Category Archives: Finance

Sinister Agenda Behind DeMo

Posted on by

Bill Engdahl rehashes the agenda behind DeMo, in a good piece, that like all Western  analysis, avoids mentioning the scores of people in India who have in real time deconstructed this operation as it occurred, instead, attributing it to investigation by a German economist.

Whether that is proof of disinformation or controlled opposition I do not know. But I always suspect people who publish misleading sources.

Nonetheless, the article is a good summing up of the agenda behind DeMo, while omitting the British angle and pinning the blame on “Washington” in the usual way of left-wing sites.

[Global Research based in Canada publishes useful pieces, slanted heavily toward Marxist or leftist analysis, thus avoiding the conspiracy tag.]

The Modi cash-less India operation is a project of the US National Security Council, US State Department and Office of the President administered through its US Agency for International Development (USAID). Little surprise, then, that the US State Department spokesman, Mark Toner in a December 1, 2016 press briefing praised the Modi demonetization move stating, “…this was, we believe, an important and necessary step to crack down on illegal actions…a necessary one to address the corruption.”

Keep in mind that USAID today has little to do with aiding poorer countries. By law it must follow the foreign policy agenda of the President’s National Security Council and State Department. It’s widely known as a conduit for CIA money to execute their dirty agendas abroad in places such as Georgia. Notably, the present head of the USAID, Gayle Smith, came to head USAID from her post as Senior Director at the US National Security Council.

German economist and blogger, Norbert Haering, in an extensive, well-documented investigation into the background of the bizarre Modi move to a cash-less India, found not only USAID as the key financial source of the project. He also uncovered a snake-pit of organizational vipers being funded by USAID to design and implement the India shock therapy.

USAID negotiated a co-operation with the Modi Indian Ministry of Finance. In October, 2016 in a press release USAID announced it had created and funded something it named Project Catalyst. The title of their report was, “Catalyst: Inclusive Cashless Payment Partnership.” Its stated goal it said was to bring about a “quantum leap” in cashless payment in India.

They certainly did that. Maybe two quantum leaps and some.

If we dig a bit deeper we find that in January, 2016, USAID presented the Indian Finance Ministry a report titled, Beyond Cash: Why India loves cash and why that matters for financial inclusion. Financial “inclusion” for them means getting all Indians into the digital banking system where their every payment can be electronically tracked and given to the tax authorities or to whomever the government sees fit.

Astonishingly, the report, prepared for USAID by something called the Global Innovation Exchange, admitted that “97% of retail transactions in India are conducted in cash or check; Few consumers use digital payments. Only 11% used debit cards for payments last year. Only 6% of Indian merchants accept digital payments…Only 29 percent of bank accounts in India have been used in the last three months.” The US and Indian governments knew very well what shock they were detonating in India.

The Global Innovation Exchange includes such dubious member organizations as the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, a major donor to the Modi war on cash initiative of USAID. It also includes USAID itself, several UN agencies including UNICEF, UNDP, UNHCR. And it includes the US Department of Commerce and a spooky Maclean, Virginia military contractor called MITRE Corporation whose chairman is former CIA Director, James Rodney Schlesinger, a close associate of Henry Kissinger.

The USAID Project Catalyst in partnership with the Indian Finance Ministry was done, according to the USAID press statement, with a sinister-sounding organization called CashlessCatalyst.org. Among the 35 members of CashlessCatalyst.org are USAID, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, VISA, MasterCard, Omidyar Network of eBay billionaire founder Pierre Omidyar, the World Economic Forum-center of the globalization annual Alpine meetings.

War on Cash

However, a most interesting member of the USAID Project Catalyst together with the Indian Ministry of Finance is something called Better Than Cash Alliance. In point of fact the US-government-finance Project Catalyst grew out of a longer cooperation between USAID, the Washington-based Better Than Cash Alliance and the Indian Ministry of Finance. It appers to be the core public driver pushing the agenda of the global “war on cash.”

India and the reckless (or corrupt) Modi government implementing the USAID-Better Than Cash Alliance agenda is clearly serving as a guinea pig in a mass social experiment about how to push the cash war in other countries. The Better Than Cash Alliance is described by the UNCDF, which is its Secretariat, as “a US $38 million global alliance of governments, private sector and development organizations committed to accelerating the shift from cash to electronic payments.”

The Better Than Cash Alliance website announces that the alliance, created in 2012, is a “partnership of governments, companies, and international organizations that accelerates the transition from cash to digital payments in order to reduce poverty and drive inclusive growth.” It’s housed at the UN Capital Development Fund (UNCDF) in New York whose major donors, in turn, surprise, surprise, are the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and MasterCard Foundation. Among the Better Than Cash Alliance’s 50 members are, in addition to the Gates Foundation, Citi Foundation (Citigroup), Ford Foundation, MasterCard, Omidyar Network, United States Agency for International Development, and Visa Inc.

Recently the European Central Bank, which has held negative interest rates for more than a year, allegedly to stimulate growth in the Eurozone amid the long-duration banking and economic crisis of almost nine years, announced that it will stop printing the €500 note. They claim it’s connected with money laundering and terror financing, though it ominously echoes the Modi India war on cash. Former US Treasury Secretary Larry Summers, whose shady role in the 1990’s rape of Russia through his Harvard cronies has been documented elsewhere, is calling for eliminating the US $100 bill. These are first steps to future bolder moves to the desired Cash-less society of Gates, Citigroup, Visa et al.

US Dual Standard: Follow the money…

The move to a purely digital money system would be Big Brother on steroids. It would allow the relevant governments to monitor our every money move with a digital trail, to confiscate deposits in what now are legal bank “bail-ins” as was done in Cyprus in 2013. If central banks move interest rates into negative, something the Bank of Japan and ECB in Frankfurt are already doing, citizens have no choice than to spend the bank money or lose. It is hailed as a way to end tax avoidance but it is far, far more sinister.

As Norbert Haering notes, “the status of the dollar as the world’s currency of reference and the dominance of US companies in international finance provide the US government with tremendous power over all participants in the formal non-cash financial system. It can make everybody conform to American law rather than to their local or international rules.” He adds, referring to the recent US Government demand that Germany’s largest bank, Deutsche Bank pay an astonishing and unprecedented $14 billion fine, “Every internationally active bank can be blackmailed by the US government into following their orders, since revoking their license to do business in the US or in dollar basically amounts to shutting them down.”

We should add to this “benevolent concern” of the US Government to stimulate a War on Cash in India and elsewhere the fact that while Washington has been the most aggressive demanding that banks in other countries enact measures for full disclosure of details of Swiss or Panama or other “offshore” secret account holders or US nationals holding money in foreign banks, the USA itself has scrupulously avoided demanding the same of its domestic banks. The result, as Bloomberg noted following the suspiciously-timed Panama Papers offshore “leaks” of May, 2016, is that the United States is rapidly becoming the world’s leading tax and secrecy haven for rich foreigners.

Perversely enough, in 2010 the US passed a law, the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act, or FACTA, that requires financial firms to disclose foreign accounts held by US citizens and report them to the US IRS tax office or the foreign banks face steep penalties. The EU signed on to the intrusive FACTA despite strong resistance. Then, using FACTA as the model, the Paris-based OECD drafted an even tougher version of FACTA in 2014 to allegedly go after tax avoiders. To date 97 countries have agreed to the tough OECD bank disclosure rules. Very few have refused. The refusers include Bahrain, Nauru, Vanuatu—and…the United States.

World’s Biggest Tax Haven

You don’t have to be a rocket scientist, a financial wizard or a Meyer Lansky to see a pattern. Washington forces disclosure of secret bank accounts of its citizens or companies abroad, while at the same time lifting control or disclosure inside the United States of private banking accounts. No surprise that such experienced private bankers as London’s Rothschild & Co. have opened offices in Reno Nevada a stone’s throw from Harrah’s and other casinos, and according to Bloomberg, is doing a booming business moving the fortunes of wealthy foreign clients out of offshore havens such as Bermuda, or Switzerland which are subject to the new OECD international disclosure requirements, into Rothschild-run trusts in Nevada, which are exempt from those disclosure rules.

Rothschild & Co. Director, Andrew Penney noted that as a result, the United States today, “is effectively the biggest tax haven in the world.” Today Nevada, Meyer Lansky’s money laundering project of the 1930’s with established legalized gambling, is becoming the “new Switzerland.” Wyoming and South Dakota are close on the heels.

One area where America’s institutions are still world class is in devising complex instruments of financial control, asset theft and cyber warfare. The US War on Cash, combined with the US Treasury and IRS war on offshore banking is their latest model. As Washington’s War on Terror had a sinister, hidden agenda, so too does Washington’s War on Cash. It’s something to be avoided at all costs if we human beings are to retain any vestige of sovereignty or autonomy. It will be interesting to see how vigorously Casino mogul Trump moves to close the US tax haven status. What do you bet he doesn’t?

RBI: DeMo Disclosure Endangers Life, National Security

Posted on by

From Gulf-News:

India’s central bank refused to share specific details of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s ban on high-value banknotes citing danger to life and national security, as the mystery deepens over who took the unprecedented decision.
The Reserve Bank of India recommended the move, which was accepted by the cabinet and announced by Modi on November 8, Power Minister Piyush Goyal told parliament in November. The RBI board approved the ban three hours before Modi’s speech and hadn’t discussed the matter before, a slew of responses to Bloomberg News’s Right to Information requests show.
However, the RBI told a lawmakers’ panel this week that the government had “advised” the monetary authority to “consider” the ban a day before the RBI board made its recommendation. The government then “considered the recommendations” and decided to withdraw the notes, culminating in Modi’s address that blindsided the nation.
The cloak of secrecy that has shrouded the currency ban decision is likely to bolster the view that authorities, both on Mint Street and in New Delhi, were not prepared for such a decision and the way it was announced. It risks undermining perceptions of the central bank’s independence and raises questions about Modi’s decision-making style and his communication with the RBI.
More clarity may emerge when RBI governor Urjit Patel deposes before a parliamentary committee on January 20. Details are essential to help assess the success of the shock move as well as gauge the impact of the decision on Asia’s No 3 economy.
“It is very perplexing that the RBI doesn’t answer questions about how the decision was arrived at,” said Shilan Shah, Singapore-based India Economist at Capital Economics. “There are concerns that in the whole process the RBI has been sidelined by the government and that raises questions about its independence,” he said, adding that authorities have not been transparent. Bloomberg News asked the RBI 14 questions between December 8 and January 2. The central bank as of January 11 had answered five, disclosing the date and time of the RBI’s board meeting and the fact that the board had never discussed demonetisation before November 8. It said it doesn’t have information to answer one question, on how many of the worthless notes have been deposited at commercial banks. It transferred two questions on printing of new notes to organisations that manage the presses. The RBI said that a question asking “what prompted the board to discuss and approve the withdrawal of notes” doesn’t come under the definition of “information” under the RTI Act. It provided different answers to a question asked three times, seeking details on board members who opposed the move. In two replies the RBI said “it is a matter of fact that the decision was unanimous.” In a separate response, it said “this information is not available on record.” To a question seeking details on the number of demonetised notes already at banks on the evening of Modi’s speech, the RBI claimed an exemption, citing danger to the life or physical safety of anyone who disclosed this information to the public. The RBI also claimed exemptions on two questions seeking detail on its preparations for the demonetisation and studies it used to forecast the impact of the move. Sharing these “sensitive matters” would endanger India’s sovereignty, integrity and security, according to the RBI.
The use of those specific exemptions are “perplexing,” Capital Economics’s Shah said. Shailesh Gandhi, a former bureaucrat with the Central Information Commission, told the FirstPost website on December 31 that the RBI’s attitude of stonewalling smacked of “sheer arrogance.”
“What the RBI is doing by refusing to answer queries under RTI is denying citizens their fundamental rights,” Gandhi said. Lawmakers are also seeking answers. Parliament was gridlocked as the opposition demanded discussions and voting on the measures, the Supreme Court is hearing petitions against the legality of the steps, and two lawmaker panels have sought explanations from the RBI.
The decision to demonetise was taken only when the stock of new currency notes was reaching a “critical minimum,” enough to meet a significant part of demand, the RBI told a panel in a note accessed by Bloomberg News. However, the currency swap was riddled with rule changes and data that analysts have questioned. Patel will depose before another lawmaker panel on January 20, which is expected to seek his view on the impact of the demonetisation on India’s economy.”

Crazy Like A Fox: RBI Figures Suggest Fraud Not Ineptitude

Posted on by

At newsclick.in someone crunches the numbers on the conflicting reports put out by the Reserve Bank of India’s on the number of new notes issued:

RBI’s figures on the number and value of new notes it has put in circulation do not add up. The discrepancy is of more than half a trillion rupees. Is RBI trying to deceive people by claiming to print more notes than it actually did? Or is the RBI, under the new governor, too inept to get its figures right?

[Lila: As I’ve blogged over and over, nothing about the chaos around DeMo indicates it was a blunder.  And if it is crazy, it is only the craziness of the fox. DeMo is planned chaos intended to conceal the insertion of fake currency, the funding of terror outfits, and the creation of fresh money-laundering opportunities – in short,  the objective of DeMo, as a black op, was THE DIRECT OPPOSITE OF MODI’S STATED GOALS.

It is a foreign-corporate attack on the country coming from the highest level, dressed up to look like a nationalist pro-poor policy. It enables gigantic corruption and terrorist-funding, while pretending to defend against corruption and terror.]

After demonetising the old Rs. 500 and Rs. 1000 notes, the RBI claims to have issued new notes worth 5.93 lakh crore. If we calculate the net value of the notes printed and issued by RBI, – as per their various press notes – we can account only for Rs. 5.27 lakh crore. More than half a lakh crore rupees – Rs. 63,000 thousand crore to be exact – are missing from the 5.93 lakh crore amount.  Simply put, RBI’s numbers just do not add up.

In December, RBI began releasing data on return of the old demonetised notes to the banking system, and also publishing data on the number and value of fresh notes issued to replace the old notes.

In a press note released on December 7th, (Interestingly, RBI’s 7th December’s press release has now been taken down) the RBI gives a break-up of the currency notes made available to the public between November 10th and December 5th. According to this, currency worth a total of Rs. 3.8 lakh crore has been issued out in this period. Rs.1.06 lakh crore was in notes of smaller denominations – the total number of these notes is 19.1 billion. The remaining amount comprised of Rs. 2000 and Rs. 500.

Again, on December 22nd, RBI released a press note , with a new set of figures.  According to the December 22nd note, between November 10th and December 19th, the central bank – the RBI — released currency worth total of Rs. 5.93 lakh crore to the public. The new press note also said that this amount was made up of 20.2 billion currency notes of smaller denominations, and 2.2 billion notes of higher denominations.

This means that, after December 7th, RBI gave out an additional 1.1 billion currency notes of smaller denomination (20.2 billion minus 19.1 billion). Even if, we were to assume that all these additional notes are in denomination of Rs.100, this would mean and addition of Rs. 0.11 lakh crore. This works out to a total worth of all smaller denomination notes issued as on December 22nd as Rs. 1.17 lakh crore: Rs. 1.06 lakh crore as per December 7th press note plus Rs. 0.11 lakh crore.

Out of the Rs. 5.9 lakh crore that RBI claims to have issued till December 19th, if Rs. 1.17 lakh crore is of smaller denominations, then Rs. 4.73 lakh crore would need to be in notes of higher denominations (Rs. 5.9 lakh crore minus Rs.1.17 crore).

RBI’s December 22nd press note states that it released 2.2 billion currency notes in high denominations. Even if all these notes were released in only Rs. 2,000 denomination, it totals up to only Rs. 4.4 lakh crore;  Rs. 33,000 crore remains unaccounted (Rs.4.73 lakh crore minus Rs. 4.4 lakh crore)

In fact, the missing money is likely to be much higher. We know that RBI has been releasing Rs. 500 notes along with Rs. 2,000 notes – even if in smaller amounts. In response to an unstarred question raised in Rajya Sabha on the composition of newly printed notes, the Minister of State for Finance, Arjun Ram Meghwal, on 6th December in a written answer provided figures that indicate that about 9% (in numbers, not values) of the newly printed notes supplied up to 29th November were in 500s, the rest in 2000s.

If we consider that 10% of the new notes of high denomination are now Rs. 500, and 90% are Rs. 2,000,  this works out to 0.2 billion as the number of Rs. 500 notes and 2 billion as the number of Rs.2,000 notes. This makes for a total of value of these notes to be Rs. 4.1 lakh crore: Rs. 4 lakh crore in 2000s and Rs. 0.1 crore in 500s.

The big question is, what happened to the remaining Rs. 63 thousand crore (Rs 4.73 lakh crore minus Rs. 4.1 lakh crore), which RBI claims to have issued to the public?

Is RBI trying to deceive people by claiming to print more notes than it did? ”

Cyprus II: Bill Puts Indian Depositors On Hook For Bank Failure

Posted on by

Meera Nangia, professor of commerce at the University of Delhi in The Wire:

“The declining profits are indicative of the persistent efforts by banks in the last two years to recognise the extent of irrecoverable loans. Simultaneously, banks are undertaking fresh initiatives to liquidate bad loan accounts. The government too is keen to facilitate this process of recovery from defaulting borrowers. The new Insolvency and Bankruptcy code was notified on May 28, 2016.

[Lila: Referenced in the Edmond de  Rothschild memo, previously mentioned here.]

Effectively, demonetisation has ensured that the cash lying outside the banking system (given our predominant cash economy and the parallel black economy) is now within the banking system, in the accounts of the customers to whom it belongs. The government campaign on digital payments is ensuring that banks remain flushed with liquidity. Liquidity implies that banks can keep a small ‘fraction’ of the deposits as reserve, and lend out the rest to credit-worthy borrowers.

However, credit off-take is likely to be slow since it will take time for the demonetisation hit economy to take off. It will take a long time for the banks to make profits that can completely wipe out the losses on account of NPAs. In the coming year, as banks net their losses, there will be greater clarity about the exact amount of fresh capital required by banks. The State Bank of India is already working out the scheme of a merger with its five associate banks subsequent to the cabinet approval in June 2016.

This brings us to the next logical question – where will this fresh capital come from? There are many options  – equity shareholders of the bank can invest further into the bank, the government can provide fresh capital, weak banks can be merged with strong ones, or in the worst case scenario, a bank can be declared insolvent (central government is empowered to declare state-owned or nationalised banks insolvent). However, it is not easy to find an investor for a failing bank. In case of liquidation, there are established principles regarding the priority in which losses are borne –secured creditors get the best deal, the unsecured creditor also bears the brunt of failure but the equity shareholders bear the maximum loss.

Perspective from international finance

In 2008, the global bank crises threatened the very existence of the financial system. Simultaneously, the outcry against ‘bail outs’ using public funds gained momentum. There could be no rational justification for the government to tide over irresponsible banks. Since then, there has been a sea change in the collective thinking of central bankers all over the world. The Financial Stability Board (FSB) was set up in 2009 to ensure that banks never fail.

It believes that a failure of banks destabilised the financial system and hence banks must never be allowed to fail. India, as a part of the G-20 group at the Brisbane summit in 2014, endorsed the FSB proposal ‘Key Attributes of Effective Resolution Regimes for Financial Institutions’ that recommends ‘bail in’ to ensure the stability of the financial system. The first test run of the bail-in strategy for insolvent banks was launched in Cyprus in 2013.

India does not have the complete legal architecture necessary to implement this new international standard. However the committee set up by the finance ministry to draft the Financial Resolution and Deposit Insurance Bill 2016 submitted its report on September 21, 2016.

The report acknowledges “the committee studied guidances issued by the financial stability board and to the extent suitable, drafted the Bill to be consistent with the key attributes given in those guidances.” It envisages the setting up of a Financial Resolution and Deposit Insurance Corporation (FRDIC) that have the objectives of contributing to the stability and resilience of the financial system, protecting consumers up to a reasonable limit and protecting public funds, to the extent possible.

In case a bank “reaches the stage of imminent risk to viability” the FRDIC will have, amongst other things, the power “to exercise any of the tools to resolve the firm – sale to another financial firm, the incorporation of a bridge institution, or bail-in”.

‘Bail in’ and the unsecured depositor

On the face of it, setting up the FRDIC appears harmless enough – a mere streamlining and simplification of existing procedures. In reality, it aims to reorient the role of the RBI from supervision and regulation to financial stability. Since the primary concern will be financial stability, the fiduciary responsibility of the RBI, presently endowed under the RBI Act 1934 to protect the depositor, is automatically curtailed. The RBI would be taking the path trodden by other central banks in the world who have sacrificed the interests of the depositors in favour of fellow banks and corporates.

The mechanism of ‘bail in’ is recommended when a bank has failed, but it must be saved since its services are considered necessary. Under the FSB proposal, the resolution authority also has the power to impose a moratorium and suspend payments to unsecured creditors. In simple terms, this means that the money belonging to the unsecured and uninsured creditor can be used to save a bank from bankruptcy. The failing bank can be recapitalised with depositors money and without their consent as well. The new enactment grants sweeping powers to the resolution corporation.

When we deposit money in a bank – seldom do we think of ourselves as creditors. In fact, we are unsecured creditors of the bank. In case a bank fails, we would lose our deposit because the bank does not give us any tangible security against this deposit. However, in India, the Deposit Insurance and Credit Guarantee Corporation insures our deposits to a maximum of Rs 100,000 per deposit account in a bank. So, if a customer has a deposit of Rs 150,000 in his bank account and the bank fails, then the excess of Rs 50,000 is uninsured and the customer has no legal remedy to recover this amount.”

Edmond De Rothschild: Modi Will Recapitalize Banks By March 2017

Posted on by

More proof that it was the Rothschild cabal, at the highest level of the globalist enterprise, that was behind Modi’s cash ban.

Not Modi, nor Obama, nor Delhi, nor the RBI, nor Washington, as the previous article I posted here suggested.

The cash ban came from the very pinnacle of the global financial markets.

The piece below is also proof that the ban had nothing to do with black money.

It was not even primarily about going to a cashless economy.

It is unlikely that even the Modi government is so out of touch with things as to believe that India is ready for such a transformation.

The ban was always an economic attack, intended to take money from the productive cash-based economy and give it to banks and big corporates (unproductive debtors).

It was intended to solve the problem of non-performing assets (i.e. bad debt).

The Rothschild memo adds to this. It explicitly urges the circumvention of the lengthy Indian legal process through bankruptcy courts, presumably after the model of the US.

Presumably, also, the new courts are to have much more leeway in deciding whose loans are to be written off and whose not, if the following is anything to go by:

Loans that were written off (Diageo-Mallya deal, February 2016, settlement funds going to Edmond de Rothschild account in Switzerland)   

Loans that will NOT be written off (SBI chief on farmers’ loans on Dec, 20, 2016)

Memo from the website of private banker and asset manager, Edmond De Rothschild Group (May 30, 2016):

The Indian economy has generated average real GDP growth of 6.5% in recent years. Yet the government is struggling to make significant headway in the area of structural reforms and this is preventing the country from realising its huge potential. Infrastructures by and large continue to creak, the labour market lacks flexibility and the financial markets need to be developed and opened further to international investors. When Narendra Modi became prime minister in mid-2014, it was hoped he would be able to make deep inroads with reforms, since he had gone on record as wanting to see India among the 50 business-friendliest countries in the world. Investors cheered this goal by bidding up the Bombay stockmarket, sending its valuation multiples soaring.

Subsequent events have reminded observers that Modi’s party does not wield a majority in the upper house of Parliament, where its bills often run into opposition. For example, the government’s flagship reform, a national goods and services tax that could boost GDP growth by 2%, has yet to be adopted.

However, the recently adopted Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code should breathe new life into India’s reform movement. It is meant to speed up the settlement of insolvency cases involving both companies and individuals. India has a sad history when it comes to settling and recovering on non-performing loans, an area where it still stands 130th in the country ranking compiled by the World Bank (see right-hand chart above). Insolvency proceedings drag on for an average of 4.3 years, with a recovery rate of just 25.7%. This is well shy of international standards. As a comparison, in China the process takes an average of 1.7 years, with a 36.2% recovery rate. The cumbersome nature and snail’s pace of debt collection in India has so far been due to archaic legislation, some provisions of which had not been revised since colonial times. This has actually encouraged debtors to drag their feet.

The new code, due to be signed into law in the coming weeks, will make it possible to settle insolvency cases in 180 days. During this period a committee of creditors will decide how to act on a payment default, i.e. by restructuring the debtor company’s liabilities or by winding it up. Creditors will moreover be classified, with senior debt taking precedence over subordinated claims. Moreover, insolvency cases will henceforth be overseen by bankruptcy courts, replacing the slower regular courts that have handled these matters up to now.

All this should have positive repercussions on India’s business climate by evening the balance of power between lenders and borrowers and by strengthening confidence on both sides. The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code broadens the range of alternatives available to distressed companies, which will now be able to change their capital structure or reschedule their debt. This new-found flexibility should stimulate free enterprise at the local level.

From a more practical standpoint, dealing with bad loans quickly and effectively will not only reduce the portion of non-performing assets in banks’ balance sheets but also increase the supply of credit. At present nearly $150 billion of Indian banks’ assets are at risk (representing 10% of their combined loan books, including restructured assets). This weighs on their profitability and, worse, blocks resources that could be used to finance productive projects. The end result is a tepid investment cycle where money needed for infrastructure spending is in short supply.

The new code is also meant to help diversify the sources of credit available to borrowers, who are now 60% dependent on bank loans. The authorities’ objective is to encourage greater financing in the bond market and provide easier access to credit for smaller firms, which are often turned down by banks because of the higher credit risk involved.

Now the fanfare over the new legislation is fading, we should bear in mind that a whole ecosystem needs to be created. Setting up bankruptcy courts, training specialists and setting up databases to catalogue delinquent borrowers will all take time, meaning that the impact of the reform will only come in the medium/long term. Moreover, the recapitalisation of state-owned banks will be subject to the government’s budget restrictions.

Unlike China, however, India is developing a coherent process to address non-performing loans, a problem that is taxing its banking system. The Reserve Bank of India has set its sights high with the objective of weeding out and fully provisioning bad loans by March 2017. This clearly marks a major step towards expanding the country’s capital market, a vital effort in its economic development.

Defects In New Notes Enable Counterfeiting

Posted on by

The new $500 rupee notes are reportedly defective:

In its hurry to meet the demand for new notes, the Reserve Bank of India has made major errors which can have serious consequences for the demonetisation exercise. The gaffe — RBI has printed two variants of the new Rs 500 notes.

According to a report in The Times of India, the newspaper has seen at least three case studies where the new Rs 500 note varied from each other. According to one customer quoted in the report, Gandhi’s face has a more than visible shadow. Apart from this, he has pointed to alignment issues with the national emblem and also serial numbers.

×

Reuters

Representational image. Reuters

Another Mumbai resident has told the newspaper that the colours of the notes he got were different. The report has cited one more such instance of variation.

Meanwhile, a RBI spokesperson has termed them as “printing defects” that have propped up because of “the current rush”. She has also said people can still freely use it for transactions or even return it to the central bank.

One thing is for sure: the same note with different features would mean confusion for the common man. It will be easy for the ‘experts’ in counterfeiting to cash in on this confusion.

How is the common man to know whether the Rs 500 note he has is indeed original or fake? It has to be remembered that the fake note circulation has been rampant in India despite the RBI’s frequent notifications on how to detect such notes.

Clearly, the awareness level among the general public about the security features of currency notes is very low. Notes with slight variations in features will only add to the confusion about the features.

Announcing the decision to withdraw Rs 500 and Rs 1,000 notes and issue new ones on 8 November, the prime minister had said that the move was aimed at destroying the counterfeit racket, ending terror funding and also stop black money generation.

If the haste has resulted in errors that will only facilitate counterfeiting, then it will kill the very objective of the demonetisation exercise.

[Lila: I beg to differ. It is very clear to me that the objective of demonetization was to attack and destroy the cash economy and facilitate further such attacks, requiring more and more digitalization and police state measures.]

Interestingly, the RBI had published on its site the security features of the new Rs 500 notes before the notes came into circulation.

It will be better for the RBI to find some practical solution to the problem before any damage is done.”

The defects in the news notes, added to the introduction of Rs 2000 note, as well as reports of new types of black markets emerging in relation to the note-ban, substantiate my theory that note-bandhi is a weapon OF the counterfeiters and of the black money of the global cabal.

It is intended to be used against economic and political opponents SELECTIVELY.

Thus, income tax raids have become a tool to crush selective mafias.

Most fascinatingly, THE ENEMY IS THE HINDU. 

This underscores once again that the elevation of Hindi and Delhi is an elevation (by the global corporatists behind Modi) of language and location, but not of Hindu religion and culture.

It is an elevation of the middle-class Hindi- speaking constituency of the BJP , not of Hinduism.

The ban on notes was intended to crush the black money channels of the political and economic competitors of the globalists.

But, it was also intended, it seems, to facilitate money-laundering and counterfeiting by the current government and its friends, hence the repeated back-tracking and confusion; the defective counterfeit detection machinery; the pressure placed on the banking system.

We saw the same sort of selectivity during the 2008 economic collapse in the US.

At the time, what the major media termed a bail-out and transfer of toxic assets turned out to be a form of inter-bank cannibalism, with the tax-payer footing the bill.

Something similar is at work here.

I firmly believe that the notes being inserted now will be counterfeited and that will compound the confusion about numbers coming from the RBI.

The chaos will make the insertion of excess notes very easy.

We could then have massive inflation, despite inflation-targeting policies on paper.

This will be more economic and financial war…terror…brought to the aam admi in India.

Indian Bankers Revolt Against Central Bank

Posted on by

Indian bankers are demanding the resignation of Urjit Patel, the RBI governor, who has been silent about the extraordinary measures taken on his watch:

“Holding RBI Governor Urjit Patel responsible for ineffective handling of the crisis post the demonetisation drive, All India Bank Employees Association vice-president Vishwas Utagi on Wednesday said that bank unions are adamant about their demand for the former’s resignations as well as lockdown of the apex bank.

Questioning the failure of the RBI as the regulatory system, Utagi said that Patel, who hasn’t uttered a word till now, should resign with immediate effect.

“Since two weeks, the bank employees are working from eight in the morning till midnight including weekends. Still, there are truckloads of work to do. There has been absolutely no cooperation from the RBI’s side,” Utagi told ANI.

“It added to the mess by banning cooperative banks from exchanging old notes or accepting deposits,” he added.

Stating that the present situation is a clear mess, Utagi further said that there have been one million employees at various banks who are working day in and day out in a situation characterised by a shortage of cash counting machines, fake notes detection machines and manpower security personnel.

The All India Bank Employees Association vice-president’s assertion come as a united opposition is cornering the government in Parliament and demanding Prime Minister Narendra Modi to explain the rationale behind imposing such a decision.”

 

RBI Refuses to Release Minutes Of Nov. 8 Meeting

Posted on by

Business Standard:

The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has refused to allow access to minutes of meetings held to decide on the issue of demonetisation of Rs 1000 and Rs 500 notes announced by Prime Minister Narendra Modi on November 8.

 

Responding to an RTI application filed by activist Venkatesh Nayak, the bankers’ bank refused to disclose the minutes of the crucial meetings of Central Board of Directors on the issue of demonetisation citing section 8(1)(a) of the transparency law.

 

The section exempts disclosure of information which would prejudicially affect the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security, strategic, scientific or economic interests of the state, relation with foreign state or lead to incitement of an offence.

 

Nayak said he will appeal against the decision, adding, “While confidentiality prior to the making of the demonetisation decision is understandable, continued secrecy after the decision is implemented is difficult to understand when crores of Indians including this author have faced difficulties due to the shortage of cash in the economy.”

 

Rothschild 9-11-On India: Modi Ban Profits DE LA RUE

Posted on by

The income tax fine envisaged for Modi-backer billionaire Gautam Adani, 15,000 crores, is the same figure given for  replacing the banned currency.

Bizarre coincidence or proof of conspiracy?

Image result for rothschild major fronts

Cui Bono? (who benefits)

When analyzing Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s infamous currency ban, this is the most pertinent question. 

Note: This post is a work in progress, so bear with me.

Here is the essence:

The Modi currency ban is not only part of the global war on cash.

It is  without exaggeration one of the most monstrous financial acts of any ostensibly constitutional government in recent decades.

For instance, see this excellent analysis.

From the Hindustan Times:

Samajwadi Party (SP) patriarch Yadav and Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) chief Mayawati — bitter rivals facing tough assembly elections next year — seldom speak the same language on any subject.

But they were on the same page on Thursday against the Narendra Modi-led NDA government’s decision to pull 500- and 1,000 rupee notes out of circulation.

“The Modi government has slapped Emergency without sending people to jail and the BJP cares only about elections, not the problems faced by common people. The government has spread anarchy in the entire country, common man is not even able to buy daily products,” Yadav said.”

Far from being a war ON the black market, it is a war BY black money, an act of financial terror.

How so?

First, because the rise of Narendra Modi was possible only because of the public relations firm APCO, closely tied to global oligarch interests.

And second, because billionaire Gautam Adani (6th richest Indian billionaire, worth around $10 billion) financed Modi’s campaign and Adani is credibly reported to be involved in off-shore tax-shelter schemes. Adani’s own brother, Vinod, is named in the Panama Papers leak of off-shore tax schemes.

To clarify, APCO  was the firm brought in to gloss over the scandal attending giant oil company Yukos, a Russian state asset auctioned off to Russian J***** billionaire Mikhail Khodorkovsky, using shell companies, for a fraction ($309 million for a 78% share) of its real market capitalization ($6 billion).

APCO helped get Yukos and Khodorkovsky access to the Western political establishment and helped them cover up the fact that the oil giant operated through an elaborate system of shell companies that hid taxes from Russia for years.

Convicted of fraud and tax evasion by Vladimir Putin in 2005, Khodorkovsky passed on his shares in Yukos to co-ethnic Jacob Rothschild, of the legendary banking family, whose name is now short-hand for Western establishment and oligarch interests.

The same APCO that white-washed the legalized theft of Yukos was brought in to white-wash Gujarati strong-man Modi.

APCO’s name is derived from Arnold & Porter, a Washington DC law firm that is arguably the longest-lived foreign agent on US soil.

APCO and its sister company ASERO between them house many of the leading figures of the Israeli defense and security establishment, as well as of Homeland (US) security. Among them are retired officers of Mossad, Israel’s intelligence service.

Mossad, like MI6 , parts of the CIA,  and parts of RAW, is no more than the spy-agency of the global oligarchy. At the center of that oligarchy is the J*****/Khazarian banking family of Rothschild.

The same kind of schemes that hid Yukos’s operation from Russian taxation financed Modi, in the form of the Adani group’s campaign for Modi:

Ironically, the biggest black money case that has come up before the SIT so far is that of the Adani group, promoted by Gautam Adani, one of Modi’s closest associates. It is in his chartered aircraft that the soon-to-be prime minister zipped around India, accusing the incumbent government of not fighting corruption. The Adani group allegedly took out over Rs 5,000 crore to tax havens, using inflated bills for the import of power equipment from South Korea and China, the SIT on black money was told by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) and the Enforcement Directorate (ED).

According to a senior ED official associated with the SIT, if the Adani case reaches its logical conclusion, the group will have to pay a fine of around Rs 15,000 crore. ‘It is a watertight case,’ he said, about the trail of documents showing how the group diverted Rs 5,468 crore to Mauritius via Dubai. The Adani group vehemently denies any wrongdoing. Modi, after his rhetoric-filled ride to power, has been silent.”

Coincidentally, 15,000 crores is also the estimated cost of replacing the old currency bills banned by Modi.

Coincidentally,  Dubai is also the hub from which fake currencies are brought into India.

Coincidentally, Adnani is now partnered with Israeli high-tech security/defense firm Elbit-ISTAR in the production of unmanned (robot) drones.

Elbit systems is partnered with DHS (Dept of Homeland Security) in the US on the Mexican border, operating the first unmanned drone in the US and taking the lead in the creation of a virtual wall with Mexico.

No doubt Adani-Elbit drones will soon be policing the borders between India and her neighbors, if not between Indian states.  Leaked espionage cables published by Al Jazeera document that Elbit, like Israeli telecom company Amdocs and Israeli airline El Al, routinely assists Mossad.

Given these facts, the Modi currency ban is not economic policy by the Indian government so much as  financial “shock and awe,” enacted by the powers-that-be, fronted by a useful idiot.

It is a monetary 9-11 (or in this case 11/9 – the date the ban went into effect), against the legitimate economy of cash-based small-businesses, traders, farmers, laborers, and pensioners of India. And the globalists have fixed their signature numerals and even their calling card – a Trump – on the day.

Just to make sure the public gets this, the BBC, a well-known outlet for Western oligarch propaganda, even introduced the term “shock and awe” into this piece on the subject,admitting bluntly that Modi’s currency blitzkrieg was aimed at the small trader and small business classes who had voted for him. Because they do business mostly in cash, they pay little or no taxes.

But taxes are revenues for central banks. And central banks are ultimately controlled by the international financial system. And the ultimate beneficiaries of the international financial system (BIS, IMF etc) are the Western oligarchy and its global satraps.

To underscore the connection, it was under the headship of a son of the then BBC chairman, Marmaduke Hussey, that a British currency printer with ties to MI6 manufactured fake India currency notes that ended up in the vaults of the Reserve Bank of India (see further below in this post for details).

Knowing this, it is indisputable that Modi’s currency ban is economic warfare, intended to break the backs of small traders, businesses, and farmers, and steal their market for Western and Western- affiliated multinational e-commerce and retailers.

Unless reversed, it is the first act in the dekulakization of India.

Follow the money.

IMMEDIATE BENEFICIARIES OF MODI’S CURRENCY BAN:

De La Rue, Master Card, Visa, Paytm, cryptocurrencies like the mysterious Bitcoin,* Chinese fintech investors in Indian e-commerce, like Alibaba (a front for Western oligarchy), large corporations with card-swiping technology that most small businesses in India lack, Western e-commerce and Internet portals that can step up and fill in consumer demand, as indigenous small businesses disappear.

[Elsewhere on this blog, I have warned against using Bitcoin, which, like the heavily promoted Tor, has come out of Western security R&D and likely has back-doors for the globalist intelligence services.]

The Modi ban also sent Indians rushing to buy gold, which promptly rocketed in price.

Only a year ago, the government was vigorously beating the drum for people to deposit their gold in banks and get paid for it, at much lower prices.  One suspects that at the current high prices they have created, the government and its corporate cronies have auctioned their gold deposits and made a killing.

Isn’t that corruption?

De La Rue:

A new note (November 30) added here: De La Rue was the company chosen to supply currency for Libya in 2011 after the destruction of that country. CEO Tim Cobbold publicly stated that the company found regime change to be a lucrative opportunity. He also suggested that the break-up of the Eurozone would provide De La Rue a similar opportunity. This was only shortly after DLR manufactured fake currency was found inserted into the RBI vaulta and fake currency inflows had become a significant cause of massive inflation.

Another interesting fact that I found was that current RBI governor Urjit Patel, a Gujarati with an impressive resume in Western elite institutions and  an unusual (for RBI governors) corporate background that includes Reliance, and Gujurati businesses, is of Kenyan origin.  The Kenyan government apparently co-owns the branch of De La Rue that operates in its country.

How it benefits:

De La Rue is a British currency printer to whom, along with other British and German printers, printing of Reserve Bank of India notes has been outsourced, over Congress’ protests, since 1997.

According to the Panama Papers leaks by Wikileaks, De La Rue secured its Indian contract between 2002 and 2010 by paying a 15% commission (bribe) plus a one-time $712,000 to New Delhi-based Somendra Khosla.

Note: Khosla is a Khatri Sikh name.

[As I’ve documented amply on this blog, Sikhs have been working with the Rothschild oligarchs to destabilize India: the most notable examples being the Sikh murder of former PM Indira Gandhi and recently the fraudulent vendetta against prominent Indian-Americans by former Attorney-General for New York, Preet Bharara (half Sikh, with a J*****/Israeli born wife and J***** children). Bharara has allied himself with major NGO’s, like Safe Horizon, that are led by the Rothschild cabal.]

DLR is the world’s largest printer of commercial currency and the largest manufacturer of passports. It prints 44% of all banknotes world-wide.

It is currently seeking to become a one-stop shop for related services, such as verification, identity, and security systems related to passports and currency and involving the “substrate” on which they are printed.

This means DLR is involved in producing the very machines that test bank notes for fraud, while simultaneously manufacturing counterfeit currency.

That is probably why the fake currency passed the Indian government’s tests before being spotted by Indian intelligence.

The government of India banned DLR in 2011, because fraudulent notes generated by it but originally attributed to Pakistan, were found in regional banks as well in the RBI vault, by the Bureau of Intelligence in 2010.

The main conduit into India was through Kerala via Dubai.

An intelligence study in 2011 found the level of fake to genuine currency to be higher than in other countries, at 4 in 1000. This finding was in stark contrast to the RBI’s white-wash of the situation that put the ratio at 4 in 1,000,000, a thousand times lower.

Shockingly, Dela Rue was reinstated as RBI printer, without any evidence whatsoever to show why the ban was lifted.

The reinstatement was at the behest of the Prime Minister’s office.

The reinstatement seems to have been under the governorship of Raghuram Rajan (footnote 1) who later moved on to the Bank of International Settlements (BIS), the bank that acts as a reserve for central banks.

BIS itself is controlled ultimately by the Rothschild cartel. 

How much it benefits:

The banned  500 and 1000 rupees notes constitute  86% of India’s currency in circulation.

The Indian economy is comprised substantially of cash transactions and 98% of consumer transactions are in cash. The cost of replacing the currency is estimated at Rs. 15000 crores. Thus, replacing the old currency is a lucrative contract for the company tasked with the printing. The printing of RBI currency constitutes 30% of the profits of DLR.

Ownership:

Ownership is hidden.

Relationship to Rothschild oligarchy:

Current advisor: N. M. Rothschild.

In the late 19th century, the Rothschild family (Alfred Charles de Rothschild)  and the Bank of England were active in promoting the amalgamation of the three Presidency banks in India into one Central  Bank to “administer currency  regulations” and meet the “seasonal requirements of credit.”

That is, central banks were to print bank notes and pass laws on their issue….thus granting them unlimited power over the economy.

Related image

 

Long-time printer for national governments all over the colonial world, but barred from printing for Britain originally, De La Rue  has had a long association with MI6.

Founded in 1821 in Basingstoke, UK, by Thomas de la Rue, a  publisher (father, Eliazar de a Rue and mother, Rachael, nee Allez, of Guernsey).

De la Rue is a medieval French name  found in Normandy. The names Eleazar and Rachael speak for themselves.

UPDATE:

A site that I will not link to, seems to have sprung up in just the past few days, to put a novel spin on the information about De La Rue that is circulating on the net. The author claims that the Modi currency ban was a defensive move against a gigantic fake currency attack (an “economic Pearl Harbor” says the website) by Pakistan, also a target of the De La Rue fake notes. The site ends by claiming that anyone who opposes the Modi ban must be termed a traitor.

The Pakistani Pearl Harbor theory might hold some water for someone completely uneducated about the deep state – the spider-like web of connections between intelligence operations and criminal networks – that underpins the global polity.

Unfortunately, I’ve been around too long to believe that the ISI (Pakistani intelligence) is the primary mover in the region, rather than those that fund and instigate the ISI .

Two pieces of evidence will dispose of the notion that the Modi ban is a defensive move:

1.  The ban was the theme of  a Gujarat-based daily, Akila, whose editor later claimed it was an April Fool’s joke.

But Kirit Ganatra, the editor, is known to be a close friend of Modi’s.

2. There was a sudden surge in deposits (Rs 3,557 billion) at commercial banks between September 16 – September 30, 2016, following a slight dip in the weeks before.

More evidence seems to be in the offing:

1. Yatin Oza, the political mentor of BJP president Amit Shah and a former BJP MLA who is now with the AAP, has alleged with some credibility that he has proof of foreknowledge of the ban among Gujarat industrialists.

2. A TV journalist and investigator Satyendra Murali has collected evidence that Modi’s announcement of the ban was prerecorded. He claims to have received death threats on account of this.

But understanding the larger picture  is even more conclusive:

1. Anil Bokil of the Pune-based think-tank Arthakranthi has met Modi a few months back and suggested several reforms intended to change India into a cashless society. Among them was the banning of currency bills with a face-value of Rs. 1000, 500, and 100. Modi is reported to have been fascinated by his presentation.

Arthkranthi is likely a front for Western interests, like a lot of such NGO’s and think-tanks springing up of a sudden.

2. Moving to a cashless society is a long-term goal of the global elites and a ban on cash has been implemented in other countries recently, although none in the draconian and extreme manner of the Modi ban.

Like numberless trolls and disinformation agents on the net, the site proposing a “Pakistani Pearl Harbor” appears to have sprung to life solely to intimidate critics of the Modi ban.

All the more reason why rational and humane people must persist in educating people about what’s really going on, while they are still able to do it.

 

 

 

 

Footnotes:

  1. Rajan’s father, Govindrajan, is described as a diplomat, but was actually a member of RAW, India’s equivalent to the CIA, that, in the past decades, has often been penetrated/compromised by CIA agents, as well as by Mossad and MI6. Govindrajan was reportedly demoted by Rajiv Gandhi for failing to anticipate the Bofors scandal, according to some sites, and, according to others, for sending his son Raghuram  to study for his PhD at Chicago University with funding from CIA-tainted NGO’s. Rajan’s appointment to the RBI was greeted by the kind of adulation that the global media barons only reserve for their stooges.

David Cameron: Scion of Opium Barons

Posted on by

A post on David Cameron’s ancestral ties to the ruling elites by a blogger named Brian Akira was republished by conspiracy researcher Henry Makow, without an issue, but Akira’s blog has been archived or suspended for terms of service violations. Whether that has to do with the content he published or something else is not clear.

Here are the juicy details:

David Cameron’s forebears have a long history in financial racketeering. His great-great grandfather, Emile Levita, a German Jew, was related to the German-Jewish Goldsmid banking family, and obtained British citizenship in 1871. He was the director of the Chartered Bank of India, Australia and China.

The Chartered Bank of India, Australia and China was founded in London in 1851 following the grant of a Royal Charter from Queen Victoria. It opened its first branches in 1858 in Calcutta and Bombay and then Shanghai. The Shanghai branch of Chartered bank began operation in August 1858. Initially, the bank’s business was in large volume discounting and re-discounting of opium and cotton bills.

Although opium cultivation gradually increased in China, opium imports still increased by more than 50% between 1863 and 1888. Transactions in the opium trade generated substantial profits for the Chartered Bank and the Jews and Freemasons who controlled it.

Later, the Chartered Bank also became one of the principal foreign banknote-issuing institutions in Shanghai. In 1862, the bank was authorized to issue bank notes in Hong Kong, a privilege it continues to exercise to this day. Over the following decades, it printed bank notes in China and Malaya.

With the Rothschilds’ opening of the Suez Canal in 1869 (Jewish Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli was accused of undermining Britain’s constitutional system, due to his lack of consent from Parliament when purchasing the shares with funding from the Rothschild Jews), Chartered was well placed to expand and develop its dope-running and other rackets.

Besides usury, the bank also dealt in cotton from Bombay, indigo and tea from Calcutta, rice from Burma, sugar from Java, tobacco from Sumatra, hemp from Manila and silk from Yokohama. In 1912, Chartered Bank became the first foreign bank to receive a license to operate in New York.

In 1927, the bank acquired 75% of the P&O Bank, which had offices in Colombo, Shanghai, Hong Kong, Singapore, and Canton. P&O Bank also owned Allahabad Bank.

In 1957, the Chartered Bank acquired the Eastern Bank, giving it a network of branches in Aden, Bahrain, Beirut, Lebanon, Qatar and the UAE. It also bought the Ionian Bank’s Cyprus Branches.

Chartered Bank merged with the Standard Bank of South Africa in 1969, and the combined bank became the Standard Chartered Bank. It’s motto is “Here for Good” so you know they’re evil.

Chartered Bank Director, Emile Levita married Catherine Plumridge Rée, the daughter of Hermann Philipp Rée (from an prominent Danish Jewish family.) Their children were Arthur Levita, Cecil Levita and Enid Levita.

Arthur Levita of Panmure Gordon stockbrokers, together with Sir Ewen Cameron (London head of the Hongkong and Shanghai Bank, and member of the Council for Foreign Bondholders and the Committee for Chinese Bondholders) played key roles in arranging loans from the Rothschild syndicate, including Jacob Schiff, to the Japanese central banker (later Prime Minister) Takahashi Korekiyo [????] to finance the Japanese war against Orthodox Christian Russia in 1905.  Cecil Levita was chairman of the London County Council. [DELETED] Enid Levita married Sir Ewen Cameron’s son.

Enit Levita is David Cameron’s paternal grandmother. His father, Ian Cameron, was a successful stockbroker, a partner at Panmure Gordon, like his father and grandfather.”