Author: admin

After last night’s massive suicide bombing in Baghdad which killed over 100, and which ISIS took responsibility for, we doubt the Islamic State will be just as quick to take credit for tonight’s latest terrorist attempt, this time in the Saudi Arabian city of Jeddah, where a suspected suicide bomber was killed in front of the US consulate.

As the Saudi Gazette reports, security authorities have raised the alert in Jeddah to the maximum after a suicide bombing attempt in which an individual blew himself up inside a car in front of the US Consulate in Jeddah.

#BreakingNews Suicider blown up his explosive belt in front of #USA consulate in Jeddah.. #Saudi http://pic.twitter.com/ZjFqUdmHfc

— Rami (@RamiAILoIah) July 4, 2016

A photo circulated today of suicide bomber near US consulate in Jeddah shows man was shot before blowing himself up. http://pic.twitter.com/gMcUFcxpNT

— Wael Mahdi (@WaelMahdi) July 4, 2016

According to Sabq sources two diplomatic security personnel were injured in the blast. They were rushed to the hospital. Security forces in Jeddah surrounded the area and enforced a lockdown where the consulate is located. Security forces are following up on the situation.

BBC adds that two policeman were reportedly injured in the incident and the attacker is said to be dead. The attack came in the early hours of US Independence Day. The Jeddah consulate was the scene of a militant attack in 2004, which left nine people dead.

The attack coming on July 4 is hardly a coincidence.

For now, the market is not reading too much into it, with WTI up just 2 cents; if anything it is silver which is surging which as of moments ago just hit limit up in Shanghaim, surging by 6%.

via http://ift.tt/29GcxTR Tyler Durden

Submitted by Laurence Vance via LewRockwell.com,

“Older men start wars, but younger men fight them.” ~ Albert Einstein

 

“Older men declare war. But it is the youth that must fight and die.” ~ Herbert Hoover

 

“I’m fed up to the ears with old men dreaming up wars for young men to die in.” ~ George S. McGovern

One hundred years ago – on July 1, 1916 – thousands of young men died after older men decided, again, to send them to war. On the first day of the Battle of the Somme, the British army suffered 57,470 casualties, of which 19,240 were deaths, the French had 1,590 casualties, and the Germans had over 10,000. It was the single greatest day for casualties in British military history. By the time the Battle of the Somme ended in November, the British had around 420,000 casualties, the French about 200,000, and the Germans about 500,000.

One would think that when almost 20,000 of your young men in the prime of their life die in one battle on one day that the British would simply say “enough is enough” and just tell the army to quit fighting and go home. But no, the British army continued to execute men for desertion like the hundred or more that suffered that fate in the two years before the Battle of the Somme.

It is senseless slaughter like the Battle of the Somme that led Ernest Hemingway, who was an ambulance driver in Italy toward the end of World War I, to say:

They wrote in the old days that it is sweet and fitting to die for one’s country. But in modern war there is nothing sweet nor fitting in your dying. You will die like a dog for no good reason.

 

Never think that war, no matter how necessary, nor how justified, is not a crime.

Over 115,000 American soldiers would go on to die like dogs for no good reason after the United States foolishly and senselessly entered World War I in April of 1917. The thousands of U.S. troops who in more recent times died in Iraq and Afghanistan likewise senselessly died in vain and for a lie.

How do you prevent such senseless slaughter? How do you stop young men from dying in vain? How do you prohibit young men from dying for a lie? How do you stop making widows and orphans? How do you thwart young men dying like dogs? How do you stop young men from dying for no good reason? How do you end the war once and for all?

It is an uphill battle.

Governments, presidents, politicians, and military officers will continue to send young men to fight and die.

The military establishment will continue to want more money and more weapons of war to try out.

Legislatures will continue to fund bloated military budgets.

Defense contractors—merchants of death—will continue to lobby for more armaments, more military interventions, and more wars.

Uber-patriots, neocons, armchair warriors, just war theorists, progressive hawks, reich-wing nationalists, red-state fascists, pro-lifers for mass murder, and bloodthirsty conservatives will continue to cheer on the military.

Christian Coalition moralists, Old Testament Christians, evangelical warvangelicals, theocon Values Voters, imperial Christians, nuclear Christians, Religious Right warmongers, God and country Christian bumpkins, sniper theologians, and members of the Christian axis of evil—all claiming to worship the prince of peace—will continue to support the troops no matter what.

Some libertarians will continue to write me and say that although they agree with everything I say about the follies of U.S. foreign policy and military interventions none of it is the fault of the troops and I should quit criticizing them even though they enlisted in the U.S. war machine of their own free will.

So, how do you end the war once and for all? Easy. Young men simply need to stop joining the military. It is just as Einstein said:

Nothing will end war unless the people themselves refuse to go to war.

The pioneers of a warless world are the youth who refuse military service.

“War has never been possible,” writes Robert Meagher in Killing from the Inside Out: Moral Injury and Just War, “ unless men have been willing to kill each other and, while they’re at it, possibly to be killed.” And as I have said over and over again: you can’t have a war without soldiers. It is only by young men not enlisting or refusing to enlist that war can be ended once and for all.

via http://ift.tt/29fVEn0 Tyler Durden

When GDP is falling and the global economy is weak, there are normally many let's say, "out of the box" ideas on how to stimulate growth again – aside from central planners tripping over each other to see who can print money the fastest that is.

For China, one would assume that more ghost cities are being built, or new projects are being constructed in order to stop Beijing from sinking, but one project that has taken place that many may not have known about is the construction of the world's largest radio telescope.

As RT reports, China has now completed construction on the world's largest radio telescope. The Single-Aperture Spherical Radio Telescope (FAST) as it is known, is an enormous dish made up of 4,450 reflector panels with a diameter of a half a kilometer, which is larger than the previous record holder, Puerto Rico's Arcibo Observatory.

It was completed in southwestern China's Guizhou Province on Sunday, when the last reflector was fitted into a natural bunker, which is situated among the mountains of Pingtang County.

The task of the telescope? According to RT, it is to be used to look for intelligent life in deep outer space. Once operational, FAST will be able to detect radio signals from as far away as one thousand light years – evidently that's where the aliens are.

Work began on the project in March of 2011, and was completed Sunday, ahead of the originally planned September date. The project displaced some local residents, who were given $1,800 in compensation and moved to a newly built accommodation.

In total, RT reports that the project cost just over $105 million – while it isn't quite the Death Star we were looking for, this is an excellent start.

Enjoy…

via GIPHY

via http://ift.tt/29hFq9j Tyler Durden

Submitted by Tho Bishop via The Mises Institute,

At its best, Independence Day is a celebration of American secession and a testament to individual liberty. At its worst, Independence Day is still a day where government offices are closed, American grills are lit and the evening sky is full of fireworks, which is still pretty good (at least in my subjective value.)

Unfortunately the travel before and after the 4^th of July is a different story, with it widely considered one of the worst travel days of the year. While the desire to take advantage of the holiday to enjoy friends and family is a natural product of humans being inherently social creatures, the degree to which this congestion leads to headache and misery rests solely with the institution responsible for them during the rest of the year – the government.

The Curse of Socialist Highways

The question “who will build the roads?” has become such a statist cliché that it’s perhaps the only libertarian internet meme bigger than “taxation is theft” and Ron Paul informing us that “it’s happening.” It has earned that designation because the entire idea of roads and highways has become so synonymous with government that even Joe McCarthy voted for this form of socialism.

Of course, the purpose for the current American interstate system had nothing to do with consumer demand and everything to do with military transportation throughout the country. While some may defend such a project on that basis, it shouldn’t be a surprise that interstates designed to transport tanks and weapons aren’t always the best at facilitating family travel.

As Walter Block has long argued, much of the congestion on these highways is a direct result of their being in the control of government and therefore being unable to have proper pricing. In his article Congestion and Road Pricing, Dr. Block rebuts various arguments defending public management of highways, as well as government-based solutions (such as automobile bans that were in vogue at the time). Block identifies how free market solutions would solve the problem of congestion, such as enabling “travel entrepreneurs” to design and fund higher-cost toll roads for travelers who don’t mind paying extra for a quicker drive. Not only would such a system obviously cut down the congestion for these “luxury drivers”, but their absence from more commonly used roads means less congestion for those who don’t use them. 

We have seen this play out when governments have tried to imitate this highway pricing mechanism with the construction of various higher-cost toll roads across the country. While so called “Lexus lanes” do offer alternatives to traditional highways and thus make some impact on congestion, they still suffer from the same problem inherent with government infrastructure in its lack of real economic calculation. Government allowing taxi’s to charge more when picking up from airports isn’t a replacement for Uber surge pricing, and the USPS charging more for overnight deliver isn’t a replacement for Fed Ex.

While there are a few examples of genuine private roads in America — the Orchard Pond Parkway, Florida’s first privately funded toll road, opened up earlier this year – as long as government roads enjoy the privilege of being subsidized by gasoline taxes over private investment, the highways system will continue to be commanded with all the efficiency of Soviet central planners.

It’s also worth noting the irony that this government project which is often held up by the left as an example of the necessity of government, is also the greatest hindrance to the progressive desire to eliminate gas-burning cars. As libertarians have long pointed out, the Federal highway project was a massive government subsidy to the automobile industry at the expense of alternative travel options – including trains and airplanes. Of course since the government has its own ways of controlling both rails and airspace, we’d likely be suffering from a whole other set of government-caused issues anyway.

Government’s Unfriendly Skies

Speaking of air travel, we would be amiss without highlighting some of the ways government has destroyed the fun of flying.

Some of these are obvious, especially given the number of headlines this spring highlighting how the TSA’s security theater had created unprecedented wait times throughout the country. American Airlines alone reported having 70,000 missed flights due to TSA complications. Even more appalling are the numerous examples of the TSA failing to treat customers with basic human dignity, such as the most recent example of a disabled 19-year old left bloodied after trying to go through airport security in Memphis.

Americans have good reason to be even more livid at these issues than those caused by highway congestion. While government roads have their share of problems, they will at least manage to get you where you need to go. The TSA, on the other hand, doesn’t even succeed at achieving its stated mission. If there is a silver lining to be found in the TSA’s spectacularly incompetence, it’s that the performance has been so abysmal that even government-managed airports are having to seriously consider alternatives.

Subsidizing Terrible Airlines

While the TSA represents an obvious example of government ruining flying, there are a variety of others ways government can ruin air travel. While it may be difficult to rally the public around Murray Rothbard’s calls to abolish the FAA at this time, another program that should infuriate tax payers is the Essential Air Service program. While billed as a way to ensure airlines maintain flights in “underserved” rural communities, in practice it serves as a way for poorly operated airlines to make money in spite of how well they serve their clients.

One airline that received near $18.5 million dollars is Silver Airlines, which recently left my hometown of Panama City Beach, FL and is perhaps the worst company I’ve ever done business with.

During their time in PCB, my family attempted to fly with them four different times for eight different flights. Of those eight times, only two operated without problem. Two flights were cancelled without any notice and the other four suffered delays ranging from three-six hours. While delays and flying weight concerns are part of the operational hazard of flying, Silver Airlines compounded the issue with poor customer service and vouchers that did not adequately cover the expenses of delay. An attempt to resolve these complaints with company management is directed to an automated system as useful as the TSA.

Ludwig von Mises described capitalism as “a social system of consumers’ supremacy.”

As such, following our last experience with Silver, my family agreed to never use them again, the taxes we pay are still going to pad their bottom line.  While Silver’s abysmal record is not an indictment on all the other airlines that utilize the EAS program, it is an example of what happens when government intervention serves to enrich terribly operated companies regardless of consumer demand.

So if you find yourself wasting hours stuck in holiday traffic or at the airport this 4^th of July, remind yourself that the solution to your headache can be found within the reason for this particular season. If we were to claim independence from the modern-day royalty of the beltway, the markets will ensure better holidays in the future.

via http://ift.tt/29G3IcD Tyler Durden

Extending Friday's gains, Silver futures just broke above $20 for the first time since August 2014…

Following silver's best week since August 2013, dramatically catching up to gold's recent performance, it appears, despite the volumeless meltup in stocks, that Brexit has sparked huge demand for the safety of precious metals.

For a second straight week, funds boosted their net-long futures and options positions in the two metals to the highest since the data begins in 2006.

Money managers have been piling in on demand for havens and speculation that interest rates will stay low as central bankers around the world struggle to contain the economic fallout from the U.K.’s vote to quit the European Union.

But what happens next?

Source: Bloomberg

via http://ift.tt/29fNbgP Tyler Durden

In the aftermath of the Brexit fiasco, the biggest fissure that emerged was not between the economies of the UK and Europe, nor between the stock markets of the UK and Europe, both of which have spiked on the back of another round of central bank liquidity promises, but between Angela Merkel, and the alcohol-afficionado who erroneously believes is the head of Europe, Jean-Claude Juncker. Unfortunately for the latter, he is now on his way out because as the Telegraph reports, citing a Sunday Times interview with a German government minister, Merkel has finally decided to oust Europe’s federalist chief Jean-Claude Juncker “within the next year.”

The catalyst for those who have been following the Brexit fallout should not come as a surprise: as we first reported a week ago in ‘More Confusion: EU Tells Cameron To Hurry Up With Article 50 As Merkel Says No Need To Rush“, the German chancellor’s frustration with the European Commission chief came as Europe split over whether to use the Brexit negotiations as a trigger to deepen European integration or take a more pragmatic approach to Britain as it heads for the exit door.

“The pressure on him [Juncker] to resign will only become greater and Chancellor Merkel will eventually have to deal with this next year,” an unnamed German minister told The Sunday Times, adding that Berlin had been furious with Mr Juncker “gloating” over the UK referendum result. Look no further than “Juncker Lashes Out At British Lawmakers: “Why Are You Here?”” for an example of just that.

Furthermore, Juncker’s constant and unabashed calls for “more Europe” – many of which have come in an intoxicated or outright drugged state – has led to several of Europe other dissenting members – including Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic – to lay some of the blame for Brexit at his door.

Even before he was appointed President of the European Commission – against the wishes of David Cameron – concerns were raised about Mr Juncker’s alchohol consumption which were dismissed as a “smear campaign” by his officials. It was, however, all true: at the time The Telegraph and several other newspapers reported officials worrying about Mr Juncker having “cognac for breakfast” and rolling through long negotiations fortified with large quantities of claret and brandy. 

Some have had enough of Europe’s most humiliating alcoholic, and since the June 23 vote both the Czech and Polish foreign ministers have called publicly for Mr Juncker to resign, moves that one senior EU official dismissed last week as “predictable”. However, the rumblings from Berlin now represent a much more serious threat to Mr Juncker’s tenure. The split also offers a glimmer of hope for British negotiators who are preparing for fractious EU-UK divorce talks and are desperate to avoid a repeat of February’s failed negotiations which – controlled as they were by Mr Juncker and the Commission – left David Cameron without enough ‘wins’ to avoid Brexit.

Meanwhile, Juncker’s European Commission is being shut down by members:

“Everyone is determined that this negotiation is handled in the European Council – i.e. between the 27 heads of government – and not by the Commission, the eurocrats and the EU ‘theologians’ in Brussels,” a senior UK source told The Telegraph.

In a signal that battle has partly already been won, Mrs Merkel pointedly met with French and Italian leaders in Berlin last week, excluding Mr Juncker from the conversation. As the Telegraph adds, British strategists hope that creating a much broader negotiation that includes the UK’s role in keeping Europe geopolitically relevant through its deep Nato ties, defence contributions and links to Washington, they can avoid a narrow tit-for-tat negotiation on trade where the UK has only very limited leverage.

At its core, Merkel’s anger reflects a growing schism in Europe between the likes of Juncker and the French and Belgian leaders, who want to see “more Europe” after Brexit, and those, like Merkel and her powerful finance minister Wolfgang Schäuble who believe that would be “crazy”, according to the Times. Prior to the Brexit vote senior European Commission officials were privately jubilant about the opportunity that a British ‘leave’ vote would present to complete the European project, sucking reluctant countries like Poland into the Euro “within five years”.

Since the Brexit vote, French ministers have been far less conciliatory to the UK than German, openly salivating at the prospect of UK-based financial businesses relocating to Paris. If so, the French will be disappointed as we hinted in “Is This Where All Those Companies “Leaving England” Will Go.” After all, few companies are so insane to leave the stability London for the socialist purgatory of Paris.

via http://ift.tt/29deUN0 Tyler Durden

Submitted by Kristin Campbell via ConservativeTribune.com,

Republican presidential hopeful Donald Trump and his supporters have been accused of being “racist,” which isn’t exactly an uncommon label given to Republicans by liberals.

However, one black Trump supporter recently dropped an epic truth bomb about what black voters really want out of the American dream, and if true, it should have them lining up to vote Republican in massive numbers.

Podcaster and blogger Sonnie Johnson told Breitbart that many black voters fully understand and support Trump’s message of wealth over poverty.

“This message is very simple,” Johnson said. “It is wealth over poverty. If you do not think that blacks understand that message, you have lost your entire mind.”

The outspoken conservative explained that black Americans were “tired of living in poverty.”

“We want greatness. We do not want to be dependent. We do not want free s***,” she said. “We want to be able to operate in the American system, just the way every other American operates, and that takes wealth.”

Johnson said she believed that Republicans had an opportunity this year to “crack this progressive shell,” which has already sustained some cracks from Trump’s campaign.

In fact, she insisted that black people have already begun to realize that the presumptive GOP nominee’s message was one for all Americans, not just white voters – even if the media doesn’t portray his growing support in the black community.

“If you go back, if you look on Twitter right now, to see all of the blacks that are in support of Donald Trump, every stat they show, shows that that support doesn’t exist. Every person they put on says that black people will not support Trump,” Johnson explained.

The blogger considered this election this “chance of a lifetime” when it comes to recruiting black voters to the GOP, but said Republicans must put forth the right message in order to do so.

“If we can … start talking about the American Dream — what it has to offer, what we as the right wing have to offer!” she said. “Freedom, liberty, financial independence, those are things that we can sell.”

Many polls have reported that the black vote comprised a mere 1 percent of Trump’s overall support — something Johnson strongly rejected.

“No way,” she said. “They poll Democrats. They poll people that are used to voting for Democrats and just put their name down. They did not poll average black people.”

These “average black people” are listening to the Republican message of conservative values through Trump, she argued.

You can listen to the entire interview here:

Johnson is right — the Republican Party has more to offer anyone searching for “freedom” or “financial independence.” While Democrat policies have sought to keep black people dependent and on the government dole, conservatism offers the proven concept that smaller government equals more freedom.

via http://ift.tt/29rInVr Tyler Durden

The US isn't the only country to can crank up its sales of weapons around the world. As we have pointed out previously, Germany is also a relatively large exporter in the global arms trade.

It turns out that Germany had a booming arms export business in 2015, because as Reuters reports, German arms exports almost doubled last year to their highest level since the beginning of this century. The value of individual approvals granted for exporting arms was €7.86 billion last year compared to €3.97 billion in 2014. Exports were boosted by a the approval of four tanker aircraft for Britain worth €1.1 billion, and a controversial approval of battle tanks and howitzers along with munitions to be sent to Qatar.

From Reuters

Newspaper Welt am Sonntag said the value of individual approvals granted for exporting arms was 7.86 billion euros ($8.75 billion) last year compared with 3.97 billion euros worth of arms exports in 2014.

 

It said the Economy Ministry had pointed to special factors that boosted arms exports such as the approval of four tanker aircraft for Britain worth 1.1 billion euros.

 

It also pointed to the approval of battle tanks and tank howitzers along with munitions and accompanying vehicles worth 1.6 billion euros for Qatar – a controversial deal that the report said was approved in 2013 by the previous government.

 

The Economy Ministry declined to comment on the report.

 

In February German Economy Minister Sigmar Gabriel said preliminary figures showed that Germany had given approval for around 7.5 billion euros worth of arms shipments in 2015.

 

The Federal Office for Economics and Export Control (Bafa), a subsidiary of the economy ministry, is responsible for licensing arms export deals and Gabriel had promised to take a much more cautious approach to licensing arms exports, especially with regard to the Middle East.

 

Germany is one of the world's main arms exporters to EU and NATO countries and has been cutting its sales of light weapons outside those states.

 

Last year the government rejected 100 applications for arms export approvals – the same number as in the previous year, Welt am Sonntag reported. It said Berlin had given 12,687 applications the green light in 2015 – 597 more than in the previous year.

According to Deutsche Welle, Qatar, a Gulf Arab state has been labeled by German opposition parties as an alleged source of funding for ISIS, which is why the receipt of tanks and heavy artillery, as well as ammunition and accompanying vehicles makes it a controversial sale.

From DW

Qatar, a Gulf Arab state panned by German opposition parties as an alleged source of funding for the "Islamic State" (IS) terror militia, received combat tanks and heavy artillery, as well as ammunition and accompanying vehicles worth 1.6 billion euros.

 

Economy Minister Sigmar Gabriel, who heads the Social Democrats, had tried to stop the delivery to Qatar but was outvoted by other ministers on Germany's Federal Security Council.

 

That deal had already been cleared in 2013 by Chancellor Angela Merkel's previous coalition, which then comprised her conservatives and the pro-business liberal Free Democrats (FDP).

 

Disclosure in February of that sale prompted renewed outcries from church-based lobby groups and charities such as Pax Christi and Misereor.

* * *

Exporting weapons and war appears to be something that the western world is still quite strong in, despite the rest of the world seeing global trade slumping. Also, when it comes to the €1.6 billion sale to Qatar, is it really a surprise to anyone – €1.6 billion is a lot of cash to pass up, and money talks as we have all come to learn.

via http://ift.tt/29cmkny Tyler Durden

With all eyes distratcted by the post-Brexit euphoria, the last week has seen a far more existential crisis accelerating in Europe. Italy's banking system is in tatters (from a EUR40bn bailout 6 days ago, to EUR150 emergency support 3 days ago, to chatter of further support from pension funds Friday) but, in what seems like a clear admission that things are really bad, The FT reports that Italian prime minister Matteo Renzi is prepared to defy the EU and unilaterally pump billions of euros into its troubled banking system if it comes under severe systemic distress, a last-resort move that would smash through the bloc’s nascent regime for handling ailing banks.

As we noted previously, Brexit will be just the scapegoat used by Renzi and Italy to circumvent any specific eurozone prohibitions. And if it fails, all Renzi has to do is hint at a referendum of his own. Then watch as Merkel scrambles to allow Italy to do whatever it wants, just to avoid the humiliation of a potential "Italeave."

And sure enough, as The FT reports, Matteo Renzi, the Italian prime minister, is determined to intervene with public funds if necessary despite warnings from Brussels and Berlin over the need to respect rules that make creditors rather than taxpayers fund bank rescues, according to several officials and bankers familiar with their plans.

The threat has raised alarm among Europe’s regulators, who fear such a brazen intervention would devastate the credibility of the union’s newly implemented banking rule book during its first real test. In the race to find workable solutions, Margrethe Vestager, the EU’s competition chief, has laid out options for Rome to address its banking problems without breaking the bail-in principles of Europe’s banking union.  

 

Italy is the eurozone’s biggest vulnerability following the shock outcome of the UK vote to leave the EU, with bank stocks plunging by a third. Concerns are building before the outcome of bank stress test results due this month and a constitutional referendum in Italy in early October, on which Mr Renzi has wagered his job. Citi has described the referendum as “probably the single biggest risk on the European political landscape this year outside the UK”.

 

After several of its ideas on intervention were rebuffed, Rome is considering whether to act alone. “We are willing to do whatever is necessary [to defend the banks], and do not rule out acting unilaterally, although that would only be as a last resort,” said one person familiar with the government’s thinking. European officials fear any Italian intervention would carry high risks, opening a battle over illegal state support that would put off private investors.

 

Angela Merkel, German chancellor , last week rebuffed Italy’s request for a suspension of state aid and bail-in rules in order to recapitalise its banks. Benoit Coeure, a senior European Central Bank official, has said any suspension of bail-in rules would spell the end of the banking union “as we know it”.

 

Mr Renzi has bristled at suggestions he is ignoring rules, saying he will not be “lectured by the school teacher”.

 

…

 

Italy’s business lobby, Confindustria, on Friday warned of “political chaos” should Mr Renzi lose October’s referendum. Under such a scenario, Italy would re-enter recession, spreads on Italian debt would widen and there would be capital flight from Italy, Confindustria argued. Italian gross domestic product would fall 0.7 per cent in 2017 and drop a further 1.2 per cent in 2018, it added.

So to summarize, The EU's "bail-in" banking system failure regime has been entirely dismissed (as Italy proves that when it gets serious, it's about national rescue, not 'union' rules). However, as we warned previously, the real threat is if the local population wakes up to the risk of holding their savings in a financial system that is now teetering on the edge, something Renzi himself admitted when he said that he "hoped to use a liquidity backstop to contain investor panic, which could result in a run on deposits and affect banks’ liquidity." Because even if it buys up every bond, loan and stock in the world, the ECB will not be able to fix the public's loss of trust in fractional reserve banking.

Finally, if you haven't already had enough enough of European bullshit, here is the massive divergence between Italy's banking system (red) and its sovereign bonds (green) which are remarkably – due to Mario Draghi's plans – as interconnected as they have ever been in history as banks bought bonds to front-run ECB bazookas…

What happens next?

via http://ift.tt/29fIWVk Tyler Durden