainment of Dolmatov was unjust, it would already be evidence that reason of a possible ‘suicide’ is no longer an issue.

Third
The NOS reported that Dolmatov had already tried a first attempt to take his own life, after which no physician was assigned to his case. That in itself is a failing too. This does have a two sided issue. On the one hand there was a suicide risk and no proper care was taken, which is an even worse ‘foo foo’ point for the government. Yet on the other side, the responses that there was pressure and intimidation in regards to Dolmatov taking his life is also an issue, as there is no mention that this pressure was there in the first attempt (or at least so it seems to be the case).

So, are the Dutch dealing with a failed IND system, or was this all a very convenient solution for the Russians. The fact that the Dutch government is very vocal in accepting blame after a three month investigating is not strange. So that is not a factor. What is a factor is that Secretary Teeven did not want an investigation into the dealings of the IND after the murder of evicted Serbian Kosanovic only a month before the Dolmatov case hit.

The NOS did report that Secretary Teeven will adopt the findings in regards to the Dolmatov report. Yet, part of the newscast is a worry, where this has been set as a failing with inaccurate computers and miscommunication. Blatant right violations seem to be at the centre of this all and as such we could deduce that the IND has a strong infrastructure failure where the rights of refugees are set. I read more than one article where it is stated that the IND prefers to do a first interview WITHOUT legal representation, as to ascertain whether a person is a true refugee. This is fair enough, yet, in a legal state, such a solution should be regarded as inferior. This I voice as we know that many western nations have a high amount of freedom and refugees come from places where these rights are missing. This means that refugees who are trying to escape a place of intimidations (often worse) as placed in a setting where they are highly intimidated. They are in their own job interview where failing the interview would mean certain death. Would you not be intimidated?

Going back to the Dolmatov case. There was an interesting mention made by the Amsterdam Herald on the 4th of April. There it stated the following: “Ludmilla Doronina, Dolmatov’s mother, said that as the note went on the style became less recognisably her son’s. Towards the end it contains an elementary spelling mistake which she insists he would never have made. ‘On the first page every comma is in the right place,’ she told Dutch state broadcaster NOS. ‘I think he wanted to give a sign that this had been written under the influence of something or someone.’”

I mention this as I found it. I am not sure how reliable this is, yet as the Amsterdam Herald seems to be the only source, some question marks should be added. I do wonder if any of the Journo’s took a serious look at those insinuations. It does not matter whether the mother is an emotional source (some papers live on emotions). It is a fact that could support or reject certain issues currently under discussion.

In the end we are left with an interesting question. If refugee issues are mounting up, and in this case where a nation as evolved, liberal and free as the Netherlands has a failing of this magnitude. Should we worry about certain issues that are now visibly in play all over the commonwealth?

Is this the second cold war? A war that decides who gets to live in freedom? For if freedom is a right subjected to conditions then what defines freedom and what is the future of any refugee?

2 Comments

Filed under Law, Media

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

April 1, 2013 · 00:46

60% confiscated and counting in Cyprus!

We knew that the played situation of the Cyprus deal seemed to have a few more angles than foreseen. We saw the two-step dance routine by Jeroen Dijsselbloem and Christine Lagarde. We saw the final second meeting and agreements after hours of delay until the negotiations were set with its back against the wall. We saw the hard felt news on those Cypriots. Some of them were defiant; some of them were blaming different parties. The last part is all good and fine. But the news as stated on BBC and other stations now mention that those owning over 100,000 Euro, are likely to lose up to 60%.

A number of enormous strangling events have been placed in effect; ready to make sure that the money does not get out of Cyprus.

So what is wrong with this picture of the bail-out? Part of me does not disagree that a hefty price is to be paid. There is a very good run down to be seen on the BBC site at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-16290598

It gives a short and to the point timeline. So you all should check this out.

You see, the press might not be asleep at the wheel, yet, even after all these high pea-cock statements about the freedom of the press and the need for self-control and no charter and all these other statements of ‘fact’ as to what they should be allowed to do, seem to remain EXTREMELY quiet in regards to the underlying facts of Cyprus at present. We know they ran into trouble when they took massive losses on the Greek government bonds. So, the Cypriot situation had been known about for a long time.

This brings us all to an interesting question. With the Greeks all getting over 150 billion Euros in bail-outs and THEIR bank customers not being cut, how come the Cypriots are getting sliced to this degree? More important, how come these sides of information in regards to press freedom did not make it to the newspapers to the extent it should have been shown?

So, the bailing out bank in Cyprus, if given 2% out of that Greek tragedy could have prevented the need for many savers to be chopped. Let us not forget that the Greek bailout in total has topped 320 BILLION Euro and it is Cyprus who had bought some those Greek bonds (amongst others) that got them into this mess to some extent.

This had nothing to do with Chancellor Merkel or Germany itself (who many seem to blame). This situation seems to show an almost basic lack of arithmetic skills with many parties. How interesting that this did not come up in the Dijsselbloem-Lagarde show of statements and posturing. This is NOT to blame them; I am just asking a few questions.

More important, the fact that this had been going on since 2010, means that either a few people are dropping not one ball, but several left, right and centre. Or the game played is about a whole lot more than just a bail-out. There is the additional issue, which is that bankers are allowed to too much of wielding, weaving and transferring issues that should have been out in the open for others to be judged of before this all was allowed. There is NO way in my mind that this could not have been prevented if proper steps had been taken by several parties. Consider that even in the final days that Cyprus was flaunting options to gas reserves to several parties including the Russians. Could this not have been done sooner? Several businesses in Europe and US could have stepped in in this attempt to raise businesses. If we can believe the voice President Obama about moving forward the US economy, than the fact that they have not been loudly all over this option seems odd, irregular and in my mind definitely questionable. So are these gas reserves for real or was this a quick Cypriot horse to open the IMF bank vaults? (The Trojan horse was already used in Troy).

In the first degree:
The Cyprus government had a first responsibility to take firm control. When the banks are over 85% of your GDP, a government does not get to look out of a window, blow their nose, then state ‘Did we miss something?‘ This level of utter incompetence (for a lack of a better word) is beyond belief. To me this reeks strongly of two partners (politicians and bankers) enabling each other, and then settling others with the bill. The issue for me is that there has been a total lack of transparency. That evidence becomes a lot stronger if we consider that their bad fortune is linked to borrowing to Greece. So when were those government bond deals done, and why were they not dealt with when they were giving hundreds of billions in Euro’s to clean up the Greek issue?

In the second:
All this reads like banks are moving huge chunks of money from place to place (or from loan to loan), with likely 1-2 executives getting a decent (read 7 figure number) commission out of that. Could this thought be true? (I was making a commercial assumption there). So why are these transactions not a lot more open and visible? This question should be taken a lot more seriously when you consider the 2004 and 2008 bank burns. Beyond that we are now likely to see a bail-out strategy between 2010 and 2013 that is more than just flawed. This entire implementation of bad banks will haunt us all down the track.

And should you consider that the money moves are not happening (which might be fair enough), then consider that people do NOT stick their necks out to THAT degree without a decent pay check behind that. These people would have known that there was a decent danger of bankrupting a nation. So whatever the deal was, it would have needed to be mucho sweet for whoever was adding his signature at the bottom.

Now let us look back at those points. The press has been too blatantly absent from all this. Yes, groups like BBC and Guardian have been active, but these are just two of a very small group that is actually digging deep. Most parties seemed to have repeated very little more than the Reuters newsflash, with all these hundreds of investigative journalists that seem to be all over the place does that not seem a little strange? Add to this the famous Cyprus bailout press meeting. How Mr Dijsselbloem was carefully phrasing abstracts like structures and solutions. Yet, until the Guardian asked their question, the ‘solution’ bad-bank seemed to be pussy footed around. Even after that, that phrase was carefully circumvented as much as possible by all parties.

This is why this last blog reads a lot more emotional than the other ones. From my point of view it is a simple approach. We are being managed. The situation is managed to a certain degree, the events are managed to a certain degree and the Cyprus Crises is shown in details, but people tended to focus for the most on the emotional parts. The people, their savings and the daily impact the banks had on their lives. A real proper timeline that gives us an account on how it drove itself over the edge is often sketchy. I find it all too sketchy.

Last is a smaller element which was reported in News.com.au on the evening of March 30th “Lawmaker Mavrides, meanwhile, confirmed that a committee appointed by President Nicos Anastasiades would investigate a list published by Greek media of Cypriot politicians who allegedly had loans forgiven”. This is a smaller part, yet, that means that there is more than just one link where politicians are making personal deals with bankers is not really that far-fetched. We should wait until the facts are investigated and reported, however, that investigation might take a lot longer with all the issues around. It does however give more credence to my earlier statement regarding the interaction between bankers and politicians.

Should you doubt me? That is fair enough!

Consider another avenue. On 30th November 2010 Jullian Assange revealed that the next target of his whistle-blowing website will be a major U.S. bank. The same date a red notice was issued by Interpol. It was around that time that the hunt for Assange intensified by a lot. Perhaps the one bank was just the beginning? If we look back at the issues we know now, then there is a chance that someone made mention of the LIBOR percentage tweaking issue.
If this is what frightens the US, then consider the consequences of a system like LIBOR being manipulated through the total value of trade. If that would have been off by 11.2%. Out of $1000T (UK and US combined) then that difference would be $112T.

I would love to get 1% finder fee of that! It would make me the FIRST Trillionaire in history (not bad for a person only dreaming to be a Law Lord some day).

This is however not about greed (I would be happy to settle on 1% of 1% of that amount), it is about the amounts that are in play here. We knew about the LIBOR percentage manipulation games played and those fines are still being sent out to the involved banks during this year. Yet the total amount does not seem to be under investigation. At least, not by a range of those loud shouting reporters we heard so much about in the last 6 months (who keep on shouting on how unfair Lord Justice Leveson was). When you look at the total value then you will read about statements of complications, non-clarity and other statements that give way to non-revealing reports. Interesting that something THIS important seems to be lacking transparency.

All this connects straight back to the IMF and Eurozone issues in play. For the chosen few it is extremely important that the slow waltz controlled by Mr Dijsselbloem and Mrs. Lagarde continues as is. Because this is NOT about what George Soros says in Inside Job (2010) “We have to dance until the music stops“. This same analogy was used in the movie Margin Call (2011). It is however the issue that in our reality the dance itself is the nightmare that keeps many financial institutions up at night. The moment that proof of large scale manipulations becomes visible (and proven) to the many, that is the moment Wall Street ends, the US goes bankrupt and our way of life stops quite literally. At that point it all stops. Then what?

So why not regulate these banks in tougher Draconian ways? These situations go beyond normal. Well, consider that there is not just the chance to lose a lot; there is the potential for these banks to win big. The problem becomes that the speculating approach banks have taken could be seen as one casino with too many independent well trained quality gamblers. To continue to remain in existence the banking system needs two factors.

First they need the one point advantage like in Blackjack (or the zero in Roulette); the second advantage is that they need more cash. This is the entire danger! The bank is no longer THAT rich and they are up against high stake gamblers who know the game through and through. So now their only playable assets left are the bonds no one wants and what is left of your pensions. So how long do you think you have any money left?

Last thoughts, how come the markets keep on going up? Financial markets are in the dump, Cyprus is in an utter depression, whilst the UK, the Netherlands, France, Spain and Italy remain in a state of recession. All these issues give me a clear impression that we are being managed in more ways than one.

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

March 25, 2013 · 15:16

Ideology?

It was tempting to continue on my blog to have another go at those ‘Masters’ of finance, but a newscast by the NOS (Dutch News Broadcasting Service) opened my eyes to another issue that is playing at this precise moment. It also plays in other nations, even though most might not have given it much visibility and we might not be aware, but many people have met this situation whether they are aware of it or not.

For me this started in 1983/1984. I knew a man, just a loose acquaintance who I met in our days in the army. After his tour with UNIFIL, where he was placed in Lebanon for 6 months he was swayed and decided to join the PLO (after he returned home). At that time, I thought he was an utter idiot and I had only barely celebrated the point of no longer being a teenager. Those lovely days, everything was clear in black and white! Grey was for pussies!

Listening to the voice of Yassin El Forkani in regards to stopping Dutch citizens joining in their Jihad against Assad I find myself in a very different place. Ideology, how can we condemn it? This is not a group of people joining as terrorists (or perhaps they are). No, these people belief in what they think is right, and they are willing to put their lives in danger to fight for what they belief. They feel that they are fighting to depose a murdering tyrant. Who is correct? Who is right?

Yassin argues a valid and good point: “The youth does not see grey, they cannot relate to nuance“. How right he is. He is pleading. He wants these ‘kids’ to stay at home, to support their family, to finish their studies and to build a future. From my view now, he is correct. Yet, does that make the stance of those people who went to fight against Assad wrong?

Looking back to 1983 perhaps my Dutch comrade was not wrong, yet I would not have joined him. If I aligned with that train of thought I would have joined the IDF. We might have ended up facing one another. He was swayed by the charisma of Arafat. There is no doubt that Arafat had Charisma, only fools ignore that part. So how does this relate to Syria? It is clear that the people fighting Assad are in need of troops, materials, weapons and ammunition. For me to judge one side, or the other seems hollow and empty. Not because I care/not care, I believe that a sovereign nations must manage their own issues. This is not because of my level of care, but because these pivotal moments of a nation are written by the victors. The Netherlands took care of the Spanish, The Americans took care of the British and the list goes on and on and on.

Should we oppose any stance, by any reason, we must understand that for most of us, our nation, whichever it is came into existence one way or another, and belief me, most of those histories are a bloody mosaic of deaths and executions, the ones who fight fair usually die.

A view that was also shown in that newscast was a jihadist speaking out for going to the war, but he was not going, because he is a father and he is not strong (His words). Does anyone remember ‘the Patriot’ with Mel Gibson? He got a nice script ‘A parent does not have the luxury of choice’. Remembering my past, when I decided not to go either. I was not a parent, was I weak? I do not think so! I had a life to return to. I had some level of roots and it seemed to me, I had something to look forward to. Is that the threshold factor we are missing? It seems to me in these nations where unemployment levels are rising, any clarion call of ideology will be considered by those who listen.

So, how to see the situation in Syria? More important, will it end with Syria? This is the other side of social networking. Interests can grow, people can be swayed and troops could be gathered this way. This is what was feared the strongest by FBI, MI-5 and a few others. Not that these people went to fight for their beliefs. No, the fears are that they come back with a full arsenal of military trainings. This would be a massive win for Lone wolf recruiters and it would be a real concern to those having to deal with the returning people.

The fact that these groups are growing large in size, willing to go there at a moment’s notice and indeed take up arms is a new charter in war management we have not seen before to this size and extent. It is certain that it will go on, and many will start to ponder two issues. Where will they be swayed to next and what are the international ramifications? Today Damascus, tomorrow Doha, then what? Muslim, Jew, Hindu or Christian, when a citizen takes up arms against another nation it will become a diplomatic issue, non-combatant or not.

1 Comment

Filed under Media

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , ,

March 22, 2013 · 21:33

Asleep at the wheel of the banking industry?

Cyprus is fast spinning out of control. The banks are still closed; the people are near civil revolt. All this was not just implied by me; it seemed to me that these acts were clear as day. So are people asleep at the wheel of the Eurozone finance?

The problem is that I am not that overly intelligent. In addition, I never had a degree in economy. So what on earth are the parties involved up to?

Last night on the 21st another Cyprus meeting was set in motion. And here, now the new game comes into play. Yes, they might have an alternative! They have offered a solution opting with two banks, a good and a bad bank. (Source: NOS News) Is this it? Is this the wave that we will see? It seems that Goldman Sachs has been very active. It was Goldman Sachs who initially mentioned such a solution in a few cases. This included the SNS bank, however the solution was rejected there and it caused the nationalisation of the Dutch SNS bank. I spoke about this in an earlier blog, and likely you might have read it in a league of other sources discussing this.

As mentioned, I did not study economics, yet I am overwhelmingly against this solution. There is no denying that the Goldman Sachs boys (and girls) are loads more qualified than me in this field and this has to be solved by clever people. All this I agree with. Yet, sweeping loads of debt under a carpet so that those who created the debt to forget about it is not the solution. Getting rid of it by creating bad bank swaps is not a solution and to accumulate all these bad banks in an effort to offset the overvalued total global sum as set in LIBOR is not a solution either (even though that would have been VERY clever indeed).

The banks never ending ability to play quick and loose with bank funds at the expense of all their customers so that they can enjoy a quick raise in commission is clear evidence that after 4 years, doing nothing is just no longer an option. It is extremely frustrating to listen to politicians and journalists games for alleged infringement of their freedom to speech and the need for better budgets. The one party that needs some intense new levels of legislation is left alone to play the games they play.

Yesterday’s news on NOS, where we saw the head of the Eurozone finance ministers Jeroen Dijsselbloem getting flame baked by the German Peter Simon who is a member of the German Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs. He went the route of dust, stating that he was taking responsibility for certain joint decisions. So is this all incompetence? If we consider that he met with Christine Lagarde earlier this week, it gives clear image that more is going on, because pardon my French, but she is one clever cookie. Should we therefore consider that they are considering another path?

I reckon that the entire SNS issue as it exploded earlier this year did not go the way certain groups wanted. Even then there were clear calls for the bad bank solution. It was stopped and the Dutch government stepped in by nationalising it all. It is not impossible that the bad bank solution was the only option from the beginning, however they not in a public position to offer it as a first option. The people would have to be a little more against the wall there (not the Cypriots, but the general population in the Eurozone). This is more than just a call. I think there are several reasons playing the field in regards to the bad bank issues.

Should you consider my thoughts to be wrong (which might be very valid), then consider the US eternal resistance against Russian activity in Western Europe. Now, there is utter silence when Russia is willing to come up with the billions saving the Cypriots and getting access to the Mediterranean Gas fields? There is no way that they would allow this, which means that either another tactic is played here, or the US is almost officially utterly bankrupt. (Not entirely unrealistic either).

It seems that this is turning into a Machiavellian play. A play where the banks hold the dagger that they are ready to stab straight into the backs of the people they should be protecting. Their own citizens! This is where the shoes are getting too tight to dance. The banks have not been a caring factor for their local population for a long time. It is all for greed, commissions and it all tastes sweeter on the international market. This is also a massive reason why it is harder and harder to get a mortgage. In the end the return on those investments does not yield the returns the banks are hungry for. This was clearly mentioned by several sources. They have been bending over backwards to not qualify customers for a mortgage. (Source: Trouw, a Dutch newspaper). Banks want to make money, lots of it. Mortgages just don’t slice the bread for a banker any more, leaving most of us all out in the cold.

So why am I against the bad bank? In itself, the bad bank could be a solution if people in charge would wake up and ACTUALLY get some true banking reforms in play. Stopping this group for needless risks should be punished severely. Like the press they claim to self-regulate, yet, like the press it is nothing less than a joke.

This was reported by CBS on May 14, 2012: “JPMorgan Chase’s admission last week that it lost more than $2 billion in one set of trades should be used as a wakeup call to end the practice of banks regulating themselves, Massachusetts Senate candidate Elizabeth Warren said on Monday.”

This is only one of MANY of these reports in a period between 2008 and now. 2009 with the reports by Lord Turner, and even now, or even in six months’ time when more fines hit the LIBOR banks. Self-regulation does not work. Show me a person with greed and I show you a person who does not care about the rules and often does not worry about the consequences either. Banks are filled to the brink and drowned in resources motivated by greed. It is the same reason why the press cannot regulate their ranks. Their need for greed (size of publication) and their ego trip to get the news first is why phone hacking started in the first place.

Yet, a royal charter will not work for banks. They will walk away too often without any severe consequences (because most dealings are international). A clear need to legislate beyond draconian is the only solution for banks, which must happen on a vast international scale. Also, my thought is that any banks on the international trading floor should have at least have 20% vested in local mortgages. The reason is that it will give most banks a better level of stability, it will serve people actually having a chance to work on a future and in the last it will give many a peace of mind.

All this is needed BEFORE we start playing with the bad bank solution. If we can tie these banks down with draconian measures making these transgressors homeless, income-less and future-less is the only way to ensure that not only will the current banks behave, it will give a realistic chance of the debt for bad banks to be resolved and paid.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media

Tagged as , , , , , , ,

March 19, 2013 · 17:07

Banking the blame game

Yes, it took less than 72 hours, but Cyprus has broken more than just a little all over Europe. There was always the issue is the situation that the numbers did not add up. Looking at the news as it hits us from Sky News, NOS, Wall Street, Reuters, CNN and a few other sources, we get the distinct impression that politicians have heard of the concept of a spread sheet. There is however a decent chance they have never seen one. Consider that these politicians were involved with the Cyprus deal, we should wonder in how much problems Europe currently is.

First is the issue on the uniqueness of the plan in the first place. Those who saved all their lives, high and low savers, all have to chip in to prevent Cyprus from going bust. So, in this situation the people will be taxed twice. Once on the average of their income their savings will be cut up to an extra 9.9%.

So, how did this get this weird? Well, reporters are giving us all kinds of reasoning; many of them make perfect sense. A good one was the issue that the bail out of Greece had to be paid by banks, and this is where Cyprus got into trouble. I am not judging whether it is ‘true’ or not, but there are two sides. I personally belief that this is NOT the full story and more has happened! The interesting part is that the side as mentioned is not given the visibility it should have. Yes, there is an issue, yes, a bail-out is needed. We can also see those reporters around an ATM with queues. Yet, this issue is naught compared to the question how the $12B is needed, and even more, as they scared people to lose faith in the banks and all are withdrawing of billions of Russian Cash, all really willing to take a hike to a safer banking place. Is no one wondering whether certain ‘made’ miscalculations were really this ‘unexpected’? This is what was stated by Bloomberg on the 16th: “‘Simply to leave Cyprus alone and see what happens would be, in my view, irresponsible‘, Merkel told reporters in the Belgian capital after a two-day European Union summit. In her wake, the finance officials arrived, along with European Central Bank President Mario Draghi and IMF chief Christine Lagarde, for the Cyprus talks.”

The other side is that, should this all be true, then the issue becomes that the bail-out of Greece is not just half baked. The solution the financial experts claim to be a solution, was not only not a solution, it is turning out to be a solution that is now dragging down other nations and the Eurozone as well. As markets opened, both Spain and Italy are feeling that like a painful stab in the back. Consider what was stated on Cyprus. They need $12B, they Cyprus is only 0.2% of the Eurozone economy. Whether they were given a bail out, can someone please explain how a market this small be such a financial tsunami creator?

Take the following facts into consideration

1. If the bailout of Greece has this effect on connected banks, what are the EEC and the IMF not telling us?
2. How can an economy this small be allowed to hold such a chunk of so much debt? Remember that the issues continued AFTER the bail outs. We can seriously ask questions on how the acts by the Eurozone ministers are cut down like this. Also interesting that a lot of this was never loudly questioned by members of the press either (if I am incorrect, please refer me to the evidence I missed and I will happily correct this).

3. The markets are now realising that the Eurozone issues are far from over. Bad management seems to be a clear factor. Perhaps that this scenario and the effects were always envisioned by certain players of the big money game! If so, what are they trying to do? Push savings from banks from place A to place B? Would they intentionally want to weaken banks, especially in Spain and Italy?

We could in my mind come to the thought that either the banks and the bailed out governments are in worse shape than ever reported and the IMF and its partners in managing the banking issues are deciding on issues behind closed doors, therefor missing issues that should have been dealt with, or it is not impossible that the lack of bank regulations on an international level are reason that there is no progress at present, and none is to be expected in the near future. More important, imply that part of this is either orchestrated, of that those in charge are a lot less competent then envisioned. There is one remote third option. I admit that this thought is far out there. What if money is ACTUALLY running out? Consider all these swaps, credit vouchers and derivatives. A derivative is a mathematical future. It is not real. If LIBOR represents, UK and US combined, a value of over $1000T (yes, trillions). Consider all the debt out there; no one can pay for it. What is really left? Traders, still dealing in make belief? Concepts and nothing seems real. Food is real, Land is real, and revenue COULD be real. All those governments all claiming to have so much, yet the US is minus 16T, UK is minus 1.5T, except for Germany, nearly ALL are deep in the negative. Now consider why Cyprus gets such a unique treatment. Is it about the $20 billion the Russians have stashed there? If so, then that would be a weird act, to endanger Euro markets to such a level. Those factors might give a little value to the third option I mentioned. I admit, it is a very thin line of thought.

People all over Cyprus are now considering the fact that their banks are all closed until Thursday. Cyprus seems to be hiding a larger secret. Part of this was reported. The issues on money laundering through Cyprus had been reported before, and last by CNN. This is hardly a secret. I know my lack of knowledge and my naive thought of replacing the ENTIRE banking management groups in ALL the Cyprus banks could have actually increased reliability. In addition, it would have given a strong message out to the banks too. None of this was done, no, the saving of people were initially cut, causing market unease. I feel there are enough thoughts proving more is going on than just a bail out.

Legally? The UK and Germany should step in setting up banking laws immediately (one common law and one civil law nation). Not the penny washing kind, but the kind that has sharp teeth. Real reforms start with laws and regulations. The Wall Street Journal reported by Lukas I Alpert reported this statement 4 hours ago: “Cyprus has always said it abides by international banking laws. Russia’s departing central bank chairman, Sergey Ignatiev, recently acknowledged that Russia saw illegal outflows of $49 billion in 2012”

Perhaps those international banking laws are a lot shakier then banks and politicians are willing to admit to.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,