Macron wins…The Question Is, How?

Source: GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell Ph.D.
May 17, 2017

Well, you’ve probably been wondering why I haven’t talked about the French elections. Truth be told, it was in part because of out-of-town commitments, and in part because during the election itself, I “smelled a rat”, but we’ll get back to that.

By now you’ve probably heard that M. Macron, the young up-and-coming-Rothschild-backed whatever-he-is, has become the President of France. Sitting on the sidelines across the pond over here in the USSA, I felt a keen sense of deja vu… it was like the Darth Hillary-Donald Trump affair all over again: one couldn’t muster much enthusiasm for either, but one sensed (or rather, smelled) the distinct odor of corruption hovering over the whole thing. It was Le Pen vs. Macron, that is to say, a French nationalist with ties to a very right-wing, and in my opinion, historically fascist, party, versus stale musty same-old same-old euro-globaloney that people like the Rottenchilds and Rockefailures like to force down everyone’s throats. It was rather like watching an election between Robespierre or Danton, and Marshal Petain, being refereed by General Maurice Gamelin. Ms. Le Pen may have put the finest point on it when, during a debate with Mr. Macron, she said that regardless of the outcome of the election, the next president of France would be a woman, either her, or Frau Merkel. By this “Penine” logic, it would appear Frau Merkel won. Watching the whole circus, I couldn’t help but think “Where’s Talleyrand when you need him?”

Indeed, M. Talleyrand’s ghost, at least, may have been hovering over the election. At one point, a friend of mine reported to me (apparently we were both following the returns) that Mr. Macron’s lead was 66.06%, a percentage he found to be fishier than a mackerel on a moonlight beach: it both shined, and stunk. The problem, of course, is that Mr. Macron’s election, though expected, solves nothing. If anything, it means more of the same, and continued German domination of the European Union, and of France. The can, as they say, has been kicked down the road; German surpluses continue, immigration continues, the French state of emergency continues, and nothing is solved. This, I would aver, is a dangerous state of affairs, and Mr. Macron, like Mr. Trump, in a certain sense is an outsider, though certainly one with the approval of Mr. Eurobaloney and Mr. Globaloney. Better a fake outsider, like Mr. Macron, than a real one, like Ms. Le Pen.

But not all is well, and this is where it gets interesting. One was almost waiting for “the other shoe to drop”, since elections in the west these days look more and more like elections in Bolivia.

The shoe, according to articles that many regular readers here shared with me, just dropped (copy and paste into your browser: http://yournewswire.com/marine-le-pen-election-rigged/  ).  There was also this version of the story, also shared by many others (copy and paste: http://www.vanguardngr.com/2017/05/france-election-2017-fraud-rigged-european-union-masters-deceit-must-annulled-knowledgeable-professor-alexia-thomas-demands/ ).

I have to admit, the stories cause some difficulty for the formation of today’s “high octane speculation.” On the one hand, I do not doubt that there was election fraud in France in favor of Mr. Macron. What I have to question, is why? Most of the data that I saw had him clearly leading Ms. LePen, so why bother to add fraud to the procedure?  It would seem to be a self-defeating project. There are several possibilities here, but the two that stand out to me are a rather obvious one, and one that is not so obvious. The obvious one is that Mr. Macron’s support was actually softer than the public numbers showed, and that he had to be helped along a bit. I’ve suspected the same thing with respect to Darth Hillary in this country, and in particular in her “solid support areas” like Nuttyfornia. Perhaps Mr. Macron was facing similar prospects in the Ile de France and other supposedly “solid support” areas, and hence, according to the first article, torn ballots for LePen were mailed out, while double ballots for Macron were mailed out. The result is predictable: some are saying that he is not the legitimate President of France. And it’s that assessment that brings me to my second option in today’s high octane speculation grab-bag: the pattern of the last American election has been repeated in its broad outlines in France, with one notable exception: (1) allegations of fraud have been accompanied by (2) media spin (in the US case) or media blackout (in France’s case) following by (3) a questioning of the legitimacy of the results in both cases. What remains different, what remains the exception in France’s case, when one compares the two, is that in Mr. Macron’s case, the “deep-state approved” candidate won. So the question is, why the pattern?

I can only speculate here, but my guess highlights the second option: it may be that we’re seeing this pattern because the real goal is to bring constitutional representative republics into doubt and question regardless of whether the “approved” candidate wins or not; already there are calls in the USSA for a constitutional convention, a process I personally think would be a disaster, allowing Mr. Globaloney to walk off with stolen money and saddle the rest of us with bad debt.

France, of course, has been through several constitutions since the French Revolution, and would be much more easily open to such a process. In other words, it is not because it is Ms. Le Pen making these allegations that I am concerned, it is because of the nature of the allegations themselves, and that we may be looking at a contrived pattern, a new ploy in the playbook, by Mr. Globaloney, that I am concerned.

All that’s missing is for the French to blame it on the Russians.

Read More At: GizaDeathStar.com
________________________________________________

About Dr. Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.

Advertisements

China To Europe: Let’s Include The Moon In The Silk Road


Source: GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell Ph.D.
May 2, 2017

There may be a new twist to China’s Silk Road economic and infrastructure strategy, one that has truly enormous geopolitical and commercial implications. First, let’s recall where exactly we are in terms of China’s Silk Road project. A few weeks ago, the first freight train from China arrived in… London. Now, Mr. J. has shared an article that indicates the return trip, loaded with British goods, has been made:

First direct London-China train completes 12,000 km run

The date of this achievement, April 29, was just a few days ago. Similarly, one can also imagine similar trips from London all the way to Vladivostok (with the appropriate stop to convert cars to the wider Russian gauge). In any case, that this means is that the Eurasian land mass is already connected. The real project is to build it out, and make those connections even more redundant.

So with that in mind, consider these two articles, which many of you noticed this week:

Will we soon build a VILLAGE on the moon? China is in talks with Europe about launching a lunar settlement

There are statements in three paragraphs that caught my attention in the first article:

As with all things in this new age of space exploration, collaboration appears to be the key to making things happen.  This certainly seems to be the case when it comes to the China National Space Administration (CNSA) and the ESA’s respective plans for lunar exploration. As spokespeople from both agencies announced this week, the CNSA and the ESA hope to work together to create a “Moon Village” by the 2020s.

Yulong and Hvistendahl indicated that this base would aid in the development of lunar mining, space tourism, and facilitate missions deeper into space – particularly to Mars. It would also build upon recent accomplishments by both agencies, which have successfully deployed robotic orbiters and landers to the Moon in the past few decades. These include the CNSA’s Chang’e missions, as well as the ESA’s SMART-1 mission.

As part of the Chang’e program, the Chinese landers explored the lunar surface in part to investigate the prospect of mining Helium-3, which could be used to power fusion reactors here on Earth….

And lest we forget, China and Europe are exploring the use of 3D Printing in their extraterrestrial human colony schemes:

In addition, its is likely that the construction of this base will rely on additive manufacture (aka. 3-d printing) techniques specially developed for the lunar environment. In 2013, the ESA announced that they had teamed up with renowned architects Foster+Partners to test the feasibility of using lunar soil to print walls that would protect lunar domes from harmful radiation and micrometeorites.

If one looks closely at these proposals, they are nothing less than the extension of the New Silk Road project concepts to space itself. And in this respect, it’s interesting the Chinese and Europeans are discussing concepts, plans, and possibilities directly with each other.

This, I submit, is another geopolitical earthquake, and it presages yet another eventuality: if Europe opts to go with China in these developments, inevitably, this will mean an economic, geopolitical, and military break with NATO and the USA. Why? Well, other than the obvious reasons, there are the not-so-obvious reasons. I and others have repeatedly said, and warned, that where there is space commercialization, there will inevitably space militarization and weaponization; one has to protect all those very expensively developed space assets from potential competitors and interdiction. China has already demonstrated a sophisticated anti-satellite capability; Russia probably has an equal if not more sophisticated capability, but they’re being typically secretive about it. Europe most likely has developed similar technologies. In any case, the point is, that rest assured the Chinese and Europeans are talking about Moon tourism, mining, permanent human colonies there, the use of 3d printing to construct such habitats.

But one can also be absolutely certain that, behind closed doors, and at very high levels, the Chinese and Europeans also have been discussing those other issues…

See you on the flip side…

Read More At: GizaDeathStar.com
________________________________________________

About Dr. Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.

Meanwhile…In France…

Source: GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell Ph.D.
April 28, 2017

By now you’ve probably heard: politics in France has turned a very bizarre corner, for the mainline parties, and their candidates, hardly made an impression. Instead, Emmanuel Macron and Marine Le Pen are headed to a runoff election on May 7th. One poll that I saw had M. Macron winning with 23.9% of the votes, with Mm. Le Pen trailing closely with 21.4% of the votes. Fillon, Melenchon, Hamon came in at 19.9, 19.6, and 6.3% respectively. Here’s the way it looks to the U.K.’s The Guardian:

French election: Macron and Le Pen go to second round – live coverage

Notably, neither Macron nor Le Pen together get a clear majority, but, interestingly enough, neither do the “mainline” candidates, who fell by the wayside. What this means in effect is that whether or not Macron or Le Pen win, they will have to govern either with each other, or by reaching out to those parties led in the last round of elections by Fillon, Melenchon & Co. And that will make governance difficult.  As all of this has been going on, I’ve been receiving a steady trickle of emails from members of this website who live in France, who inform me that many of the same tricks we saw applied in the previous US election have also been rolled out in France: pro-Le Pen comments are censored on social media, pro-EU/globaloney articles are pushed, &c. In spite of this, Le Pen has advanced to round two: the mainline candidates did not.

The question is, why?

In doing a little research for this blog, I came across the following article from Global Research News (copy and paste in your browser:

The Main Issue in the French Presidential Election: National Sovereignty and the Future of France

This article is well worth pondering at length, but I want to draw attention to certain statements critical of the traditional right-left divide, and why French politics looks so peculiar now. Consider, first, the critique of the right:

The upshot is that Fillon’s coherent pro-capitalist policy is not exactly what the dominant globalizing elite prefers. The “center left” is their clear political choice since Tony Blair and Bill Clinton revised the agendas of their respective parties. The center left emphasis on human rights (especially in faraway countries targeted for regime change) and ethnic diversity at home fits the long-term globalist aims of erasing national borders, to allow unrestricted free movement of capital. Traditional patriotic conservatism, represented by Fillon, does not altogether correspond to the international adventurism of globalization.

And now the left:

As the traditional left goal of economic equality was abandoned, it was superseded by emphatic allegiance to “human rights”, which is now taught in school as a veritable religion. The vague notion of human rights was somehow associated with the “free movement” of everything and everybody. Indeed the official EU dogma is protection of “free movement”: free movement of goods, people, labor and (last but certainly not least) capital. These “four freedoms” in practice transform the nation from a political society into a financial market, an investment opportunity, run by a bureaucracy of supposed experts. In this way, the European Union has become the vanguard experiment in transforming the world into a single capitalist market.

The French left bought heavily into this ideal, partly because it deceptively echoed the old leftist ideal of “internationalism” (whereas capital has always been incomparably more “international” than workers), and partly due to the simplistic idea that “nationalism” is the sole cause of wars. More fundamental and complex causes of war are ignored.

For a long time, the left has complained about job loss, declining living standards, delocalization or closure of profitable industries, without recognizing that these unpopular results are caused by EU requirements. EU directives and regulations increasingly undermine the French model of redistribution through public services, and are now threatening to wipe them out altogether – either because “the government is bankrupt” or because of EU competition rules prohibit countries from taking measures to preserve their key industries or their agriculture.

Add to this the following:

Meanwhile, it has become more and more obvious that EU monetarist policy based on the common currency, the euro, creates neither growth nor jobs as promised but destroys both. Unable to control its own currency, obliged to borrow from private banks, and to pay them interest, France is more and more in debt, its industry is disappearing and its farmers are committing suicide, on the average of one every other day. The left has ended up in an impossible position: unswervingly loyal to the EU while calling for policies that are impossible under EU rules governing competition, free movement, deregulation, budgetary restraints, and countless other regulations produced by an opaque bureaucracy and ratified by a virtually powerless European Parliament, all under the influence of an army of lobbyists.

Benoit Hamon remains firmly stuck on the horns of the left’s fatal dilemma: determination to be “socialist”, or rather, social democratic, and passionate loyalty to “Europe”. While insisting on social policies that cannot possibly be carried out with the euro as currency and according to EU rules, Hamon still proclaims loyalty to “Europe”. He parrots the EU’s made-in-Washington foreign policy, demanding that “Assad must go” and ranting against Putin and Russia.

And finally, this comment about Melenchon and Le Pen:

A most remarkable feature of this campaign is great similarity between the two candidates said to represent “the far left”, Mélenchon, and “the far right”, Marine Le Pen. Both speak of leaving the euro. Both vow to negotiate with the EU to get better treaty terms for France. Both advocate social policies to benefit workers and low income people. Both want to normalize relations with Russia. Both want to leave NATO, or at least its military command. Both defend national sovereignty, and can thus be described as “sovereignists”.

The only big difference between them is on immigration, an issue that arouses so much emotion that it is hard to discuss sensibly. Those who oppose immigration are accused of “fascism”, those who favor immigration are accused of wanting to destroy the nation’s identity by flooding it with inassimilable foreigners.

So where’s my daily dose of speculation? A few months ago I predicted that even if Marine Le Pen does not win this bid for the French Presidency, the issues driving her and her party simply will not go away, especially if Mr. Globaloney continues to pursue the same policies with the same playbook, and to ignore the real issue.

That issue, I suspect, is much deeper than even Global Research understands, for the phenomenon is not political, it is cultural and civilizational, and it is, perhaps, not surprising at all that it should be France, and Britain (with the Brexit vote) where we see, if not the strongest opposition to Mr. Globaloney, then at least the most articulate and vocal, for those two nations are, to put it succinctly, the two oldest nation-states in the western world. They represent, so to speak, the core countries of modern western culture: Britain spread Anglo-Saxon jurisprudence and associated cultural institutions throughout the world via the British Empire. In doing so, it also put an end to many practices we would now consider barbaric. And yes, I realize in stating that I have taken a very unpopular view. (If you want to hear the politically correct view, attend an American university.) France, similarly, spread French law and jurisprudence and institutions throughout Europe during the Napoleonic era, which gave rise to the national aspirations of Italy and Germany and helped pave the way for their national unifications in the 19th century.

Why is this distinction between politics and culture important? It’s very simple: if what is driving the Trump train, or the Brexit vote, or, now, the upheavals in French politics, is cultural and not political, then the phenomenon is not going to go away very quickly, nor very quietly, no matter what the politicians do or do not do.

The first politician in the West that truly understands this, and can articulate the cultural vision and aspect of the problem, wins.  Why? Because Mr. Globaloney has no real innate sense of culture. He has to buy it, but does not understand it, nor view himself as belonging to any cultural tradition (except a modern one no older than a century or century and a half). He endows modernist ugliness and promotes it at every turn (think David Rockefailure here, folks, and his “taste” in modern “art”); and people are turning from ugliness.

As for France, this will, indeed, be an election to watch, and I confess some personal emotional involvement; my paternal grandmother was French; I have my great-grandfather’s (her father’s) French prayer book; French composers – Saint-Saens, Rameau, Couperin, and so on – and musicians have enriched my personal life; when I studied organ, I played an edition of J.S. Bach’s organ music edited and prepared by the grand master of French organists (Charles-Marie Widor), and so on. So I watch what goes on there with great personal feeling, because I do not want France to become something one can only read about in history books, another victim of Mr. Globaloney’s hatred of and war on all things of beauty belonging to western culture and tradition.

See you on the flip side…

Read More At: GizaDeathStar.com
________________________________________________

About Dr. Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.

Is Euroland on Verge of Disintegration?

Is Euroland on Verge of Disintegration?
Source: WilliamEngdahl.comf
F. William Engdahl
April 21, 2017

The decision last year by a majority of British voters to exit the European Union was more than a simple vote of the people. The Brexit campaign was promoted and financed by the most influential banks of the City of London and by the British Royal House. Far from the end of Britain, Brexit is far more likely to be the beginning of the end of the disastrous Euro single currency experiment .

Since the global financial crisis of 2008 little significant has been done by Brussels or the governments of the 19 member Eurozone countries to bring the largest banks of the Eurozone into a healthy stability. On the contrary, even venerable mega-banks like Germany’s Deutsche Bank are teetering on the brink.

In Italy the world’s oldest bank, Monte Paschi di Siena, is on state life-support. That is but the tip of an iceberg of Italian bank bad debts. Today in total Italy’s banks hold Italy’s banks hold €360 billion of bad loans or 20% of Italy’s GDP, which is double the total five years ago.

It gets worse. Italy is the fourth largest economy in the EU. Its economy is in dismal shape so bank bad loans grow. State debt is almost as high as that of Greece, at 135% of GDP. Now, since the 2013 Cyprus bank crisis, the EU has passed a stringent new bank “bail-in” law, largely under German pressure. It stipulates that in event of a new banking crisis, a taxpayer bailout is prohibited until bank bond-holders and, if necessary as in Cyprus, its bank depositors, first “bail-in” or take the loss. In Italy, most holders of bank bonds are ordinary Italian citizens, with some €200 billion worth, who were told bank bonds were a secure investment. No more.

German Austerity Medicine Killing Patient

A major problem is that the Eurozone economies have been forced to impose the wrong medicine to deal with the 2008 financial and economic crisis. The Eurozone crisis has been wrongly seen as states spending too wildly and labor costs rising too high. So, under again German pressure, the Eurozone countries in crisis such as Greece, have been forced to impose draconian austerity, slash pensions, cut wages. The result has been even worse economic recession and rising unemployment, rising bank bad loans. By 2015 Greece’s GDP had declined by more than 26%, Spain’s GDP by almost 6%, Portugal by 7%, and Italy’s GDP by almost 10% compared with 2008.

Austerity is never a solution to a state economic crisis. The example of the German economic crisis that erupted in 1931 in depression, unemployment and a banking crisis as a consequence of the severe austerity policies of Chancellor Heinrich Brüning ought to be clear enough to German authorities whose historical memory seems to have amnesia today.

Across the Eurozone more than 19 million workers are jobless. Greece, Italy, Portugal and Spain have a total of an unprecedented 11 million unemployed workers. In France and Italy unemployment is over 13% of the labor force. In Spain it is 20%, and in Greece a staggering 25%. This is all the state of economic affairs more than 8 years after the 2008 crisis. In short there has been no economic recovery in Euroland. Since 2009 the European Central Bank (ECB), the bank of the Euro, has made unprecedented moves to try to stabilize the banking crisis. They have only postponed not improved the situation.

Today as a result of ECB buying of mortgage bonds, corporate bonds, state bonds, and asset-backed securities, the ECB balance sheet is more than €1.5 trillion. The ECB, whose President is Italian Mario Draghi, has held interest rates in an unprecedented negative interest rates around -0.4% since June, 2014. The ECB has made clear that negative central bank interest rates will remain “for some time.” This is leading some to try to convince voters to go to a cashless society as India did last year with catastrophic consequences and as Sweden, not a Euro country, has largely done. If banks begin to charge their customers a fee for using customers’ deposits, an incredible thought for most, people would simply “take the money and run,” into gold or other safe assets, or cash.

The ECB negative interest rates are a sign of desperation to put it mildly. With interest rates on bonds across the Eurozone so low, many insurance companies are facing severe liquidity problems meeting their future obligations unless Eurozone interest rates return to more normal levels. Yet were the ECB to end its negative interest rate policy and its quantitative easing so-called, the debt crisis of many banks would explode from Greece to Italy to France to even Germany.

A Coming Currency War?

So, to put it gently, the Eurozone is a ticking debt time bomb ready to blow at the slightest new shock or crisis. We may well see that shock in the next two years, once Britain has completed its exit from the EU. Already the new Administration of Donald Trump in Washington has signaled a potential launch of currency war against the Euro. On January 31, US Trade Czar Peter Navarro accused Germany of using a “grossly undervalued euro to exploit” the US and Germany’s EU partners. Navarro went on to call Germany, the core of the Eurozone economies, a de facto “currency manipulator.” Navarro has stated, “While the euro freely floats in international currency markets, this system deflates the German currency from where it would be if the German Deutschmark were still in existence.”

Britain with the vast financial resources of the City of London, once free from the shackles of the EU membership, could well join with Washington in a full-scale covert currency war to bring down the Euro, something that would have devastating consequences for the Eurozone economies. Britain’s Pound is the third largest global payments currency after the dollar and the Euro. If Britain, free from the restraints of the EU can bring down the Euro, the Pound could become a major gainer–currency war with Britain on the side of Washington against the fragile Eurozone with their Italian, Greek, Spanish and other problems. Already British Prime Minister Theresa May is in discussions with the Trump Administration about forging a bilateral US-UK trade agreement and some in influential UK circles are talking of inviting the USA to become an associate member of the British Commonwealth. For the US dollar and Wall Street banks, wounding the rival to the dollar as central bank reserve currency is a very tempting thought. Now with Britain and the City of London soon to be free of EU restraints, the temptation might become reality.

All of this is because of the dysfunctional nature of the entire Eurozone project, a supranational currency with no democratic elected authorities to control abuses. The half-way dissolution of national sovereignty that the Maastricht Treaty introduced with the European Monetary System back in the 1990s, has left the EU with the worst combination in event of future crisis.

Read More At: WilliamEngdahl.com
__________________________________________________________________________

F. William Engdahl is strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he holds a degree in politics from Princeton University and is a best-selling author on oil and geopolitics, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”

News & Views From The Nefarium – Dr. Joseph P. Farrell Speaks On The Fallout From #Brexit, Nuclear Weapons & Germany, France & More

Source: GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell
March 9, 2017

Fallout (and I mean that literally) from the BREXIT: a common nuclear deterrent for the European Union?

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/03/06…

Meanwhile, In Spain, They’re Arresting Banksters

Source: GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell Ph.D.
February 28, 2017

Typically, according to “Great Power” theory, Spain lost its status as a Great Power in the Napoleonic era, and hence, it gets ignored… too much, in my opinion. The reason? Spain may have fallen on hard times from the end of the Napoleonic era up through the Spanish Civil War and the victory of Franco, but under Franco it regained much of its lost economic clout and, despite grievous setbacks in recent years, in 2016 was the 10th largest world economy by Gross Domestic Product, and the fifth largest in the European Union, behind Germany, the U.K., France, and Italy, and just slightly ahead of the Netherlands. But Spain, in a manner rather similar to Great Britain, does have an enormous soft-power card, due to the enormous influence it has had historically on the development of western culture. From the Philippines to Central and South America, Spanish culture became the dominant influence. During World War Two Franco carefully maneuvered, in spite of enormous pressure to join the Axis, to keep Spain neutral, playing the soft power card quite effectively in this effort, reminding the Axis powers that any invasion of Spain would be met with stiff resistance, and sever any useful ties the Axis had, via Spain, with the rest of the Latin world and most importantly, with their considerable investments in South America. In return, Franco bought Spain’s neutrality by sending a “volunteer” infantry division, the “Blue” division, to fight with the Axis in the Soviet Union, where it distinguished itself in combat operations in and around Leningrad.

So when a major economy of the West decides to start arresting banksters, I sit up and take notice (thanks to Mr. B.H. for sharing this article):

Spain Follows Iceland As Mass Arrests Of Top Bankers Begin

Note how this article by Jacky Murphy begins:

Spain’s Supreme court last year ruled that there was “serious inaccuracies” about listing led investors to back Bankia in error, as a result the bank has paid out millions of Euros in compensation.
If one translates this, what the Spanish Supreme Court is really saying is that Bankia, a consortium built from other failed banks(!), failed to apprise investors of serious exposure and risk; in short, it committed major material omissions of fact. This in and of itself is highly significant, but its import takes on a more sinister aspect when one connects it to the last paragraph in the article:
“The court is questioning why they allowed Bankia to sell shares in an initial public offering in 2011, less than a year before Bankia’s portfolio of bad mortgage loans forced the government to seize control of it. It said there was evidence the regulators had ‘full and thorough knowledge’ of Bankia’s plight. After its nationalisation, it went on to report a €19.2bn ($24.7bn) loss for 2012, the largest in Spanish corporate history.” (Emphasis added)
Now, many people may recall that Spain did indeed embark on an orgy of real estate projects during the pre-2008 boom, and, like other countries, when the housing bubble collapsed, the problems began. Additionally, while not often mentioned in connection to the refugee crisis, the Spanish government, like others, fell victim to the the multicultural virus and began importing refugees to such an extent that it dramatically effected the ability of native Spaniard youth to gain jobs; consequently unemployment rose dramatically, and with it, calls for secession from Madrid in various regions, most notably Catalonia. One reader of this website, located in Spain, referred years ago to the whole process of being one of remaking Spain into “Spanistan.” And though we don’t hear of Spain in this connection as often as we do of the Netherlands, France, Germany or Italy, or for that matter Great Britain or the USA, there has been a growing backlash against these policies among Spaniards.
What caught my eye here, however, was the admission that Bankia’s and indeed Spain’s economic woes were due to the same cause as elsewhere: “bad mortgage loans.” That, as one might imagine, caught my eye because I strongly suspect there is much more going on…

Read More At: GizaDeathStar.com
________________________________________________

About Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.

Brexit & Revitalization The Common Wealth: The USA As Associate Member?

Source: GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell Ph.D.
February 27, 2017

In the aftermath of the BREXIT vote, I began to argue in blogs and in various interviews, that the next step geopolitically for Great Britain would be to play the soft power card, in the form of revivifying the British Commonwealth of nations. My reasons for thinking this was in the cards were various, and spread out over several  blogs and interviews. Here were some of those reasons: (1) elements of the British deep state, including apparently the Queen herself, were increasingly disappointed not only with the EU and the loss of national sovereignty, but with the unipolar and multicultural (read, Gramscian Marxist) direction things were going; (2) a significant segment of the British population was fed up with the growing Islamicization of Britain; and (3) Britain was pursuing, independently of the EU, it’s own relationship and trading policy with China, hosting the state visit of Mr. Xi Jinping to that country, and joining, as a member of the board, China’s Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank. Finally, (4) Britain continued to be alarmed at the growing power and influence of Russia, in particular Russia speaking openly about the West abandoning its core cultural principles and appealing directly to those elements in the West with decidedly traditional cultural sympathies. Russia was playing the soft power card, and playing it well.

In this context, I was arguing that the United Kingdom had certain unique advantages – all of them cultural – that the European Union, firmly under Germany’s thumb, did not: Britain had dramatically influenced the expansion of an English-speaking culture, with English institutions, concepts of jurisprudence, and so on, over a vast area of the globe. Britain could, I argued, if it played its cards right, play that soft power card and create an immense bloc of economic and cultural interests. But this would be impossible under the aegis of the globaloney-multicultural-unipolar philosophy. The way to do this would be to stress the cultural heritage and institutions, and the British Commonwealth was ready-to-hand.

This last week, a number of regular readers of this website, particularly in the United Kingdom, shared an article which appears to confirm this analysis and prediction, and moreover, to do so in a very astonishing way:

USA could be ‘associate member’ of Commonwealth to reap rewards from forgotten ‘treasure

While this article is fairly short, the first four paragraphs contain a number of bombshells that appear to support my arguments from months ago, rather substantially:

The United States could eventually become an “associate member” of the Commonwealth, according to plans being drawn up by the Royal Commonwealth Society.

The move, which is said to have the backing of the Queen, is believed to have come about because of US President Donald Trump’s love of Britain and the Royal Family.

With the UK making plans to leave the European Union (EU) officials are keen to build up international relations through the Commonwealth in an number of areas, including trade.

Director of the Royal Commonwealth Society Michael Lake told The Telegraph: “The UK rather left this treasure in the attic, and forgot about it because people were so glued to Brussels.” (Emphasis added)

I cannot help but think that since this plan “is said to have the backing of the Queen”, that it may have been in the works for some time, since we all recall the story from last year, prior to the BREXIT referendum, that the Queen had invited Mr. Cameron’s vice-premier to the palace for tea and dinner, during which the Queen allegedly asked him is he could name three incontestable benefits Britain was reaping from the EU. The message was clear: the Queen was casting a skeptical eye on the whole business.

There was another wrinkle that seldom…

Read More At: GizaDeathStar.com
________________________________________________

About Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.