The EU approach in Ireland vs it's approach in Cyprus
international |
anti-capitalism |
feature
Monday April 08, 2013 20:45
by feudal castrato
The EU bailout in Cyprus seems, on the surface to have taken on board some good ideas such as burning bondholders, capital flight controls, and much more limited small depositors state bank guarantee scheme, but does this stand up to closer inspection or have they just used these good ideas in a rather twisted way to further the same old financial terrorist agendas?
External Related Links:
The European Union’s looting of Cyprus |
Cyprus faces deep recession, high unemployment after bank bailout |
Global Deposit Confiscation Called For By Bilderberg Member and CEO Of Italy’s Largest Bank |
Canada Includes Depositor Haircut Bail-In Provision For Systemically Important Banks in 2013 Budget! |
Laiki Bank: Some Depositors Are More Equal Than Others |
The Lesson From Cyprus: Europe Is Politically Bankrupt |
Cyprus Wealth Grab: The BIG TELL! |
Jim Willie’s “Most Important Article Ever”- USDollar: Ring-Fenced & Checkmate -this is a newsletter from financial investor Jim Willie who is following events very closely for many years and suggests that Cyprus is the trigger for much larger events and thus is an important piece of a much larger jigsaw. It is intriguing to say the least.
The EU approach to Ireland vs it's approach in Cyprus
When Ireland gave it's bank guarantee, no capital controls were imposed, capital was free to flee (and it did), the bank guarantee was unlimited, even though all at the table and in financial circles in Europe were aware that certain banks were involved deeply in gambling and speculative activities in the Irish and foreign property markets, yet had relatively few depositors. And of course, no Irish senior bondholders were allowed to be burned as a condition for getting continued finance (in order to pay back German banks).
Furthermore, lest we forget 17 billion in hard cash was directly taken from our national pension reserve fund by the EU as a "contribution" to pay off the speculators.
Eventually after a gruelling few years in which the local economy was eviscerated by austerity and lack of lending and investment to small business, our loans were "extended" so what was a 35 billion loan would now end up becoming 65 billion over a longer period, but with lowered annual interest payments. Now that's European solidarity for you! Oh, and as a consequence of those "negotiations", now it's ALL sovereign debt to the ECB and there are no longer any bondholders to burn.
Pretty much everything wrong was done. In my opinion very deliberately, and with the knowing collusion of some of our own elected representatives.
What about Cyprus?
Well, in the case of Cyprus, It looks like, on the surface, the EU have finally taken on board that the real problems in countries in difficulty are capital flight and bondholder gamblers getting away Scott free every time. So in Cyprus, they imposed capital controls, and burned a few senior bondholder gamblers (there weren't many though. According to Colm McCarthy, foreign deposits, rather than long term bonds, made up practically all the liabilities in insolvent Cypriot banks.) and, in a new twist, depositors with greater than 100k in savings had funds directly confiscated by the government. Great. So the rich depositors and bondholder gamblers finally get to take a haircut. Maybe they've learned something from events in Iceland and the complete disaster in Ireland?
A couple of things to note though. Firstly, Cyprus is a very special case where it's economy is totally reliant on it's position as a tax haven and financial centre. Secondly, there weren't actually all that many senior bondholders compared to Ireland. Burning them was not a significant hit to German banks, unlike in Ireland's case. Thirdly, most large depositors flew the coop weeks in advance. Quelle Surpris as our European comrades say. When you are that rich, you get tipped off by corrupt insiders about such matters. So in fact, it's mostly (around 80%) Cypriots that were hit by the "haircut" on deposits, which in some cases is up to 60% on amounts over 100k. It is proposed that they will get shares in the remaining Cyprus Bank in exchange but these are currently worth next to nothing.
After the Ireland debacle, contrasted with the positive example of Iceland, coupled with the statements by the leader of the free world about "stupid cuts" in a recession, even the dogs in the street know the proper formula to allow some recovery to begin in an economy. So in the case of Cyprus, how can the financial geniuses in the EU manage to take many of the right ingredients which would have worked great if allowed in Ireland, and combine them to totally destroy Cyprus? Unless of course it was again a deliberate act of sabotage and self interest.
Clearly, capital controls are a good thing. The first thing economic hitmen do in third world countries is insist on the removal of capital controls for their victims, so capital can easily flee overnight from banks, creating an artificial crisis. Then money is loaned back to the state at high interest, thus profiting the financial terrorists, crippling their economies, and making them subject to "loan conditions" which normally involve cutting social programs and privatising state utilities, planting GM crops etc. Capital flight controls help keep money invested in an economy and prevent financiers and investors holding a country to ransom, under threat of taking away their capital overnight if governments do not do their bidding. This obvious step of imposing capital controls would certainly have helped in Ireland. But these controls are a total disaster for an economy totally dependent on financial trust to attract depositors looking for a safe low tax haven for their money. Great for Ireland, which was haemorrhaging deposits from it's ailing banks (but we weren't given the option). Disaster for Cyprus which relied on the financial trust (but they were forced to apply controls)
[The current conditions for Cypriots include a daily withdrawal limit from the ATM's of 300 Euro. A limit of 1000 cash can be taken abroad on your person. Credit cards used abroad have a maximum limit of 5000 Euro. There is a ban on overseas transfers of money.]
Guaranteeing small depositors was also a good idea. Why should the little guy pay for the activities of bankster gamblers right? The "little guy" is unlikely to have more than 100k in savings. Except of course if he just got his retirement cheque and had been saving a lifetime to retire in the sun. This might send even a "little guy" into the realm of the unguaranteed depositor. However, most people would not shed a tear for someone with >100k of life savings. Yes, It's certainly a thorny problem to solve. How to remain somewhat fair to the ordinary worker when stealing their money to give to the rich. Not surprisingly, they failed. Commentators are saying that only 20% of deposits constituted those of "money launderers" and "tax exiles", Russian or otherwise, and the rest, some 80% , were just ordinary Cypriots, or retirees who banked their life savings there to retire on.
Again, this approach might probably have worked for Ireland, but instead we got a blanket guarantee which bought the fatcats time to move their deposits offshore in droves (and they did). In the case of Cyprus, what was coming down the tracks was telegraphed to the large depositors by insiders and they had left the scene weeks in advance. Cyprus was a popular retirement spot, so ordinary Cypriots and UK retirees who banked all their life savings to fund their retirement in a sunny climate were the actual ones hit hardest. So, might have worked well as a measure to help "share the pain" amongst the wealthy who "partied" in Ireland,( but again, not an option for us ). However for Cyprus, with it's financial trust issue and it's status as a sunny place to retire, this measure was again a disaster (but was implemented)
What about burning the senior bondholders? Y'know, the guys who were actually engaged in dodgy investments and who knew the risks? Well a few were burned in Cyprus. How come it was ok there but "impossible" in Ireland? In fact one of the main reasons for the so called "bailout" in Ireland, was largely to make good their losses, and we and our children will be paying them off for a very long time. Answer: In Ireland's case, these would have meant large losses to German banks so they were "untouchable". However no problem burning innocent Irish taxpayers of course.
One tactic missing that might have worked in Ireland to some extent was the re-issuing of our own currency. However this was even too much for the EU plunderers in the case of Cyprus. Its obvious that in an economy without exports like Cyprus, this would have few positive effects. However, Ireland has a lot of exports so why was this not properly considered as part of our strategy for recovery? It would have made our exports very competitive indeed. Declan Ganley suggested that we print punts as a measure before going into talks with the EU, if nothing else to show that we were prepared to play hardball. I don't agree with too much Mr Ganley says but in this case, I think he may have had a point. The Euro straitjacket may suit the German economy very well but it is killing small peripheral economies who need more control over the reins of their economy. The ability to devalue currency is an important economic tool which being tied to the Euro makes unavailable to our economic planners (that is assuming we even have such people! ;-)
So in the final analysis, why were the EU willing to burn bondholders, impose capital flight controls and a limited bank guarantee in Cyprus? Sounds too good to be true. Well, the cover story was: There were only a few actual senior bondholders involved so the pain would be minimal, and since Cyprus was used by a large contingent of Russian depositors, the EU thought they might get away with stealing their deposits without too much objection from other Euro countries, and it would send a political message to Russia, and it would also discourage money laundering / tax avoidance in the EU. Evidently the cold war mentality still exists at the top level among many eurocrats. (and they are certainly very selective in highlighting money laundering / tax avoidance!! )
But it was really just a cover story. They needed to manufacture one because they couldn't admit to the fact that most of the people they were effectively stealing from were mainly (80%) ordinary hard working Cypriots and people who had worked and saved all their lives for their retirements. And since Cyprus relied totally on their tax laws for their small economy to function, effectively the EU "killed the patient" by imposing these awkward financial controls and destroying any remaining trust in Cyprus bank for future depositors. They have even admitted this. With capital flight controls, and burnt senior bondholders and depositors, Cyprus as a financial haven, is effectively dead. And that was pretty much their whole economy.
And those large Russian deposits have to go somewhere. Where? You guessed it: other European banks. Effectively some well connected banksters managed to remove some of their "tax haven" competition and at the same time boost their own deposits with some large new Russian ones looking for a new home. The fact that Cyprus no longer has an economy as a consequence and it's people are now on welfare support for life is not really important.
So, what on the surface, looked like a great improvement over the Irish approach, in what the EU were willing to do in a financial crisis, on closer inspection looks more like a cynical application of some of the right tactics deliberately in the wrong way for the wrong reasons and a cover story in such a way as to mask the robbery of ordinary citizens deposits, while deliberately shutting down and destroying a whole economy and closing down a favoured tax haven used by Russian money in order to channel that money into more favoured European tax havens.
The result is yet another peripheral Euro economy destroyed by financial terrorists, whilst the central countries have their Banks shored up by new deposits fleeing from Cyprus and by loading sovereign debt on the poor citizens of another small peripheral country who does not have the means to repay it. And of course the "bailout" (conjured / printed fake money) has terms which no doubt include austerity, the dismantling of social supports and unsurprisenly privatisation of utilities and selling off of natural resources for a song. Where have I seen all that before??
There seems to be rather a pattern developing here. And it looks to me to be far too premeditated to be just incompetence.
Anyone from Latin America could tell you what's really going on. Is it so hard for us to believe that what the IMF and World Bank have been systematically doing to other Third World countries for so many years is now happening here, courtesy of our bankster "comrades" in the EU?
Short guide to plundering a country's hard assets in return for fiat currency 101:
Ordinary economy (Ireland):
Loosen capital controls, open up economy, wait, lots of cheap low interest printed / made up money flows in, bubble develops. bubble bursts, capital flight now occurs, money loaned back at interest with "terms". "Terms" involve selling off natural resources, privatisation of state assets and utilities. Hard assets of country pwned.
Financial service based economy (Cyprus):
(general case: country eventually makes large investment error of some kind. Help them do it) Cyprus invests in Greek bonds, gets burned, creates opportunity for EU to jump in and impose capital controls to "stop capital flight", confiscating of deposits in return for help, completely destroys trust in banks, fleeing deposits absorbed, money loaned with "terms", "Terms" involve selling off natural resources, privatisation of state assets and utilities. Hard assets of country pwned.
Links:
Confessions of an economic hitman - readable online here:
http://archive.org/stream/ConfessionsOfAnEconomicHitman...e/2up
WSWS links:
Europe threatens Cyprus with bankruptcy in power struggle with Russia
http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2013/03/22/cypr-m22.html
Cyprus to face savage cuts and economic dictatorship
http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2013/03/23/cypr-m23.html
The European Union’s looting of Cyprus
http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2013/03/29/pers-m29.html
After Cyprus, more austerity in Greece
http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2013/03/30/gree-m30.html
The object of this article is to open up the crisis in Cyprus as a topic and trigger some alternative discussion on the EU's flawed approach to "saving" peripheral countries in financial difficulty
printable version
Digg this
del.icio.us
Furl
Reddit
Technorati
Facebook
Gab
Twitter
View Comments Titles Only
save preference
Comments (12 of 12)
Jump To Comment: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12Some good analysis in that article.
I have read elsewhere that the US and UK have similar plans on standby should or rather when the situation arises in those respective countries.
Ellen Brown who writes frequently about money and debt has an article on AlterNet.org with the title:
"Think Your Money is Safe? Think Again: The Confiscation Scheme Planned for US and UK Depositors"
Confiscating the customer deposits in Cyprus banks was not a one-off. It could happen here.
Basically what has happened is that depositors are unsecured creditors. Yes that's correct and those involved in derivatives are secured creditors which means they are first in line before anyone else.
It turns out that the both Bank of America and JP Morgan have transferred all the derivatives ($75 trillion and $79 trillion respectively) to their respective deposit-taking entities.
Note that the size of the real US economy is approximately $12 trillion.
When you take what has happened in Greece and Cyprus onboard and all the other disasters and then the level of planning gone into the above it is hard to escape the conclusion that we are witnessing to transfer of practically all wealth to the financial elite and the rest of us will be vastly impoverished. That effectively then creates puts us in a new economic system and it looks awfully like a modern form of fuedalism.
There is further information on what is being planned over at the Golem XIV blog where in a piece titled "Plunderball – The new Euro banking game", the author explains how New Zealand is working on the Open Bank Resolution Policy (OBR) which is something being worked on by the govt and which they intend to pass.
The implementation of OBR would see all unsecured liabilities that rank equally among themselves, including deposits, having a portion frozen (My emphasis)
Meanwhile back in Dec 2012 and as already described in the previous comment, the FDIC (USA) and Bank of England worked on a joint paper for dealing with collapse of banks called "Resolving Globally Active, Systemically Important, Financial Institutions” and would essentially transfer the payout from any bank deposit insurance not to the depositors but to the bank -to save it of course.
And he reports that ZeroHedge reported -quoting from a report in El Pais, that Spain too has been working to implement the same idea.
Spain, it would appear, has changed constitutional rules to enable a so-called ‘moderate’ levy on deposits
And for Italy he quotes http://hat4uk.wordpress.com/2013/03/21/depositor-levies...ered/ that Joerg Kraemer, chief economist of the German Commerzbank sugesting Italy could/should seize 15% of Italian deposits.
If these countries all are planning a Cyprus style robbery of funds then you can be sure many other countries are too.
So it seems the whole idea of putting your money in the bank because it would be safe there has been completely blown away. But it would seem the powers-that-be figure that since you have got nowhere else to put it then you have not real viable choices
The paper: "Resolving Globally Active, Systemically Important, Financial Institutions” can be found here:
http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/publications/Documents/n...6.pdf
Blog article is at the link below
BitCoin is the new digital currency http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoin invented in 2009 and it is unlike other currencies because it is based on public key encryption and there is no central bank overseeing it. It is peer to peer. And it is certainly a novel idea. Already many websites accept BitCoins for their donations and it's popularity is rapidly increasing.
And now in this article in the Washington Post titled: "Dollar, euro fall sharply against bitcoin" they describe how as a result of the Cyprus people are now flocking to it in the hopes that it can be some form of safe haven.
Bitcoin has become a new safe haven for investors similar to the way gold has historically been the favorite refuge of panicked investors during a financial crisis. Bitcoin has become so mainstream that worried Spaniards (many of whom see themselves as potentially the next victims in a financial contagion scenario) are downloading Bitcoin apps to their mobile devices at a rapid pace. There’s even a plan to install the first-ever Bitcoin ATM in Cyprus so individual investors can exchange their “real” currency for Bitcoins without the need for suddenly unreliable bank intermediaries
The full text of the above paragraph can be read at: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/innovations/post/wh....html
And the blog entry was reported on here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/dollar-e....html
Yes, it looks like this "banksterless" currency will actually take off now. People are just so fed up of banks. This could be a real revolution.
Some useful sites to research:
http://bitcoin.org/en/how-it-works
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Main_Page
https://www.weusecoins.com/
Max keiser's (bitcoin advocate) op ed on bitcoin:
http://rt.com/op-edge/bitcoin-novelty-revolution-market...-326/
It's clear that some well connected people are threatened by the emergence of bitcoin
Mt. Gox is The main exchange for bitcoin that currently manages most USD / other currency bitcoin transactions. As such it represents an achilles heel of the system for people who would like to harm bitcoin.
Quote:
"It is not a secret Mt.Gox is the largest Bitcoin exchange with more than 80% of all USD trades and more than 70% of all currencies. Mt.Gox is an easy target for anyone that wants to hurt Bitcoin in general."
Recently the Mt. Gox site has been subject to systematic Ddos attack. Big surprise that this has coincided with a huge rise in uptake of bitcoin after the Cyprus depositor grab.
It's clear that the banksters and their captured government officials have a lot invested in the current system, so the failure of bitcoin is in their interests.
Mt. Gox site press release
https://mtgox.com/press_release_20130404.html
"(United States) Vice President Joe Biden threw caution to the wind Friday as he shockingly declared, “The affirmative task we have now is to actually create a new world order,” adding yet another admission to an already long list of documented globalist bragging of plans for a centralized, one-world global government."
The above excerpt is from April 6th 2013 Article at http://www.infowars.com/biden-calls-for-a-new-world-order/
Related Subject #1:
'With specific reference to "national policy" on "bank-bailouts" and the closely associated "austerity measures", does Article 6.1 of Bunreacht na hEireann (the Constitution of the Republic of Ireland) mean ANYTHING at all to the Judicial Branch of the Republic of Ireland's Government?".'
'In the case of the Republic of Ireland, the 70 billion Euro (or whatever the exact overall sum is to date) set of bank-bailouts, and the closely related austerity measures, are all ENTIRELY unconstitutional, are they not?: allowing for the fact that "the people" of the Republic of Ireland have never been consulted, even though -- according to the SUPREME LAW of the land -- it is for "the people" to have the "final" say regarding "national policy" relating to "ALL" such matters.'
Related Subject #2:
Might "Bitcoin" help stop all the Bankster/Legal Profession Crime?
"Put it all together and I feel comfortable in declaring victory on my call from nine months ago. The stock, bond, and fat currency markets have all crashed against Bitcoin. For all you bloggers out there about to hit the keyboard with some uniformed and jealousy fuelled rant I'll say again: just buy Bitcoin and be a part of the bankless currency revolution that will finally help rid us of the scourge that is Ben Bernanke and his ilk."
The April 4th 2013 excerpt just above is from: http://rt.com/op-edge/bitcoin-novelty-revolution-market...-326/
Related Link:
(Copy of April 7th 2013 e-mail to Republic of Ireland Chief Justice Susan Denham and Justice Minister Alan Shatter TD)
http://www.humanrightsireland.com/ChiefJusticeSusanDenh...l.htm
Apparently Cyprus president’s family transferred tens of millions to London days before deposit haircuts:
"ENET English, a newspaper, which is affiliated to the communist-rooted AKEL party, reports that three days before the Euro-group meeting the company took five promissory notes worth €21m from Laiki Bank and transferred the money to London."
http://www.globalresearch.ca/cyprus-presidents-family-t...30115
The true cost of Cyprus's fiat printed money bank bailout has risen steeply from an initial 17 billion euro to the current figure of 23 billion euro.
Thats an increase of 1/3 over the original figure. And now a hidden clause means their gold reserves are vulnerable.
Here's what the telegraph had to say:
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/ambroseevans-pritc...rves/
Quote:
"First they purloin the savings and bank deposits in Laiki and the Bank of Cyprus, including the working funds of the University of Cyprus, and thousands of small firms hanging on by their fingertips.
Then they seize three quarters of the country’s gold reserves, making it ever harder for Cyprus to extricate itself from EMU at a later date.
The people of Cyprus first learned about this from a Reuters leak of the working documents for the Eurogroup meeting on Friday.
It is tucked away in clause 29. "Sale of excess gold reserves: The Cypriot authorities have committed to sell the excess amount of gold reserves owned by the Republic. This is estimated to generate one-off revenues to the state of €400m via an extraordinary payout of central bank profits."
This seemed to catch the central bank by surprise. Officials said they knew nothing about it. So who in fact made this decision?
Cypriots are learning what it means to be a member of monetary union when things go badly wrong. The crisis costs have suddenly jumped from €17bn to €23bn, and the burden of finding an extra €6bn will fall on Cyprus alone.
The government expects the economy to contract 13pc this year as full austerity bites. Megan Greene from Maverick Intelligence fears it could be a lot worse.
She says the crisis has reached the point where it would be “less painful” for Cyprus to seek an “amicable divorce” from the eurozone and break free.
Quite so, and while we’re at it, lets seek an amicable divorce for everybody, for Portugal, for Ireland, for Spain, for Italy, and above all for Germany, since they are all being damaged in different ways by the infernal Project. All are victims of their elites.
It is an interesting question why Cyprus has been treated more harshly than Greece, given that the eurozone itself set off the downward spiral by imposing de facto losses of 75pc on Greek sovereign debt held by Cypriot banks.
And, furthermore, given that these banks were pressured into buying many of those Greek bonds in the first place by the EU authorities, when it suited the Eurogroup.
You could say that this is condign punishment for the failure of Cyprus to deliver on its side of the bargain on the 2004 Annan Plan to reunite the island, divided by the Attila Line since the Turkish invasion in 1974.
Greek Cypriots gained admission to the EU on the basis of a gentleman’s agreement, then resiled from the accord. President Tassos Papadopoulis later deployed the resources of the state to secure a "No" in the referendum on the Greek side of the island. No wonder the EU is disgusted.
But there again, Greece behaved just as badly. It threatened to block Polish accession to the EU unless a still-divided Cyprus was admitted, much to the fury of Berlin.
The workhouse treatment of Cyprus is nevertheless remarkable. The creditor powers walked away from their fresh pledges for an EMU banking union by whipping up largely bogus allegations of Russian money-laundering in Nicosia. A Council of Europe by a British prosecutor has failed to validate the claims.
The EU authorities have gone to great lengths to insist that Cyprus is a “special case”, but I fail to see what is special about it. There is far more Russian money – laundered or otherwise – in the Netherlands. The banking centres of Ireland and Malta are just as large as a share of GDP. Luxembourg’s banking centre is at least four times more leveraged to the economy.
It should be clear by now that the solemn pledges of EMU leaders are expendable. They change their mind whenever its suits them, and whenever the internal politics of their own countries demands.
Cyprus may not be a “template” but it is clearly a warning to any other EMU country that needs help from now on. The creditor powers will go to extraordinary lengths to avoid sharing the costs.
We now learn that one of those lengths is to seize gold reserves. So what will happen as Portugal’s economy slides deeper into its contractionary vortex, and its deficits remain stubbornly stuck near 6pc of GDP despite the fiscal cuts, and its public debt hits 124pc of GDP this year?
Portugal holds 382 tonnes of gold, the 14th largest holding in the world, and more than either Britain or Spain. For the sake of delicacy, I will skip over the methods by which Salazar acquired that gold.
So will the Troika order Portugal to hand over these reserves if the country requires a second bail-out, as deemed likely by a great number of analysts in the City?
Will they impose savage haircuts on anybody with savings or operational funds above €100,000 in Portuguese banks? Portugal’s banks may be healthy, but that is no protection.
The original plan in Cyprus – approved by the Eurogroup, but rejected by the Cypriot parliament – was to steal the money from any bank regardless of its health, and from small depositors regardless of the €100,000 guarantee. They have shown their character. The Eurogroup don’t give a damn about moral hazard. They are thieves.
Furthermore, the northern powers skip lightly over their own responsibility for what has happened. They seem not to recognise that EMU was a joint venture. The creditor states were entirely complicit. They flooded the South with cheap debt. They failed to understand the ruinous implications of monetary union just as badly as the southern states.
Eurozone citizens still have a touching faith in the euro and the EMU Project. They blame their own leaders, their own bankers, even the head of statistics office in Greece. But most still refuse to blame monetary union itself.
This is understandable. Even Nobel laureate Robert Mundell seems to have trouble understanding his own theory of "optimal currency areas".
Yet this escalating assault on bank savings and on the state assets of victim nations is gradually taking its toll. Throw gold into the mix and you touch an atavistic nerve. The Cypriot gold confiscation of April 2013 may matter more than first meets the eye.
On a side note, Greek unemployment reached a fresh record of 27.2pc in January. Youth unemployment reached 59.3pc. Ah, but, recovery is surely round the corner.
Greece’s foreign minister is digging himself deeper into a hole on the issue of war reparations against Germany. He told his parliament that Greece “reserves the right” to seek damages at the International Court of Justice in The Hague.
Germany’s Wolfgang Schauble dismissed the demarche as irresponsible. Time has resolved the matter, he said. They won’t get one bent Pfennig.
Nor will Germany when Greece defaults on its rescue loans."
Reply to fred at Sat Apr 13, 2013 00:44 ...
RE: "True cost of bailout rises hugely, as EU makes a hard asset grab for Cyprus's gold reserves"
While not wishing to disagree in any way with your basic assessment relating to Cyprus, there are also other "hidden costs" of a more general and even deeper nature (especially for the Republic of Ireland), connected with the bankster's bailouts, which "the people" of the Republic of Ireland cannot sensibly ignore (in my opinion); and, which the banksters -- criminally, delicately, and very slyly -- "aided and abetted (to the hilt!!)" by the likes of RTE, and the three main branches of the Republic of Ireland Government (Executive, Legislative, and Judicial) -- and ESPECIALLY the Judicial Branch -- are all very accomplished at burying: to an extent which only those who "dig deep" will ever be able to see.
Viewpoint 1 (that of a typical bankster, or typical "bankster supporter"):
"Speaking earlier at a press conference in Dublin Castle, Mr Dijsselbloom congratulated the country for its continued steadfast progress in implementing the programme"
"He said that Ireland (the Republic of Ireland, that is) is a living example that adjustment programmes do work."
The two excerpts in this section are from recent RTE Article at:
http://www.rte.ie/news/2013/0412/380983-eu-finance-mini...ters/
==============================
Viewpoint 2 (that of typically well-informed Republic of Ireland citizens, who are VERY "far and few between" at the present time):
'As a direct consequence of such criminal skulduggery throughout the whole of the Republic of Ireland Judicial system, we now have COMPLETELY unconstitutional -- completely UNLAWFUL in other words, in terms of the SUPREME LAW of the land -- "ruling elite" type "government of the BANKSTERS, by the BANKSTERS, for the BANKSTERS", instead of "government of the people, by the people, for the people": which is precisely what Article 6.1 of Bunreacht na hEireann (the Constitution of the Republic of Ireland) was designed to provide "the people" of the Republic of Ireland with, as the "democratic republican" worded "jewel in the crown" achievement of the very long and protracted string of bloody struggles, and numerous other miseries and hardships, which took place on the Island of Ireland (and elsewhere) between 1169 AD and 1948 AD: i.e. a period of 779 years.'
The excerpt just above is from an e-mail sent this morning to veteran RTE Broadcasters Miriam O'Callaghan and Gay Byrne. The full text of the e-mail in question, which was copied to several others, can be viewed at:
http://www.humanrightsireland.com/DrMiriamOCallaghan/13...l.htm
==============================
Some related links (also from this morning's e-mail to RTE's Miriam O'Callaghan and Gay Byrne):
President Barack Obama, "The Global Threat For Humanity Posed By Unconstitutional Legislation And Activities" ...
http://tinyurl.com/cmz46gy
British Monarchy, "The Global Threat For Humanity Posed By Unconstitutional Legislation And Activities" ...
http://tinyurl.com/c65pmkl
President Michael D Higgins, "The Global Threat For Humanity Posed By Unconstitutional Legislation And Activities" ...
http://tinyurl.com/cucb4es
Prime Minister Enda Kenny TD, "The Global Threat For Humanity Posed By Unconstitutional Legislation And Activities" ...
http://tinyurl.com/ce79bbf
Chief Executive Officer of Irish Advocacy Network Colette Nolan, "The Global Threat For Humanity Posed By Unconstitutional Legislation And Activities" ...
http://tinyurl.com/dx6ownd
Michel Chossudovsky reckons that "bail ins" as happened in Cyprus will become part of the banksters toolkit to remove struggling credit unions from the competitive landscape.
article here:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/bail-in-the-birth-of-the-n...30946
"All structures both formal and informal which existed for communication between those two branches of government have ceased." (Note: the "two branches of government" referred to here by the AJI are the "Judicial" and the "Executive".)
The above excerpt has been copied from the (AJI) Association of Judges of Ireland (the Republic of Ireland, that is) web site.
The bad news for all, or almost all, Republic of Ireland citizens, is that this very recent statement from the AJI represents extremely serious difficulties between two of the three main branches of the Republic of Ireland Government (Executive, Legislative, and Judicial).
The good news -- as I see things at least -- is that the members of the Judiciary responsible for issuing this statement in such a public way are now being very "open and honest" about SOME of the difficulties at least: which is the "first step" (in my opinion) for finding a HEALTHY solution to extremely serious government problems of this kind.
The full text of the "Report in Sunday Business Post 14.04.2013" from the AJI can be viewed at:
http://aji.ie/news/view/report-in-sunday-business-post-....2013
For those not familiar with such difficulties -- and there is no shame in not being familiar with them because the vast majority of us were never taught about them in school (through no fault of our own) -- they relate in a general way to what is often referred in certain small circles of people as the "Doctrine of the Tripartite Separation of Powers": which is a primary "legal instrument" (of sorts) for preventing government tyranny -- and the associated social chaos of the kind we ("the people" of the Republic of Ireland) now appear to be heading towards, if, that is, high-quality corrective action is not rapidly undertaken by ALL THREE of the main branches of our overall Government -- and the origins (in written form) of which can be traced back to Ancient Athens (circa 500 BC), but which may in fact have existed long before 500 BC in non-written forms, or, in written forms which have since been lost to present generations: either deliberately, or otherwise.
Some basic and very general information on the "Separation of Powers" principle, often referred to by slightly different names, and which is not always a three-way split (though it is three-way, Executive, Legislative, and Judicial, as embedded in the Republic of Ireland's Constitution), can be found at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_powers
For more on the history of how the "Doctrine of the Tripartite Separation of Powers" has influenced the overall running of the Republic of Ireland Government in recent decades, or FAILED (through no fault of its own) to influence it, more like, please click on the link just below:
Doctrine of the Tripartite Separation of Powers, Human Rights Ireland, William Finnerty ...
http://tinyurl.com/cjedg9s
Though it may be something of an over-simplification, and as stated very briefly here in the restricted space of this "comment", all of my research to date suggests that many (possibly all) of the worst social problems "the people" of the Republic of Ireland have been experiencing in recent years, can be traced straight back to the "fact" (as I see it) that the Judicial and Legislative Branches of the Republic of Ireland Government have both failed VERY MISERABLY to keep check of the Executive Branch: which has resulted in, among some other very nasty things, unconstitutional (i.e. unlawful and sometimes criminal) activities of several different kinds by our overall Government: including lots of unconstitutional legislation, which is arguably the very WORST form of government abuse that "the people" of any nation can be subjected to.
Related Link:
Unconstitutional activities, legislation, Republic of Ireland ...
http://tinyurl.com/bmh9bav
"The President of the High Court, Mr Justice Nicholas Kearns, said Master Honohan had no authority to speak on behalf of the court or its judges."
The above excerpt is from an RTE article dated April 16th 2013 (i.e. yesterday), and the full text of the article can viewed at:
http://www.rte.ie/news/2013/0416/381601-judges/
As I "see" (and "feel") things, the above comment by Republic of Ireland (RoI) President of the High Court, Mr Justice Nicholas Kearns, appears to have a very healthy ring to it.
Correctly or otherwise, this particular comment, well timed and well aimed, and obviously designed to "shut up" Master Honohan, strongly suggests (to me) that Justice Nicholas Kearns, and several of his Judicial colleagues I suspect, know perfectly well that a number of extremely serious legal problems, which are potentially exceptionally dangerous, and which directly relate to "Tripartite Separation of Government Powers" issues, have slowly but surely -- and for the most part completely imperceptibly for the viewpoint of the general public -- built up, over a period of several years, to a point where they now have be tackled, and openly discussed in pubic: if, that is, the BEST INTERESTS of "the people" of the Republic of Ireland are to be protected, both in the here-and-now, and into the long-term future.
Related e-mail (dated April 16th 2013):
Copied to several others, yesterday's e-mail was addressed primarily to
"The Three Principal (Republic of Ireland) Government CEOs (Chief Executive Officers, as I see them)":
Prime Minister Enda Kenny TD (CEO of the Executive Branch of the RoI Government),
President Michael D. Higgins (CEO of the Legislative Branch of the RoI Government), and
Chief Justice Susan Denham (CEO of the Judicial Branch of the RoI Government).
The full text of the April 16th 2013 e-mail referred to above can be viewed at:
http://www.humanrightsireland.com/PrimeMinisterEndaKenn...l.htm