Soros, Rothschild Warn Of Brexit Doom; Osborne Threatens With "Suspending" Market

The big guns are officially out. 

Just yesterday, we recounted the story of "Black Wednesday" when on September 16, 1992, the UK was forced out of the EU’s exchange-rate mechanism, or ERM, when the BOE tapped out and allowed the British pound to float freely, leading to 15% losses in the sterling. As we noted, this was George Soros' infamous trade which "broke the Bank of England" and made the Hungarian richer by over $1.5 bilion. 

24 years later Soros is back, and this time he is warning against the kind of devaluation that made him a billionaire and which he believes will be unleashed by Brexit, when in a Guardian Op-Ed he wrote that U.K. voters are “grossly underestimating” the true costs of a vote to leave the EU, saying that there would be an "immediate and dramatic impact on financial markets, investment, prices and jobs."

He predicts that the pound would decline "precipitously", seeing a gargantuan drop of at least 15% and possibly >20% to below $1.15. Considering it has now become trendy for analysts to come up with ever "doomier" forecasts of just how low cable would plunge in case of Brexit, we are surprised Soros stopped there.

Here Soros makes the distinction how the collapse in cable would be different from the one that made him richer by saying that this devaluation wouldn’t be “healthy” like the one in 1992 because BOE wouldn’t cut rates, U.K. has large current account deficit and devaluation unlikely to improve manufacturing exports this time. Just don't tell that to the BOJ, which would gladly leave the EU - twice if it had to - if it meant a 20% devaluation.

“Brexit would make some people very rich - but most voters considerably poorer”; “there are speculative forces in the, markets much bigger and more powerful" than the speculators that profited from the 1967 devaluation at Britain’s expense. "A vote to leave could see the week end with a Black Friday, and serious consequences for ordinary people."

Here is the gist of Soros' scaremongering, from the Guardian op-ed titled "The Brexit crash will make all of you poorer – be warned":

David Cameron, along with the Treasury, the Bank of England, the International Monetary Fund and others have been attacked by the leave campaign for exaggerating the economic risks of Brexit. This criticism has been widely accepted by the British media and many financial analysts. As a result, British voters are now grossly underestimating the true costs of leaving. 

As opinion polls on the referendum result fluctuate, I want to offer a clear set of facts, based on my six decades of experience in financial markets, to help voters understand the very real consequences of a vote to leave the EU.

Of course, Soros' set of facts may be clouded by his far greater equity stake in equity interests around Europe, and the globe, which would be drastially impacted by not only a Brexit, but by a European Union which is suddenly on the rocks. 

From that point on, Soros' entire analysis is on the "worst case" scenario centered around a collapsing pound, something which most ironically every other central bank around the globe is so desperate to achieve:

... sterling is almost certain to fall steeply and quickly if there is a vote to leave– even more so after yesterday’s rebound as markets reacted to the shift in opinion polls towards remain. I would expect this devaluation to be bigger and more disruptive than the 15% devaluation that occurred in September 1992, when I was fortunate enough to make a substantial profit for my hedge fund investors, at the expense of the Bank of England and the British government.

At least he is honest. 

It is notable that Soros' warning comes just days after that of Jacob Rothschild himself who said in another Op-Ed, this time for The Times, that leaving the EU could lead to a "damaging and disorderly situation" in the UK as he urged Britons to vote 'remain'. Just like Soros, Lord Rothschild, suddenly exhibiting a rare strain of humanitarian concern, said readers should not "risk the wellbeing of our country"and European countries are "better off together". 

He said that "at present we enjoy being a permanent member of the UN security council and we are essential to the G8 and Commonwealth. But diplomacy, defence, the environment and our values of being a liberal democracy will all be at risk" adding that "I can see no good reason why we should accept our playing a diminished role on the world stage," especially if his own personal fortune would be jeopardized.

* * * 

Finally, completing the doom loop, was none other than Chancellor George Osborne who, according to the Telegraph, "refused to rule out suspending trading on the London stock market if Britons vote to leave the European Union on Friday morning... The threat from the Chancellor, made in an LBC radio interview on Monday evening, after the market had closed could force shares down in London as early as Tuesday morning."

Iain Dale, the presenter, asked Mr Osborne: “If the financial markets do plummet on Friday would you have to consider suspending trading on the FTSE?”

The Chancellor responded: “Well look, the Bank of England and the Treasury – Governor Carney and myself – we have of course discussed contingency plans. 

But the sensible thing is to keep those secret and make sure you are well prepared for whatever happens but if you set them all out in advance then you rather undermine the power of those plans.” 

Pushed again on the contingency plans, Mr Osborne said: “I have a responsibility to the people listening to this programme to do all I can to protect them.  “But I have to tell you that you cannot in the end protect people from the economic shock that leaving the EU would bring about.”

And in case the threat of shuttered markets was not enough, Osborne also hinted at imminent mass layoffs, suggesting that redundancy notices could be issued hours after Britons vote to leave the EU at the vote. 

Mr Osborne pointed to warnings from the London Stock Exchange there would be 100,000 job losses in the City after a Brexit. 

Mr Osborne was challenged about whether redundancies warned by the bank JP Morgan could come as early as Friday – the day after the referendum. Mr Osborne replied: “I think that will start to happen very quickly, sadly.”

Amid all this gloom, Osborne presented the "only" alternative that would not lead to the imminent economic collapse he so forcefully imagines: 

"he added that if the UK voted to remain there would be a “quick snap back” for the British economy, he said that “decisions will be taken and investment will come in”. Asked if these redundancy notices would be issued on Friday morning if Britons vote to leave, Mr Osborne said: “That will start to happen very quickly sadly.”

Now if only the people will do what these noble public servants tell to do in their own best interest... 

Finally, Osborne also played down claims he could be forced to leave the Treasury after the referendum amid anger form Tory backbenchers over the way he has campaigned, saying: “It’s really not about my job”.

Oh but is George, just like it is in Soros and Rothschild's own self interest for the people to vote "Remain." To suggest otherwise is naive, but it may also be irrelevant. With just three days until the vote, the scaremongering tactic, not to mention the murder of an innocent woman, may have already done its job judging by the reveral in public opinion.

In any case, one can only hope that unlike the case of the failed Greek referendum where the people voted one way only to get the opposite, no matter how the Brits vote, it will truly represent the democratic will of the majority and that particular outcome is what they get. 

Credit to Zero Hedge

2016 OFFICIALLY THE YEAR AMERICANS STOPPED TRUSTING THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA

"Strawberry MOON Over Indiana On Summer Solstice" First Since 1948

GERMANY SLAMS NATO “WARMONGERING” AGAINST RUSSIA

As we reported in just the past week, not only has NATO accelerated its encirclement of Russia, with British soldiers deployed in Estonia, US soldiers operating in Latvia and Canadians in Poland, while combat units are being increased in the Mediterranean…



… but even more troubling, was NATO’s assessment that it may now have grounds to attack Russia when it announced that if a NATO member country becomes the victim of a cyber attack by persons in a non-NATO country such as Russia or China, then NATO’s Article V “collective defense” provision requires each NATO member country to join that NATO member country if it decides to strike back against the attacking country.

Specifically, NATO is alleging that because Russian hackers had copied the emails on Hillary Clinton’s home computer, this action of someone in Russia taking advantage of her having privatized her U.S. State Department communications to her unsecured home computer and of such a Russian’s then snooping into the U.S. State Department business that was stored on it,might constitute a Russian attack against the United States of America, and would, if the U.S. President declares it to be a Russian invasion of the U.S., trigger NATO’s mutual-defense clause and so require all NATO nations to join with the U.S. government in going to war against Russia, if the U.S. government so decides.

Also recall that the attack on the DNC servers which leaked the Democrats confidential files on Trump and Hillary donors lists were also blamed on “Russian government hackers”, before it emerged that the act was the result of one solitary non-Russian hacker, but not before the US once again tried to escalate a development which may have culminated with war with Russia!

Throughout all of these escalations, the popular narrative spun by the “democratic” media was a simple one: it was Russia that was provoking NATO, not NATO’s aggressive military actions on the border with Russia that were the cause of soaring geopolitical tension. Ignored in the fictional plot line was also Russia’s clear reaction to NATO provocations that it would “respond totally asymmetrically” an outcome that could in its worst oucome lead to millions of European deaths. Still, no matter the risk of escalation, one which just two weeks ago led to assessment that the “Risk Of Nuclear Dirty Bomb Surges On Poor US-Russia Relations“, NATO had to maintain its provocative attitude .

All NATO had to do was assure that all alliance members would follow the lead, and nobody would stray from the party line.


And then everything imploded when none other than the Foreign Minister of NATO member Germany, Frank-Walter Steinmeier,criticized NATO for having a bellicose policy towards Russia, describing it as “warmongering”, the German daily Bild reported. And just like that, the entire ficitional narrative of “innocent” NATO merely reacting to evil Russian provcations has gone up in flames.

As AFP adds, Steinmeier merely highlighted all those things which rational persons have known about for a long time, namely the deployment of NATO troops near borders with Russia in the military alliance’s Baltic and east European member states. However, since it comes from a NATO member, suddenly one can’t accuse Russian propaganda. In fact, NATO has absolutely no planned response to just this contingency.

“What we should avoid today is inflaming the situation by warmongering and stomping boots,” Steinmeier told Bild in an interview to be published Sunday.


German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier

“Anyone who thinks you can increase security in the alliance with symbolic parades of tanks near the eastern borders, is mistaken,” Germany’s top diplomat added.

Needless to say, Russia bitterly opposes NATO’s expansion into its Soviet-era satellites and last month said it would create three new divisions in its southwest region to meet what it described as a dangerous military build-up along its borders. This is precisely what NATO wants as it would be able to then blame Russian effect to NATO cause as an irrational move by the Kremlin, one to which the kind folks at NATO HQ would have no choice but to respond in their caring defense of all those innocent people, when in reality it is NATO that is desperate to provoke and launch the conflict with Russia.

And now even its own members admit it!

In its latest ridiculous escalation, blamed on Russia no less, NATO announced on Monday that it would deploy four battalions to Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland to counter a more assertive Russia, ahead of a landmark summit in Warsaw next month. Well, as Steinmeier made it very clear, NATO’s deployment to provoke Russia was precisely that. As a result a Russian “assymmetric” response is assured, and this time it may even spill over into the combat arena, something which would bring infinite delight to Washington’s military-industrial complex neocon puppets.

In an interview with Bild on Thursday, NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg said Russia is seeking to create “a zone of influence through military means”. “We are observing massive militarisation at NATO borders — in the Arctic, in the Baltic, from the Black Sea to the Mediterranean Sea,” he told the newspaper.


Credit to Infowars

http://www.infowars.com/huge-scandal-erupts-inside-nato-alliance-member-germany-slams-nato-warmongering-against-russia/

'Within Ten Years 50% of Americans Will Be Chipped' – Tech Pioneer

The US Navy has held talks with "Transhumanist" and presidential candidate Zoltan Istvan, who told Radio Sputnik about the US military's concerns.

Last week it emerged that US naval officers have held discussions with Zoltan Istvan of the Transhumanist political party, who is also running as a candidate for the US presidency.

He advocates fitting human beings with technology, including microchips, to boost brain power or enhance physical attributes.

Istvan himself has a microchip in his hand that he uses to give out business cards, send text messages, or start his car.

He told Radio Sputnik that the US navy wanted to discuss the possibility of implanting humans with chips fitted with global positioning (GPS) technology, and said that in the near future many people will want to be fitted with chips.

"I wouldn't be surprised if within ten years 50 percent of Americans have some type of implant, because at the end of the day an implant can reduce the size of your wallet or whatever you carry in your purse by about 30 or 40 percent," Istvan said.

"The US Navy is interested in implants of course because they want to know where their soldiers are in the field, and it's not always useful to have a tracking device strapped onto the wrist or to their clothing."

The technology would enable a tracking device to continue working even if a soldier was wounded or captured by the enemy, Istvan said. He explained that the navy is also motivated by security concerns, which also raise legal questions.


"But there are some security concerns for the navy. We have civilians going into the military, and chipping yourself is something that has become more common – for example, I have a chip in my hand."

"Do you allow somebody who has just signed up to the service with a chip in them, onto a nuclear base, or should there be some protocol or policy regarding that?"

The legality of biological chips is a gray area, and they are currently bought on the black market from companies over the internet, without any regulation.

"You inject these chips in yourself, it's just a 30- or 60-second procedure, the chips are so small they go in through a needle, they're literally the size of a grain of rice so right now that's one of the things I'm trying to do, is get the US government and official institutions like the Navy to start discussing it and creating policies around it."


Credit to Sputniknews

Read more: http://sputniknews.com/science/20160619/1041597594/transhumanism-microchips-us-navy.html#ixzz4C44lPNzK

"I Don't Need A War In The Black Sea" ...Another NATO Member Folds As Bulgaria Refuses To Join Naval Task Force

Days after it was revealed that the US had dispatched the destroyer USS Porter to the Black Sea, in what the US Navy said was "a series of drills with allies and forces of partner nations in what the United States called a routine deployment", Russia responded that Moscow would respond with "unspecified measures", adding that this and other US deployments were designed to ratchet up tensions ahead of a NATO summit.



The guided-missile destroyer, USS Porter

Russian state media reported that the USS Porter, a U.S. naval destroyer, entered the Black Sea a few days ago on a routine deployment, a move it said raised hackles in Moscow because it had recently been fitted with a new missile system. This deployment was in addition to the two aircraft carriers already on location in the Mediterranean as the US is seemingly eager to dramatically escalate tensions with Russia, this time over sea.

"Of course, this does not meet with our approval and will undoubtedly lead to response measures," RIA cited Andrei Kelin, a senior Foreign Ministry official, as saying about the USS Porter's movements. He also said the deployment of U.S. aircraft carriers in the Mediterranean was a show of force which in his view deepened a chill in ties between Moscow and Washington caused by Russia's actions in Ukraine and Syria."

So how did the US respond? Reuters reports that the United States "decided it would maintain its presence in the Black Sea despite a Russian warning that a U.S. destroyer patrolling there undermined regional security, the U.S. Navy Secretary said."


The USS Porter entered the Black Sea this month, drawing heavy criticism from Moscow. Turkey and Romania are expected to push for a bigger NATO presence in the Black Sea at the NATO summit in Warsaw next month. Aboard the USS Mason, another U.S. destroyer, in the Mediterranean on Thursday, Navy Secretary Ray Mabus told Reuters that it was the U.S. Navy's job to deter aggression and keep sea lanes open.

"We're going to be there," Mabus said of the Black Sea. "We're going to deter. That's the main reason we're there -- to deter potential aggression." Mabus spoke days after Russia criticized NATO discussions about a creating a permanent force in the Black Sea. The NATO summit is set to tale place as relations between Russia and the alliance are severely strained over Moscow's role in the Ukraine crisis and in Syria. While Russia says it poses no threat to alliance, NATO is considering what to do to counter what it sees as growing Russian aggression.

Ironically, this takes place just as the Steinmer, the foreign minister of core NATO member Germany, accused the very NATO of which Germany is part, of "warmongering" toward Russia.

Russian anger, meanwhile, grew following the report of a possible permanent Black Sea naval force: "If a decision is made to create a permanent force, of course, it would be destabilizing, because this is not a NATO sea," Russian news agencies quoted senior Foreign Ministry official Andrei Kelin as saying.

The US shot back when Navy Secretary Mabus said the United States follows the rules of the Montreux Convention, which states that countries without a Black Sea coastline cannot keep their warships there for more than 21 days. NATO members Turkey, Romania and Bulgaria are all Black Sea Basin countries.

However, for all the escalating rhetoric, a major schism appears to be taking place below the placid surface.

Following Germany's scandalous statement accusing NATO of "warmongering" toward Russia and revealing how deep the European fissures within NATO truly are, Reuters added that NATO-member, and Black Sea coast country Bulgaria "appeared to buckle to Russian pressure on Thursday" when its Prime Minister Boiko Borisov said he would not join a proposed NATO fleet in the Black Sea "because it should be a place for holidays and tourists, not war."

“I always say that I want the Black Sea to see sailboats, yachts, large boats with tourists and not become an arena of military action ... I do not need a war in the Black Sea,” Reuters cited Bulgaria's Prime Minister as saying at a media briefing. “To send warships as a fleet against Russian ships exceeds the limit of what I can allow,” Borisov told reporters in Sofia on Thursday, as cited by Bloomberg. “To deploy destroyers, aircraft carriers near [the resort cities of] Bourgas or Varna during the tourist season is unacceptable.”

Bulgaria's president Rosen Plevenliev chimed in, asking to “stop with the speculations that fleets will be set up against anyone,” adding that “Bulgaria is a peaceful country and its foreign policy is not aimed at anyone."

Bulgaria's neighbor to the north also opined, when its President Klaus Iohannis, who visited Bulgaria on June 15-16, and discussed the initiative with both Borisov and Plevneliev, said the initiative’s sole purpose is “practical cooperation in joint exercise.” Iohannis called the news about NATO fleet in the Black Sea a “misconception.”

“Nobody wants to create NATO fleet. That’s nonsense. NATO has neither the resources nor the desire to maintain a Black Sea fleet,” Iohannis said as cited by TASS.

Bulgaria and Romania may be surprised: if recent NATO determination to bring the conflict into Russia's back yard, the two nations may be forced to choose if they wish to maintain their NATO membership as it puts them clearly in harm's way as a Russian retaliation would impact the two Black Sea nations first.

And then there is the Turkey "wildcard" - in May, Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said that NATO is paying insufficient attention to the Black Sea region. “The Black Sea has almost become a Russian lake,’” Erdogan said at a meeting of heads of general staff of Balkan nations in Istanbul.

Needless to say, relations between Turkey and Russia in recent months have been anything but good, and which brings us to the final point: as Turkey's Yeni Safak newspaper reported yesterday, Erdogan "stressed the significance of the defense industry, saying that Turkey will soon start producing an aircraft carrier after an Anatolian ship." Erdo?an's remarks were made in his speech at a launching ceremony of the Istanbul Naval Shipyard. "There isn't any obstacle to producing our own aircraft carrier. It is possible with this determined government and state," said Erdogan.

Because the only thing the rapidly escalating war of words (and perhaps more in the near future) between NATO and Russia needs is a Turkey aircraft carrier operating in the Black Sea.




Credit to Zero Hedge

IS SOMETHING BIG COMING? REPORT FEMA JUST QUIETLY ACTIVATED CIVILIAN CORPS!