TEC, “Deutsche Bank Collapse: The Most Important Bank In Europe Is Facing A Major ‘Liquidity Event”, 30 Sept 2016:

The largest and most important bank in the largest and most important economy in Europe is imploding right in front of our eyes.  Deutsche Bank is the 11th biggest bank on the entire planet, and due to the enormous exposure to derivatives that it has, it has been called “the world’s most dangerous bank“.  Over the past year, I have repeatedly warned that Deutsche Bank is heading for disaster and is a likely candidate to be “the next Lehman Brothers”.  If you would like to review, you can do so here, here and here.  On September 16th, the Wall Street Journal reported that the U.S. Department of Justice wanted 14 billion dollars from Deutsche Bank to settle a case related to the mis-handling of mortgage-backed securities during the last financial crisis.  As a result of that announcement, confidence in the bank has been greatly shaken, the stock price has fallen to record lows, and analysts are warning that Deutsche Bank may be facing a “liquidity event” unlike anything that we have seen since the collapse of Lehman Brothers back in 2008.

At one point on Friday, Deutsche Bank stock fell below the 10 euro mark for the first time ever before bouncing back a bit.  A completely unverified rumor that was spreading on Twitter that claimed that Deutsche Bank would settle with the Department of Justice for only 5.4 billion dollars was the reason for the bounce.

But the size of the fine is not really the issue now.  Shares of Deutsche Bank have fallen by more than half so far in 2016, and this latest episode seems to have been the final straw for the deeply troubled financial institution.  Old sources of liquidity are being cut off, and nobody wants to be the idiot that offers Deutsche Bank a new source of liquidity at this point.

As a result, Deutsche Bank is potentially facing a “liquidity event” on a scale that we have not seen since the financial crisis of 2008.  The following comes from Zero Hedge
:
  It is not solvency, or the lack of capital – a vague, synthetic, and usually quite arbitrary concept, determined by regulators – that kills a bank; it is – as Dick Fuld will tell anyone who bothers to listen – the loss of (access to) liquidity: cold, hard, fungible (something Jon Corzine knew all too well when he commingled and was caught) cash, that pushes a bank into its grave, usually quite rapidly: recall that it took Lehman just a few days for its stock to plunge from the high double digits to zero.

  It is also liquidity, or rather concerns about it, that sent Deutsche Bank stock crashing to new all time lows earlier today: after all, the investing world already knew for nearly two weeks that its capitalization is insufficient. As we reported earlier this week, it was a report by Citigroup, among many other, that found how badly undercapitalized the German lender is, noting that DB’s “leverage ratio, at 3.4%, looks even worse relative to the 4.5% company target by 2018″ and calculated that while he only models €2.9bn in litigation charges over 2H16-2017 – far less than the $14 billion settlement figure proposed by the DOJ – and includes a successful disposal of a 70% stake in Postbank at end-2017 for 0.4x book he still only reaches a CET 1 ratio of 11.6% by end-2018, meaning the bank would have a Tier 1 capital €3bn shortfall to the company target of 12.5%, and a leverage ratio of 3.9%, resulting in an €8bn shortfall to the target of 4.5%.

The more the stock price drops, the faster other financial institutions, investors and regular banking clients are going to want to pull their money out of Deutsche Bank.  And every time there is news about people pulling money out of the bank, that is just going to drive the stock price even lower.

In other words, Deutsche Bank may be entering a death spiral that may be impossible to stop without a government bailout, and the German government has already stated that there will be no bailout for Deutsche Bank.

Modern Heretic, “Diversity Success Story: Chinese Angry at Negro Rapper”, 4 Oct 2016:

For all its faults, the Chinese Ant Farm has more sense than Western Europe when confronted with a negro. For reasons that remain inscrutable the reaction of many Whites to what is clearly a missing link between modern man and our ape-like forebears is to immediately assert the equality and special humanity of these monsters. This is clearly just a sun-tanned White with a receding forehead, a brow ridge, a muzzle, burry hair, low intelligence, lack of self-control, magical thinking and all the other evidence that points to a failed branch of humanity that remains permanently stuck in the Stone Age all against all.

The Chinese reaction to the living fossil is to call them “ghost slaves,” and to mercilessly strip their failed African nations of natural resources. This has not gone unnoticed by the negro and when these two groups find themselves living together in the reeking privy that is today’s U.S.S.A. it’s not surprising that there’s a certain amount of conflict. Consider today’s story, where “get dat yella” refers to the actual yellow man and not mulattoes, for once.

A two-year-old hip-hop music video that depicts a home burglary in a “Chinese neighborhood,” as the lyrics go, is angering some Chinese-Americans.

The impressive cultural and spiritual contributions that the vibrant morlock makes to the American salad dish. We bee rawbin da aunt fam an sheeet.

The song is called “Meet the Flockers” and is performed by Compton hip-hop artist YG. In the video, two men with bandanas around their faces set out to burglarize a house

Write what you know, as the English professors like to say.

“First, you find a house and scope it out, you find a Chinese neighborhood, ‘cause they don’t believe in bank accounts…”.

LOL. Get dat Chinee ‘hood mudda fudda. It’s almost as if forcing wildly divergent people groups together and expecting them to get along is the height of folly, but that can’t be true because a jew said it was a good idea.

Once the actors playing the burglars enter a house, the camera shows a photo of an Asian family.

This is also noteworthy because it’s the first time non-Whites were depicted as burglars on the talmudvision in several decades.

Here’s a video of what happens when the negro tries to attack The Colony in real life:

The video went on YouTube in ‘14, but lately it’s been making rounds on WeChat, a Chinese social media app. San Gabriel attorney Qiang Bjornbak is among those in California and China who are angered by the lyrics, which they find offensive.

The last horse crosses the finish line. You’ve got quite the backlog of negro pathology to get through until you’re back in Current Year, Middle Kingdom.

“The song seems to hit the racial stereotypes, and encourages possible crimes targeted at a specific Chinese group,” Bjornbak said. “That is the problem.”

Here’s why it’s a problem, declares the invisible model minority. More lyrics: Meet the motherfucking flockers/Make some noise if you’ve ever stole something in your life/Don’t be ashamed, it’s okay, baby/Make some noise if you’ve ever stole a dollar out your mama’s purse/When she wasn’t lookin while y’all was in Church

Totally compatible with classical liberal tradition of White civilization and the “every insect does its job” of the Jade Throne.

Police in Alhambra and San Marino, two communities with large numbers of Asian residents, said they’ve seen an uptick in burglaries. But Sgt. Jerry Johnson with the Alhambra police department is skeptical that a music video would cause burglaries to increase.

If you want a successful career as a civil servant basic pattern recognition is a skill you’ll want to lose right away.

“I can’t imagine it would,” Johnson said. “To try to blame burglary statistics on a song is frankly just a little bit ridiculous.”

It’s not like a 70 I.Q. mind with no future time orientation is easily influenced, right?

There’s historic tension between some Asian-Americans and African-Americans, and the controversy over the song feeds into that, said Shana Redmond, an associate professor of musicology and African-American studies at UCLA. But the song itself should not be taken seriously, she said.

“Educated” sinecure negro to the rescue. Sure, we hate each other and here’s a song that glorifies home invasion, but you should probably just ignore it and go back to sleep. Say, isn’t there Africa Ball on the talmudvision this weekend?

“They take socks, coins, and DVDs — none of which hold true value. This isn’t a heist; it’s playtime.”

It’s just negro playtime, learn to have a sense of humor about it you stiff and uptight people without color.

       
        Playtime is over

Stefan Molyneux interviews an American EX-Pat, who lived in Germany, liked-it, wanted to stay, but returned to live in The U.S. after experiencing the deterioration of its way of life on behalf of obsequious accommodation of Islam.

Infowars, “Never before seen video shows President Barack Obama complaining about white privilege during a 1990 trip to Kenya. (go to 14:40 for comments on race).”

In the US, Whites cannot legally discriminate against blacks. What privilege and what freedom is there in that? Which group has the privilege?

Furthermore, blacks have a myriad of programs to aid them, in big ways, just because they are black: well-paying government jobs, education, corporate set asides, welfare, etc. Who is privileged?

Related article by Kumiko - “White privilege as warrant for expropriation.”

Macleans, “China is buying Canada: Inside the new real estate frenzy”

How China’s affection for Canada’s real estate is reshaping the nation’s housing market well beyond Vancouver

Paul Shen can tick off the reasons Mainland Chinese people buy property in Canada as surely as any fast-talking B.C. realtor. Some long to escape the fouled earth and soupy air of their country’s teeming cities, he explains, while others are following relatives to enclaves so well-populated by other Chinese expats they hardly feel like foreigners.

The richest, of course, regard homes in the West as stable vessels for disposable cash, but Shen lays no claim to such affluence. Last spring, the 39-year-old left behind his middle-management advertising job in Shanghai to seek the dream of home ownership he and his wife couldn’t afford in their home city. “We just followed our hearts to begin a totally different life,” he tells Maclean’s, adding: “We can make the house dream come true in Canada.”

The starting point was one-half of a modest duplex near downtown Victoria, close to the university where his wife is seeking a master’s degree, and priced about right for their limited means. Selling points ranged from the quiet of the street—perfect for their six-year-old son—to the stunning Vancouver Island vistas all around. High on his list, though, was Victoria’s comfortable distance from the bustling Chinese communities of B.C.’s Lower Mainland. As Shen—betraying his limited knowledge of pre-settlement Canadian history—puts it: “We wanted a place that would allow us to live with the natives.”

It’s hard not to smile at his idealism. Substitute any one of two dozen nationalities, after all, and you have a chapter in Canada’s cherished narrative of migration, settlement and shared prosperity.

But as a Chinese newcomer with a buy-at-all-costs resolve, Shen also personifies a phenomenon dividing those “natives” he’d like to call his neighbours. In the past five years, the flow of money from mainland China into Canadian real estate has reached what many consider dangerous levels, contributing to a gold-rush atmosphere in the nation’s leading cities, while stirring anger among young, middle-class Canadians who feel shut out of their hometown markets.

Its impact on Vancouver’s gravity-defying boom is the best known—and most hotly debated—example, as eye-popping price gains leave behind such quaint indicators as average household income, or regional economic activity. “We’re bringing in people who just want to park their money here,” says Justin Fung, a software engineer and second-generation Chinese-Canadian who counts himself among those frustrated by Vancouver’s surreal housing market. “They’re driving up housing prices and simply treat this city as a resort.”  Full story at Macleans

Related story:

BCBusiness, “China, Foreign Ownership & B.C. Resources”

B.C.’s natural resources are being gobbled up by foreign entities at a record pace. Increasingly, those entities are controlled by governments, such as China’s, that may have motives beyond mere profits. (Return to B.C.‘s Top 100 of 2011.)

[...]

It’s that potential for conflict of interest that has a few people worried. Jock Finlayson, executive vice-president of the Business Council of B.C., appreciates the “investment renaissance” that B.C. is now experiencing, but recommends a cautious approach.


“Canada needs to look at this,” he says. “I don’t know what the right answer is, but I do agree that the private-sector rules don’t apply to state-owned organizations, and it’s not just the Chinese. It requires an explicit look. Do we hold them to a higher test? They are going to have to do it sooner rather than later.”


John Bruk, who 27 years ago co-founded and headed the Asia Pacific Foundation, pulls no punches on this topic. He sees a need for some concerted action before too many horses have fled the barn. Bruk has prepared a comprehensive analysis of the track record of the foundation; he believes the government-funded organization needs to be re-energized in part because of China’s growing economic influence, and believes it needs to do much more to help Canada address an unsustainable trade deficit with China. (Disclosure: I provided editing services for Bruk on this paper.)


“Is trading our ownership and control of core assets for more consumer goods, resulting in unsustainable trade deficits, good for Canada?” Bruk asks in his report. “Are we jeopardizing prosperity for our children and grandchildren while putting at risk our economic independence? In my view, this is exactly what is happening.”


DiversityMachtFrei,“Prominent French patriot sentenced to 6 months in prison for defending himself after being attacked by Muslims”, 4 Oct 2016:

       

Attacked in March 2014 in front of my wife and my sons - 7 months and 3 years at the time - by three armed (wheel brace, tyre iron) men with long criminal records objecting to my political engagement, I was today sentenced on the same basis as them for having defended myself.

I am being blamed for using a tear gas canister belonging to my wife to keep the attackers at bay while the police themselves were forced to use theirs to protect me later. How could I do otherwise? Let myself be lynched while my family looked on? In this incident I was the only one injured (an injury to the hand from a sharp tool) and to have a statutory period off work confirmed by a medical jurist.

Today, only one of my attackers was present in court. He had no choice because he is already in prison for another case! His record shows 12 convictions (thefts, violence). The two others, also with long criminal records, were not present. One of them has an electronic bracelet and just came out of prison.

I admit being stunned by this bizarre judgement which echoes the injustice experienced by so many victims. Of course I will appeal this decision!

Philippe Vardon was a prominent patriotic activist involved in the Bloc Identitaire movement. He now serves as a regional councillor for the Front National.

UPDATE: This news story in the newspaper Nice Matin (link) describes the attackers as “trois jeunes maghrébins” “three young North Africans”. This, of course, means they were MuslimsSkittles (see link).

Alt Righter 1: The Skypes and the Skittles are working together against us.

Alt Righter 2: Yeah. They always have been.

Alt Righter 3: The Googles are the worst.

Alt Righter 1: No.

Alt Righter 2: No way, dude.

Alt Righter 1: The Googles are strategically insignificant. Without the Skypes stirring them up and weaponising them, they wouldn’t be a problem.

Alt Righter 2: Same with the Yahoos.

Alt Righter 3: The Bings aren’t so bad.

Alt Righter 1: The Bings are fine as long as they stay in Bingland.

TNO, “Hungary Votes No to Invasion”, 2 Oct 2016:

More than 90 percent of Hungarians who participated in Sunday’s referendum have rejected the European Union’s “refugee distribution” plan—setting the stage for a dramatic clash in Brussels which could cause the EU to split.

Prime Minister Orbán’s victory has however been soured by a low turnout, which needed to be above 50% to be binding.

If the turnout is below 50 percent, the government will still claim victory and press ahead with measures to prevent the “distribution” of the nonwhite invaders—who were invited to Germany by chancellor Angela Merkel.

The question asked of voters was: “Do you want the European Union to be able to mandate the obligatory resettlement of non-Hungarian citizens into Hungary even without the approval of the National Assembly?”

Hungarian Deputy Prime Minister Zsolt Semjen has already announced that the government has “received a political mandate to protect the country from Brussels.”

Visigrad Post, “Serbia – Serbian President Nikolić announced that Serbia will close her borders to migrants,” 3 Oct 2016:

As for the Minister of Labour Aleksandar Vulin, he asks for help to the EU to cope with the flood of migrants.

“We ask for help for Serbia to be treated in the same way as other countries on the transit route,” said Mr Vulin. Between 5,000 and 10,000 migrants are stranded in Serbia, and would be able to cross Hungary and Croatia to Western Europe. But Hungary, followed by Slovenia and Austria eventually secure their borders and do not offer many options to migrants wanting to go to Germany, the UK and Scandinavia.

Monday, October 3 Serbian President Tomislav Nikolić announced that Serbia would also soon have to resort to securing its border also.“Everyone who closes the border behind us, creates a danger of making us a funnel that cannot channel the water, which would mean that we would have to, regardless of our beliefs and wishes, close our border for the migrants without any delay, because this is not the country they wanted to be and live in, in the first place”, said Mr Nikolić.

He also stressed that Serbia had no obligation to recover the migrants in the European Union that it would send him, referring to a hypothetical massive return of currently illegal in the EU, but also to illegal escorted to the border in Hungary. “We do not have that obligation, if they decide to send one million people back to Serbia. They can jump over Serbia, fly over, and drive people to the place from which they initially invited them to come, lured them to come, made them come”, said Mr Nikolić.