Sep 27

Today’s News 27th September 2016

  • George Soros' False Flag Factories

    Submitted by Wayne Madsen via Strategic-Culture.org,

    Global hedge fund tycoon and political provocateur George Soros is leading a war of symbols, namely flags and banners either resurrected or conjured up by his myriad non-profit groups, to stir religious, racial, and ethnic tensions the world over. From the Serbian OTPOR! movement and its clenched-fist symbol adopted by protests groups around the world to the menacing black and white flag of the Islamic State, which first appeared during the Soros-backed «Arab Spring» rebellions, Soros’s «false flag» factories have been running at break-neck production speeds.

    Soros and his acolytes saw the importance of symbology in the writings of Gene Sharp of the Albert Einstein Institution in Boston, Massachusetts. Although Sharp’s catechism of how to conduct non-violent resistance and revolution has been likened by some political scientists to Mohandas Gandhi and Dr. Martin Luther King, his concepts on upsetting the political status quo appear to be borrowed more from the likes of Mao Zedong, Karl Marx, and Adolf Hitler.

    Among Sharp’s necessary tools to conduct political action are «flags and symbolic colors», «slogans, caricatures, and symbols», and «banners, posters, and displayed communications». The «symbolic colors» have been used by Soros- and Central Intelligence Agency-sponsored «color revolutions» in Ukraine (Orange) and Kyrgyzstan (Pink) and attempted color revolutions in Iran (Green), Kuwait (Blue), and Burma (Saffron).

    Using the Sharp template and financing from Soros and the CIA-linked National Endowment for Democracy (NED), Symbols were used in the themed Arab Spring revolutions in Tunisia (Jasmine) and Egypt (Lotus) and attempted revolutions in Georgia (Rose), Lebanon (Cedar), Uzbekistan (Cotton), and Moldova (Grape).

    It is now more than obvious that Soros and his minions, known as «Sorosites» – a clever play on «parasites» – in the Balkans, contracted with flag factories to churn out banners of former regimes in the uprisings in Libya and Syria. In Libya, the rebels who rose up against Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi in 2011 brandished factory-fresh, still-creased red-black-green horizontal tricolor with the white crescent and star used by the old Libyan monarchy, the regime that Qaddafi overthrew in 1969.

    Almost simultaneously, Syrian rebels opposed to President Bashar al-Assad hit the streets of major Syrian cities with factory-fresh green-white-black horizontal tricolors with three red stars used by Syria during the French League of Nations mandate and by the Republic of Syria in 1961. It was obvious that in both cases, the Soros- and NED-sponsored opposition groups in Libya and Syria foresaw a return to a pro-Western Libya as had existed under the feudalistic King Idris until his overthrow in 1969 and a Syria not unlike the pro-Western regime of Major-General Abd al-Karim Zahr as-Din, a Druze who ousted the pro-Gamal Abdel Nasser regime in Damascus in 1961. However, for Soros and the regime change advocates under U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, there would be disappointment.

    Instead of pro-Western regimes taking power in Libya and Syria, major swaths of territory fell to jihadist forces who mainly owed allegiance to the Islamic State but with a few swearing loyalty to Al Qaeda. Regardless of what jihadist entity they supported, these rebel groups received support from Saudi Arabia, the Turkish Islamist government of Recep Tayyip Erdogan, and the Gulf emirates of Qatar, Abu Dhabi, Dubai, Sharjah, and Kuwait.

    Instead of the flags of the former pro-Western proxy regimes appearing over buildings in Libya and Syria, factory-fresh black and white flags of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) flew from flagpoles, windows, and balconies from Benghazi and Sirte to Tripoli and Derna. In Syria, new ISIL flags were raised from Raqqa and Majib to Idlib and Palmyra. To the east, in Iraq, ISIL flags replaced those of the U.S.-installed Iraqi government and the Kurdistan Regional Government.

    One indication as to the source of the new ISIL flags was reported on October 7, 2014 by the Jewish Telegraph Agency from the northern Israeli town of Nazareth Illit. Gardeners in the factory area of the city discovered a bag that had fallen onto a street from a truck. Twenty-five new black and white ISIL flags were found inside the bag.

    A number of questions were raised by the discovery. Were the flags manufactured by a factory in the Jewish city? It is known that the Israeli military provided logistical and other support to jihadists fighting across the Golan Heights border in Syria. Were ISIL flags part of Israeli propaganda support to the jihadist rebels? Additionally, did Soros and the NED outsource the production of ISIL, as well as the flags of former Arab regimes, to the Israelis for distribution in Libya and Syria?

    Soros’s connections to ISIL became very apparent during the opening session of the United Nations General Assembly when some human rights advocates, including some linked to Soros’s nongovernmental organizations, called for the International Criminal Court (ICC) to prosecute the leadership of ISIL. The ICC, which is heavily influenced by Soros organizations, balked at the idea of prosecuting ISIL officials and operatives.

    The ICC claimed that since neither Syria nor Iraq were parties to the 1998 Rome Statute, which created the court, ISIL commanders and ground troops could not be hauled before the international tribunal to answer for their crimes against humanity in those countries. The ICC has had no problem prosecuting leaders and military officers from the Balkans and Africa, but ISIL was deemed off-limits.

    The ICC was also prepared to put members of the Qaddafi family on trial for alleged crimes in Libya, however, ISIL and its affiliates in Libya were of no interest to the court. The main reason for the ICC to look askance at ISIL is because in any trial of the group’s leadership, the «false flag» antics of the Saudis, Israelis, Turks, Emiratis, the Soros organizations, and the Americans might have been laid bare for all the world to see.

    Soros’s false flag antics are not merely confined to the Middle East. The eruption of violence among African-Americans in response to police violence targeting mainly African-American men saw new flags bearing the slogan «Black Lives Matter» being raised in cities and towns across the United States. It is well-known that Soros finances the Black Lives Matter group and the flags appeared to be yet another use of banners, slogans, and symbols in keeping with the template of Sharp and his themed revolution model.

    While «Black Lives Matter» flags appeared throughout America, historical flags like the 13-star «Betsy Ross» flag from the American Revolution; the Gadsden Flag bearing the motto «Don’t Tread on Me», a slogan popularized by Benjamin Franklin; and any flag bearing any symbols from the Confederate States of America were denounced by Soros-funded pressure groups as «racist». There were demands that these historical American flags be banned from cemeteries, parks, historical battlefield sites, and other locations. This was yet another «false flag» attack by Soros and those who actually wish to alter American history and impose a regime of extreme political correctness in violation of the free speech clause of the U.S. Constitution.

    As a result of Sharp’s roadmap to revolution, flags and symbols are potent weapons. Police in Spain have found ISIL flags in towns located in southern Spain, the location of the old Al Andalus Caliphate that the Islamic State has vowed to «liberate» from Christianity. Turkish flags are found in greater numbers in some German neighborhoods than German flags. Hispanic groups protesting Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump wave factory-fresh Mexican flags. The telltale signs of George Soros and CIA destabilization efforts can be found in the flags that appear in crowds of protesters. Vexillology intelligence (Vexint), or flag intelligence, should become a branch of every major intelligence agency around the world.

  • I Prefer Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton (Video)

    By EconMatters


    Donald Trump might just be outside the career politician mode enough to address some of the structural issues facing this country over the next four years that sadly Hillary Clinton will just continue perpetuating with the status quo. I expect out of control spending and continued fiscal mismanagement during Hillary Clinton`s Presidency.

     

    © EconMatters All Rights Reserved | Facebook | Twitter | YouTube | Email Digest | Kindle    

  • Debate Post-Mortem: Rematch Required As Commentators Split On Debate Winner, Markets Give Hillary Nod

    From "big, fat, ugly bubbles" to "trumped-up trickle-down" economics, tonight's debate had something for everyone. One-liners and soundbites were dropped like confetti with strange facial gestures, delicate coughs, and direct jabs flying left, right, and center. As far as the results go, it's anyone's guess: Lester Holt was soundly beaten by everyone online; the markets (S&P Futs and the Mexican Peso) both suggested a Trump loss, Trump won Twitter, online (and unscientific) polls were undecided with a slight nod to a Trump victory, as commentators were mixed, most siding with their ideological bias.

    As Bloomberg reports, after a little more than 90 minutes of debate (full transcript here), here are the key takeaways from tonight's event:

    The candidates spent a good deal of time on stop-and-frisk, racial issues, Obama birther matter, ISIS and nuclear weapons.

     

    Trump appeared to be rambling on a number of questions, especially on foreign policy.

     

    Clinton made points on the tax returns, with Trump not ending questions about whether he failed to pay any federal income taxes — an not offering a clear reason as to why he's not releasing his tax returns.

     

    Clinton's answers often were recitations of her campaign statements.

     

    It was difficult for Holt, as moderator, to keep the candidates focused on the questions. At times, it appeared he'd lost control of the debate.

    Behind their glazed eyes…

     

    Some Key Excerpts

    Clash of the Titans…

     

    Then Hillary struck…

     

    Quickly followed by Trump…

    And…

     

    Trump on 'birtherism'

    "I got him to give the birth certificate," he said about President Barack Obama.

    Trump on his temperament

    "I think my strongest asset by far is my temperament. I have a winning temperament," Trump said.

    Trump on taxes

    "That makes me smart," Trump said in response to Clinton saying he might not pay federal income taxes.

    Clinton on her emails

    "I made a mistake using private email," Clinton said.
    "That's for sure," Trump added.

    How rich?

    "Maybe he's not as rich as he says he is … There is something he's hiding … Who does he owe money to?" Clinton speculating on why Trump hasn't released his tax returns.

    Trump Won The Drinking Game:

     

    Trump Won Twitter:

     

    Polls Were Mixed:

    Drudge – as expected – big trump win, suggesting whoever was for Trump before, remained with Trump:

     

     

    NJ.com – Trump win.

     

    Time.com – Hillary win.

    Fortune.com – Small Trump win.

     

    The Hill: Trump slightly ahead:

     

    On the other hand, judging by the market's response, Trump lost:

     

    Judging by the surge in futures and the Mexican peso, markets judged the first of three U.S. presidential debates a win for Hillary Clinton: U.S. stock index futures reversed losses, while Mexico’s peso rebounding from a record low and haven assets including the yen and gold fell.  S&P 500 futs gained 0.4 percent as shares in Asia pared losses. Mexico’s peso rose as much as 1.5 percent, although rolled over toward the end of the debate.

    *  *  *

    She Said…

    • *CLINTON SAYS KEY ELECTION QUESTION IS WHAT FUTURE FOR U.S.
    • *CLINTON SAYS NEED TO BUILD AN ECONOMY FOR `EVERYONE'
    • *CLINTON SAYS NEED TO INVEST IN INFRASTRUCTURE, RENEWABLES
    • *CLINTON CALLS FOR RAISING MINIMUM WAGE, MORE PROFIT SHARING
    • *CLINTON SAYS WEALTHY NEED TO `PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE'
    • *CLINTON: TRUMP'S TAX PLAN IS TRUMPED UP TRICKLE-DOWN ECONOMICS
    • *CLINTON SAYS TRUMP `ROOTED FOR THE HOUSING CRISIS'
    • *CLINTON, TRUMP SPAR ON ECONOMIC RECORD OF BILL CLINTON'S YEARS
    • *CLINTON: `DONALD, I KNOW YOU LIVE IN YOUR OWN REALITY'
    • *TRUMP: YOU HAVE NO PLAN; CLINTON: I WROTE A BOOK ABOUT IT
    • *CLINTON: I HAVE A FEELING I'LL BE BLAMED FOR EVERYTHING
    • *CLINTON ON PRIVATE EMAILS: I MADE A MISTAKE; TRUMP AGREES
    • *CLINTON SAYS SHE'S MET PEOPLE `STIFFED' BY TRUMP'S BUSINESSES
    • *CLINTON: RACE REMAINS `SIGNIFICANT' CHALLENGE IN U.S.
    • *CLINTON: TRUMP PAINTS `DIRE, NEGATIVE' PICTURE OF BLACK AMERICA
    • *CLINTON SAYS WANTS TO END PRIVATE PRISONS IN STATE SYSTEMS TOO
    • *CLINTON SAYS TRUMP INVITING RUSSIA TO HACK WAS `UNACCEPTABLE'
    • *CLINTON SAYS TRUMP BACKED IRAQ WAR AND LIBYA INTERVENTION
    • *CLINTON SAYS TRUMP HAS `CAVALIER ATTITUDE' ON NUCLEAR WEAPONS
    • *CLINTON SAYS U.S. CAMPAIGN HAS CAUSED WORRY FOR WORLD LEADERS

    He Said…

    • *TRUMP SAYS U.S. JOBS `FLEEING THE COUNTRY' INCL. TO MEXICO
    • *TRUMP: THEY'RE USING OUR COUNTRY AS PIGGY BANK TO REBUILD CHINA
    • *TRUMP: WE HAVE TO STOP OUR JOBS FROM BEING STOLEN FROM US
    • *TRUMP CITES FORD, CARRIER SAYING NEED TO KEEP COS. IN U.S.
    • *TRUMP CALLS CLINTON BY SECRETARY TITLE, ASKS IF THAT'S OK
    • *TRUMP INTERJECTS ON CLINTON ATTACK: `THAT'S CALLED BUSINESS'
    • *TRUMP SAYS U.S. ENERGY POLICIES ARE A `DISASTER'
    • *CLINTON, TRUMP SPAR ON ECONOMIC RECORD OF BILL CLINTON'S YEARS
    • *TRUMP SAYS NAFTA IS THE WORST TRADE DEAL SIGNED ANYWHERE
    • *TRUMP SAYS CLINTON FLIPPED ON TPP AFTER HIS CRITICISMS
    • *TRUMP: YOU HAVE NO PLAN; CLINTON: I WROTE A BOOK ABOUT IT
    • *TRUMP SAYS WE HAVE NO LEADERSHIP, THAT STARTS WITH CLINTON
    • *TRUMP SAYS CLINTON A `TYPICAL POLITICIAN,' THAT SHE'S ALL TALK
    • *TRUMP SAYS THE FED IS NOT DOING THEIR JOBS, BEING POLITICAL
    • *TRUMP ON E-MAILS: THAT WAS NOT A MISTAKE, DONE PURPOSEFULLY
    • *TRUMP ON RACIAL DIVIDE, SAYS NEED TO HAVE `LAW AND ORDER'
    • *TRUMP: TEND TO AGREE W/ BLOCKING GUNS FOR THOSE ON NO-FLY-LIST
    • *TRUMP: BLACK COMMUNITY HAS BEEN `LET DOWN' BY POLITICIANS
    • *TRUMP SAYS HE GOT OBAMA TO PROVIDE HIS BIRTH CERTIFICATE
    • *TRUMP SAYS CLINTON ALLIES PEDDLED OBAMA BIRTHPLACE QUESTIONS
    • *TRUMP SAYS DOESN'T KNOW IF RUSSIA HACKED DNC, COULD BE OTHERS
    • *TRUMP: ISLAMIC STATE COULDN'T HAVE FORMED IF WE'D TAKEN THE OIL
    • *TRUMP SAYS IDEA HE SUPPORTED IRAQ WAR IS MEDIA NONSENSE
    • *TRUMP SAYS HE HAS MUCH BETTER TEMPERAMENT THAN CLINTON DOES
    • *TRUMP: NUCLEAR WEAPONS ARE NUMBER ONE THREAT NOT CLIMATE CHANGE
    • *TRUMP ON NUCLEAR WEAPONS: I WOULD CERTAINLY NOT DO FIRST STRIKE
    • *TRUMP: CLINTON DOESN'T HAVE THE LOOK, DOESN'T HAVE THE STAMINA
    • *TRUMP: `HILLARY HAS EXPERIENCE, BUT IT'S BAD EXPERIENCE'

    *  *  *

    The bottom line.

     

    So, as Obama would say after his first unfortunate debate in 2012, on to the rematch.

  • "Foot-In-Mouth" Trump Vs. "Frog-In-Throat" Clinton: First Presidential Debate Begins – Live Feed

    The day has finally arrived. The two most disliked presidential candidates in the history of America face off mano a (wo)mano in a 90-minute, pee-break-barred grudge match of the politically-correct corrupt establishmentarian against the deplorable status-quo-wrecker. With the polls tied up, there's everything to play for as a record audience tunes in to see who will screw up first…

    Anything could happen…

     

    With race almost perfectly tied up in the polls, as we detailed earlier, there is everything to play for, and as The Hill details, here are five things to watch for in the heavyweight clash that will set the course for the final 42 days of the election…

    Will Trump bring up _______?

    During the GOP primary debates, Trump veered from controversial and blustering to subdued and cordial. On the campaign trail, he’s shifted away from free-wheeling stream-of-consciousness rallies to reading from prepared text, but sometimes the teleprompter is not enough to keep him on message. The Clinton camp is preparing for everything but is undoubtedly unnerved by the prospect of Trump conjuring one of the countless real and imagined conspiracies or controversies from Clinton’s decades in public life. Trump could make Clinton’s marriage an issue by bringing up Monica Lewinsky, Paula Jones, Juanita Broaddrick or Kathleen Willey, or he could bring up Clinton’s health, just weeks after a passerby captured dramatic cellphone video of her appearing to pass out while leaving a 9/11 memorial in New York City. He could also veer into conspiracy. Trump during the GOP primary suggested rival Ted Cruz’s father might have been involved in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. The GOP nominee has huddled with controversial anti-Clinton author Ed Klein, whose work has been dismissed by the mainstream political class as unsubstantiated conspiracy-mongering. And he has surrounded himself with conservative media giants like former Fox News chief Roger Ailes and Breitbart chairman Steve Bannon, both known for gleefully trafficking in the most embarrassing aspects of Clinton’s private life. It all has the potential to blow Clinton off course. Or it could backfire spectacularly on Trump and provide an election-defining moment of authenticity for Clinton. The Democrat will also have ample opportunities to get under Trump’s skin. A New York Times report said Clinton wants to show him unhinged, which could signal she intends to dig at her rival over his business accomplishments, temperament, past controversies with women or ties to right-wing extremist elements.

     

    Body language

    Every move, subconscious twitch and unplanned reaction will be captured in high definition, magnified before a Super Bowl-sized audience and endlessly dissected on cable news. Minor physical faux pas have sunk candidates in the past, from Al Gore sighing in 2000 to George H.W. Bush checking his watch in 1992. Trump has a flashy and over-the-top style punctuated by unique hand gesticulations and facial expressions. He is entertaining to watch and is a ratings juggernaut but is also in the position of having to prove to a skeptical public that he is commander in chief material — not just a showman. Clinton, meanwhile, is a cool and accomplished debater but can come across as dull or dispassionate. The Democratic nominee badly needs to energize a liberal base that has shown indifference to her. She’ll be looking to avoid a performance that appears overly scripted or sterile under the bright lights.

     

    The moderator

    Lester Holt, the modest and understated anchor of "NBC Nightly News," need only ask his colleague Matt Lauer, the host of NBC’s "Today," how tricky moderating a presidential forum can be. Lauer has suffered immense blowback from critics who said he was unprepared and allowed Trump to walk all over him at a military forum earlier this month. Holt will face intense scrutiny for the questions he asks, how he frames those questions, and whether he fact-checks and challenges the candidates on their claims. In 2012, CNN anchor Candy Crowley came under fire for correcting Mitt Romney — wrongly, according to conservatives — at a key moment in a debate against President Obama over a question about Benghazi. There are myriad controversies and scandals involving both candidates that Holt could choose to raise. Partisans will be keeping tally. The campaigns and candidates are already busy working the ref. Trump this week said Holt is a Democrat and warned the anchor not to fact-check his assertions. The Clinton campaign is publicly fretting that Holt has such low expectations for Trump that the moderator will take it easy on the GOP nominee while holding Clinton to a higher standard.

     

    What voters do Trump and Clinton speak to?

    Both candidates have work to do in shoring up their respective bases, but both also need to expand their appeal. Clinton has big leads over Trump among Hispanics, African-Americans and young voters. But none of these groups that formed the core of the Obama coalition are particularly enthused about turning out for her. She could lay it on thick with a message that energizes that liberal core, which could help her slam the door shut on Trump. But Clinton could also be looking to expand her appeal to Republicans who can’t bring themselves to vote for Trump. That would mean casting herself as a centrist and a pragmatist, rather than a fierce advocate for the causes important to the left. Trump, meanwhile, badly needs to resonate with some constituency outside his core base of white men. His efforts to reach African-American voters have been mocked as condescending and trafficking in stereotypes. Many minority voters and young people aren’t considering voting for Trump, but if he can improve even slightly on his dismal numbers there it could be meaningful for him in the long-run. A focus on minority outreach might also help alleviate the fears of white, college-educated voters who are steering clear of Trump because they don’t want to be associated with a candidate who has been accused of racism and bigotry.

     

    The debate over black and blue

    A police shooting of a black man under disputed circumstances in North Carolina has the nation on edge. The fatal shooting of Keith Lamont Scott has sparked protests in Charlotte and once again put the spotlight on police practices in black communities. Potentially furthering the tension — Monday’s debate is expected to attract upwards of 10,000 protesters and will take place on Long Island, which has a high concentration of cops, firefighters and first responders. Trump has broken recently from his hard-line pro-police stance, saying he was “troubled” by a different police shooting of a black man in Tulsa, Okla., which has led to charges of manslaughter against the officer. Tensions are running hot on both ends of the debate, and how the candidates handle the super-charged political minefield will be revealing.

    With some big money bets going down in the last few days on Trump's victory…

    We suspect tonight's battle royale will do much to solidify the nation's choice.

    *  *  *

    Live Feed:

    *  *  *

    Perhaps more crucially for many watching tonight's debate, is the opportunity to drink (responsibly at first)

    Beginner's Drinking Game…

    h/t @chgirl

    Professional's Drinking Game… (only attempt if you have attempted at least one debate drinking game)

    Simplified… Pick A Candidate, Listen for words; If any candidate says a Community word, everyone drinks…

    h/t DebateDrinking.com

    And Keeping Score…

    And for the non-drinkers… How about some Bingo:

  • "America Is On Our Side": Al-Nusra Commander Tells German Press US Is Arming Jihadists

    In a striking interview with German journalist Jürgen Todenhöfer published today the German press including the prominent newspaper Focus, a militant jihadist commander said that US weapons are being delivered to Jabhat Al-Nusra by governments that Washington supports, adding that American instructors were in Syria to teach how to use the new equipment.

    “Yes, the US supports the opposition [in Syria], but not directly. They support the countries that support us. But we are not yet satisfied with this support,” Jabhat al-Nusra unit commander Abu Al Ezz said in an interview with Koelner Stadt-Anzeiger newspaper from the city of Aleppo. According to the commander, the militants should be receiving more “sophisticated weapons” from their backers to succeed against the Syrian government.

     

    For those pressed for time, below is a summary of what the Al-Nusra commander said:

    • They are directly supported by the US
    • They received tanks and other heavy weaponry via Libya and Turkey
    • They got officers and experts from the US, Israel, Turkey inside Aleppo
    • The commanders of IS are led by Western intelligence
    • They are against cease-fires and aid deliveries
    • “The U.S. is on our side”

    In the full interview, the commander notes that “The fight is difficult. The regime is strong and gets support from Russia,” the jihadist explained. Al Ezz said that Jabhat Al-Nusra “won battles thanks to TOW rockets. Due to these rockets, we reached a balance with the regime. Our tanks came from Libya via Turkey, joined by the [BM-21] multiple rocket launchers,” he said. 

    “We will fight until the regime is toppled,” he said, referring to Assad’s government. Al-Nusra Front wants “to establish an Islamic state that will be ruled according to the Sharia law. We do not recognize any secular state.”

    The government forces have an advantage because of aircraft and missile launchers, but “we have the American-made TOW missiles, and the situation in some areas is under control,” Al Ezz added.

    But the most stunning admission came when asked if the TOW missiles were initially intended for Jabhat Al-Nusra or if the group obtained them from the moderate Free Syrian Army, the jihadist clarified: “No, the missiles were given to us directly.”

     He also said that when Jabhat Al-Nusra was “besieged, we had officers from Turkey, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Israel and America here… Experts in the use of satellites, rockets, reconnaissance and thermal security cameras.”

    Another dramatic admission: when Todenhöfer asked specifically if the US instructors were really present among the jihadists’ ranks and Al Ezz replied: “The Americans are on our side.”

    He also said that Jabhat Al-Nusra has been paid for achieving specific military goals during the Syrian conflict. “We got 500 million Syrian pounds (around $2.3 million) from Saudi Arabia. To capture the Infantry School in Al Muslimiya years ago we received 1.5 million Kuwaiti dinars (around $500,000) and Saudi Arabia’s $5 million,” Al Ezz said.

    The money came from the “governments” of those states, not private individuals, he said.

    One of the governments cited as a source of funds – Israel. “Israel is now giving us support because Israel is at war with Syria and with Hezbollah,” Al Ezz said. The West also “paved the way” for jihadists coming to Syria, saying that “we have many fighters from Germany, France, Britain, America, from all the Western countries,” the commander said.

    In the interview, Al Ezz confirmed claims made by Moscow and the Syrian government that the militants had used the Syrian ceasefire, agreed by Russia and US on September 9, to prepare for a new offensive.

    “We do not recognize the ceasefire. We will regroup our groups. We will carry out the next overwhelming attack against the regime in a few days. We have regrouped our forces in all provinces, including Homs, Aleppo, Idlib and Hama,” Al Ezz said.

    He said that Jabhat Al-Nusa would not let trucks with humanitarian aid enter Aleppo “as long as the regime [forces] are along the Castello Road, in Al Malah and in the northern regions.” “The regime must withdraw from all the territories, and we will let the trucks in. If a truck is going in anyway, we will detain the driver,” he said.

    The idea of a transitional government in Syria is also not supported by Jabhat Al-Nusra, the commander said. “We accept no one from the Assad regime or of the Free Syrian Army, which is described as moderate. Our goal is to overthrow the regime, and establish an Islamic state in accordance with the Islamic Sharia,” he said.

    As for the people who represent the Syrian opposition at the Geneva talks, Al Ezz said that “these people are weak, they’ve got a lot of money. They’ve sold themselves.”

    “There are mercenaries in Syria, Alloush fights with Al Nusra-Front,” he said talking about Mohammed Alloush, a leader in the Jaysh al-Islam group, part of the Syrian opposition’s High Negotiations Committee (HNC) in the peace talks. “The group that was housed in Turkey and which was turned into the Free Syrian Army, used to be part of Al Nusra-Front.”

    Interestingly, the al-Nusra Front commander also mentioned the UN aid convoy. Keep in mind that Todenhöfer, the first Western journalist to be granted access to the caliphate, conducted the interview ten day ago, before the attack. The commander said that the militants would not allow UN trucks carrying aid to enter Aleppo if the Syrian Arab Army does not withdraw “as required.” “The regime must withdraw from all areas in order for us to let the trucks in. If a truck drives in anyway, we will arrest the driver,” he detailed.

    Finally, in case there is still any confusion, the commander openly confirmed that Jabhat Al-Nusra “are part of Al Qaeda.”

    “Actually, we were inside one group together with the Islamic State. But the Islamic State has been used in accordance with the interests and political purposes of the big powers like America, and the group has drifted away from our principles. Most of the IS leaders are working with intelligence services, and it’s now clear for us. We, the Jabhat Al-Nusra, have our own way,” Al Ezz said.

    The interview with Jabhat al-Nusra’s commander was taken at a stone quarry in Aleppo on September 17 by Koelner Stadt-Anzeiger journalist Jurgen Todenhöfer on his seventh trip to war-torn Syria.

  • P2P Meltdown Continues: LoanDepot's CDO Collapses Just 10 Months After Issuance

    We first noted Wall Street’s misguided plan to feed its securitization machine with peer-to-peer (P2P) loans back in May 2015 (see “What Bubble? Wall Street To Turn P2P Loans Into CDOs“).  Obviously we warned then that the voracious demand for P2P loans was a direct product of central bank policies that had sent investors searching far and wide for yield leaving them so desperate they were willing to gamble on the payment streams generated by loans made on peer-to-peer platforms.

    In addition to the pure lunacy of using unsecured, low/no-doc, micro-loans as collateral for a CDO, we pointed out that the very nature of P2P loans meant that borrower creditworthiness likely deteriorated as soon as loans were issued.  The credit deterioration stemmed from the fact that many borrowers were simply using P2P loan proceeds to repay higher-interest credit card debt.  That said, after paying off that credit card, many people simply proceeded to max it out again leaving them with twice the original amount of debt.

    And, sure enough, it only took about a year before the first signs started to emerge that the P2P lending bubble was bursting.  The first such sign came in May 2016 when Lending Club’s stock collapsed 25% in a single day after reporting that their write-off rates were trending at 7%-8% or roughly double the forecasted rate (we wrote about it here “P2P Bubble Bursts? LendingClub Stock Plummets 25% After CEO Resigns On Internal Loan Review“). 

    Now, signs are starting to emerge that Lending Club isn’t the only P2P lender with deteriorating credit metrics.  As Bloomberg points out, less than year after wall street launched the P2P CDO, one of the first such securities backed by loans from LoanDepot has already experienced such high default and delinquency rates that cash flow triggers have been tripped cutting off cash flow to the lowest-rating tranches. 

    The $140mm private security, called MPLT 2014-LD1, was issued by Jefferies in November 2015 and, less than 1 year after it’s issuance, cumulative losses rose to 4.97% in September, breaching the 4.9% “trigger” for the structure.  And sure enough, the deal was sold to a group of investors that included life insurance company, Catholic Order of Foresters.

    But, as Bloomberg noted, the LoanDepot deal wasn’t the only one to breach covenants in less than a year.  Two other Jefferies securitizations backed by loans made by the online startups CircleBack Lending and OnDeck Capital have also breached triggers.

    For some reason the following clip from the “Big Short” comes to mind…“short everything that guy has touched.”

  • Wells Fargo Or The Fed: Who's The Bigger Fraud?

    Submitted by Ron Paul via The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity,

    The Wells Fargo bank account scandal took center stage in the news last week and in all likelihood will continue to make headlines for many weeks to come. What Wells Fargo employees did in opening bank accounts without customers' authorization was obviously wrong, but in true Washington fashion the scandal is being used to deflect attention away from larger, more enduring, and more important scandals.

    What Wells Fargo employees who opened these accounts engaged in was nothing more than fraud and theft, and they should be punished accordingly. But how much larger is the fraud perpetrated by the Federal Reserve System and why does the Fed continue to go unpunished?

    For over 100 years the Federal Reserve System has been devaluing the dollar, siphoning money from the wallets of savers into the pockets of debtors. Where is the outrage? Where are the hearings? Why isn’t Congress up in arms about the Fed’s malfeasance?

    It reminds me of the story of the pirate confronting Alexander the Great. When accused by Alexander of piracy, he replies “Because I do it with a small boat, I am called a pirate and a thief. You, with a great navy, molest the world and are called an emperor.”

    Over two thousand years later, not much has changed. Wells Fargo will face more scrutiny and perhaps more punishment. There will undoubtedly be more calls for stricter regulation, notwithstanding the fact that regulators failed to detect this fraud, just as they have failed to detect every fraud and financial crisis in history. And who will suffer? Why, the average account-holder of course.

    Any penalties assessed against Wells Fargo will be made up by increasing fees on account-holders. Clawbacks of bonuses, if they occur, will likely face resistance from the beneficiaries of those bonuses, leading to protracted and costly lawsuits. Even if the Wells Fargo CEO and top executives of Wells Fargo step down, the culture at Wells Fargo is unlikely to change anytime soon. As one of the largest banks in the world, Wells Fargo knows that it is not only too big to fail, but also too big to prosecute. At the end of the day, no matter how much public posturing there is, Wells Fargo and the regulators will remain best buddies. And those regulators who failed to catch this fraud will be rewarded with more power and larger budgets, courtesy of the US taxpayer.

    Through all of this, the Federal Reserve will continue its policy of low interest rates and easy money. Retirees who hoped to be able to live off the interest on their investments will find themselves squeezed by continued low interest rates. Those living on fixed incomes will see their monthly checks buying less and less as the prices of food staples continue to rise. The fat cats on Wall Street will continue to have access to cheap and easy money while those on Main Street will face a constantly declining quality of life.

    It is well past time for the Federal Reserve to face the same music as Wells Fargo and the bad actors on Wall Street. It is, after all, the Federal Reserve's creation of money out of thin air that enables all of this fraudulent behavior in the first place, so why should the Fed remain untouchable? Let's hope that someday Congress wakes up, hauls the Federal Reserve in for questioning, and puts as much pressure on the Fed as it does on private sector fraudsters.

  • Hofstra University Unveils "Trigger Warning" For Tonight's Debate

    It was inevitable. With much of the debate over the past year focusing on Social Justice Warriors, “safe spaces”, and – most notably – “trigger warnings,” moments ago the first such caution emerged when Hofstra University- the venue of tonight’s historic debate – posted a “trigger warning” sign to warn students about the potentially disturbing content that may be discussed during Monday night’s presidential debate.

    According to CBS New York reporter Tony Aiello, a sign inside of the student center at Hofstra reads, “Trigger warning: The event conducted just beyond this sign may contain triggering and/or sensitive material. Sexual violence, sexual assault, and abuse are some topics mentioned within this event. If you feel triggered, please know there are resources to help you.”

    As MrcTV adds, the sign provides students with contact information for student counseling services, the Title IX coordinator, student advocacy and prevention, and the national sexual assault hotline

  • The QE Premium

    Authored by Michael Lebowitz via 720Global.com,

    It has been eight years since the great financial crisis of 2008, and the Federal Reserve (Fed) is still maintaining an unprecedented level of accommodation in monetary policy. The Federal Funds rate has been pinned at or near zero since 2008. Recent discussions on raising the rate a mere quarter of a percent are met with a palpable level of angst and incredulity by economists and investors alike. Since the crisis, the Fed quadrupled their balance sheet using printed money to buy U.S. Treasury and mortgage securities. The economic results, supposedly the justification for these aggressive actions, have mostly been disappointing. That said, one can credit Fed policy actions for driving financial asset valuations to historic levels.

    Over the last eight years investors have adopted a mindset that Fed intervention is good for asset prices, despite clear evidence that it has contributed little to the fundamental rationale for owning such assets.  Fixed income yields are at or near record lows and stock indices trade at valuations that have only been eclipsed twice in history, just prior to the great depression (1929) and at the height of the technology bubble (2000). High end real-estate and various collectibles trade at unparalleled levels. The eye-popping valuations on these less liquid assets further confirm how impactful Fed policy has been on asset prices.

    We have written numerous articles highlighting rich valuations and the infectious behavior that can compel investors to make investment decisions that they would not otherwise make.  In this article we employ a cash flow model to quantify the potential ramifications on the equity market. The goal is to provide investors with a simple tool to calculate total return outcomes that could occur if investors were to lose confidence in the Fed and as a result stretched market valuation premiums built up since 2008 diminish or vanish altogether.

     

    P/E Ratio

    The 720 Global cash flow model was built to provide expected total returns associated with changes to the S&P 500 P/E ratio. For instance, if the P/E ratio were to increase to 30 or decrease to 15, what total return should an investor expect? The model uses the Shiller CAPE 10 ratio versus one-year trailing earnings as it provides earnings consistency by eliminating cyclical noise. The graph below offers a long term historical perspective on the wide range of monthly P/E ratios that have occurred since 1884.

     

    CAPE Ratio

    Data Courtesy: Shiller Data  http://www.econ.yale.edu/~shiller/data.htm

    The current P/E ratio of 26.57, denoted by the black dotted line, is approximately 60% above the average and has only been eclipsed by the exuberant periods of 1929 and 2000 and matched in 2007. Since the era of Fed activism began in the 1990’s, the ratio has tended to remain elevated relative to the historical average, despite what the recent quote from Janet Yellen would have us believe. “I would not say that asset valuations are out of line with historical norms.” – Federal Reserve Chairwoman Janet Yellen 9/21/2016

     

    P/E Shifts and Returns

    The graph below shows the output of the 720 Global cash flow model. Annualized percentage equity returns on the vertical axis (which includes price changes and dividends paid) are shown for correspondent P/E scenarios along the horizontal axis. The model assumes: 2.50% annual corporate earnings growth, 3.50% annual dividend growth and a three year term over which cash flows are modeled.

     

    Expected Annualized Returns

    Data Courtesy: 720 Global Cash Flow Model

     

    Hurdle Rate

    To use the graph to calculate the expected total return for a particular P/E ratio, locate the forecasted P/E ratio on the x-axis, follow it straight up to the total return black line, and read the corresponding figure on the y-axis. The green lines on the graph exhibit how a reversion from the current P/E ratio of 26.57 to a more historically normal P/E of 17.16, imply three consecutive years of –6.73% annualized returns.

    Under normal market conditions, investors appropriately require additional levels of return for added levels of risk. Historically, U.S. equities have exhibited approximately 2.5 times the risk (measured by standard deviation of prices) of U.S Treasury bonds. Fittingly, equites have rewarded investors with approximately 4.50% of additional annual returns over the long term. Measured using the Sharpe Ratio, the bond and stock markets have been very efficient over a long time horizon at assessing comparative risk between the two assets.

    Currently, 30-year U.S. Treasury bonds yield 2.35, thus equity investors mindful of history should have an investment hurdle rate, or a required annual rate of return of 6.85% (4.50% + 2.35%). Such an annualized return over time compensates them fairly for the additional risk of buying equities.

    The 720 Global model can be used to solve for the S&P 500 price that would allow an investor to meet their given hurdle rate or required rate of return for a given P/E ratio. The graph below charts these prices versus the associated P/E ratios for a hurdle rate of 6.85%.

     

    S&P 500 Hurdle Rates

    As shown with the green lines, an investor with the aforementioned 6.85% hurdle rate and expectations of P/E ratios decreasing only modestly from 26.57 to 20.00, should feel comfortable meeting their return requirement by purchasing the S&P 500 at any price below 1706.90.

     

    Data Courtesy: 720 Global Cash Flow Model

     

    Is the Past Prologue to the Future?

    The graphs above use conservative and relatively stable earnings and dividend assumptions. If the economy slides into a recession, not only may P/E ratios dip below the mean, but earnings and dividends growth may falter. The extent to which these measures adjust is often influenced by the extremity of valuations.

    The following table highlights historical experiences that occurred the three other times that P/E ratios resided at or above current levels. The top half of the table displays the changes in the ten year average earnings growth, dividend growth and P/E ratios that occurred during the 1929, 2000 and 2008 market corrections. The bottom half of the table uses that data as its assumptions and forecasts how similar changes would affect total returns today.

     

    Summary

    Equity valuations are grossly dislocated from supporting fundamental data. Comparisons to historic norms, despite what Janet Yellen claims, are far from reality. Investors willing to study history and look at current data will come to the same conclusion. Those that do will also likely agree that the downside looms large as mean reversion is, after all, a powerful force in the markets.

    The purpose of this article is not to claim that the market will immediately correct. In fact, there are several reasons, however unsound, that valuations may indeed rise further. The point is to stress that the odds are not in your favor of that occurring. Any sort of regression to mean, or as frequently occurs below mean, will result in a sizeable market correction as shown. To reiterate this point, the graph below shows the range of returns associated with the various P/E ratios described earlier. Additionally, the bar chart backdrop illustrates the percentage of time the market traded at the corresponding P/E ratios. Based on this analysis, one should expect negative returns if P/E ratios revert to historical ranges.

     

    Expected Annualized Returns with Historical Distribution of P/E Ratio

    Data Courtesy: 720 Global Cash Flow Model

    The current economic recovery and equity bull market rank among the longest on record. Concurrently, domestic and global economic data are slowing markedly while U.S. corporate earnings are declining. Even more concerning, the Federal Reserve’s tool kit is sparse and their ability to continue to prop up the market appears limited. To be blunt, given the aforementioned fundamental risks and the poor risk/return skew, history is clearly not in favor of those who remain long equities banking on the Fed to continue to levitate valuations and prices with limited tools and faulty narratives.

Digest powered by RSS Digest