Germany Unveils 'Cash Control', The Continuing Demonization Of Cash, Russia Could Overrun Eastern Europe In Three Days

Germany Unveils "Cash Controls" Push: Ban Transactions Over €5,000, €500 Euro Note

It was just two days ago that Bloomberg implored officials to “bring on a cashless future” in an Op-Ed that calls notes and coins “dirty, dangerous, unwieldy, and expensive.”

You probably never thought of your cash that way, but increasingly, authorities and the powers that be seem determined to lay the groundwork for the abolition of what Bloomberg calls “antiquated” physical money.

We’ve documented the cash ban calls on a number of occasions including, most recently, those that emanated from DNB, Norway’s largest bank where executive Trond Bentestuen said that although “there is approximately 50 billion kroner in circulation, the Norges Bank can only account for 40 percent of its use.”

That, Bentestuen figures, “means that 60 percent of money usage is outside of any control.” “We believe,” he continues, “that is due to under-the-table money and laundering.”

DNB goes on to say that after identifying “many dangers and disadvantages” associated with cash, the bank has “concluded that it should be phased out.”

On Tuesday we got the latest evidence that officials across the globe are preparing to institute a cashless “utopia” when Handelsblatt reported (in a piece called “The Death of Cash) that the Social Democrats – the junior partner in Angela Merkel’s coalition government – have proposed a €5,000 limit on cash transactions and the elimination of the €500 note. 

Berlin is using a familiar scapegoat to justify the plan: the need to fight “terrorists” and “foreign criminals.”

“Limits on cash transactions would discourage foreign criminals from coming here to launder money,” says a paper penned by the Social Democrats. “If sums over €5,000 have to pass through traceable bank transactions, laundering would be severely hampered, it adds.”

“Since money laundering and terrorism financing are cross-border threats,” it makes sense to adopt a bloc-wide “solution”, but “if a European solution isn’t possible, Germany will move ahead on its own,” he added.

The Antichrist’s Cashless Utopia: War on Cash in 2016

The push for a cashless society has begun to gain steam around the globe, with nearly every major nation taking strides to adopt digital currencies, centrally governed cash controls and incentivize cashless transactions.

A Bloomberg Op-Ed published on January 31st called for the end of paper currencies, touting that “cash had a pretty good run for 4,000 years or so,” but was “dirty, dangerous, unwieldy and expensive, antiquated and so very analog.”

Now though each of these reasons all have some merit of truth behind them, such as paper currency serving as a vector for disease, incentivizing physical robberies, and complicating P2P long distance transactions, the existence of physical legal tender has an equal set of priceless characteristics.

Without the circulation and use of paper currency, centralized banking strategies such as Quantitative Easting (QE) though already being predominately aggregated through computers, would have no physical constraints. The power of a government to tax and confiscate would also be greatly enhanced, with the legal minimum of a court order standing between the state and an individuals ability to earn a living.

Lastly cash has long been a deterrent to the enforcement of global standardized negative interest rates, a problem coined by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) as “zero lower bound.” In the 2015 IMF Working Paper: “Breaking Through The Zero Lower Bound“, central bank officials Ruchir Agarwal and Miles Kimball argued that the circulation of physical cash during economic turmoil severely limits the control and power of central banks during crisis’s. They also noted that the elimination of cash would not likely come through a radical outlawing of physical tender, but through incentivizing digital alternatives.

In the Book of Revelation, God forewarned his people through the Apostle John, that during the Tribulation period the global system will be dictatorially ruled by a single political authority, known as the antichrist. In Chapter 13 verses 16-17 the antichrist’s control over the economy is described as absolute: “He also forced everyone, small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on his right hand or on his forehead, so that no one could buy or sell unless he had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of his name.” Cashless technology and centralized restrictions of transactions fit this warning.

James Corbett of The Corbett Report recently began an open source investigation, compiling a country by country guide of the war on cash.

The Continuing Demonization Of Cash

The insidious nature of the war on cash derives not just from the hurdles governments place in the way of those who use cash, but also from the aura of suspicion that has begun to pervade private cash transactions. In a normal market economy, businesses would welcome taking cash. After all, what business would willingly turn down customers? But in the war on cash that has developed in the thirty years since money laundering was declared a federal crime, businesses have had to walk a fine line between serving customers and serving the government. And since only one of those two parties has the power to shut down a business and throw business owners and employees into prison, guess whose wishes the business owner is going to follow more often?

The assumption on the part of government today is that possession of large amounts of cash is indicative of involvement in illegal activity. If you’re traveling with thousands of dollars in cash and get pulled over by the police, don’t be surprised when your money gets seized as “suspicious.” And if you want your money back, prepare to get into a long, drawn-out court case requiring you to prove that you came by that money legitimately, just because the courts have decided that carrying or using large amounts of cash is reasonable suspicion that you are engaging in illegal activity. Because of that risk of confiscation, businesses want to have less and less to do with cash, as even their legitimately-earned cash is subject to seizure by the government.

Restrictions on the use of cash are just some of the many laws that pervert the actions of a market economy. Rather than serving consumers, businesses are forced to serve the government first and consumers last. Businesses act as unpaid tax agents, collecting sales taxes for state governments and paying excise taxes to the federal government, the costs of which they pass on to their customers. Businesses act as enforcers of vice laws, refusing tobacco sales to those under eighteen or alcohol to those under twenty-one. Financial institutions, which includes coin dealers, jewelers, and casinos, are required to report cash transactions above $10,000 as well as any activity the government might deem “suspicious.” Cash becomes such a hassle that it is almost radioactive, and many businesses would rather not deal with the burden. Using cash to buy a house is becoming impossible and it is probably only a matter of time before purchasing a car with cash will become incredibly difficult also.

Centuries-old legal protections have been turned on their head in the war on cash. 

Guilt is assumed, while the victims of the government’s depredations have to prove their innocence.Governments having far more time and money to devote to asset forfeiture cases than the citizenry, most victims of cash seizures decide to capitulate rather than attempt a Pyrrhic victory. Those fortunate enough to keep their cash away from the prying hands of government officials find it increasingly difficult to use for both business and personal purposes, as wads of cash always arouse suspicion of drug dealing or other black market activity. And so cash continues to be marginalized and pushed to the fringes. Stemming the anti-cash tide will require a societal attitudinal adjustment that views cash not as something associated with crime, but as a bastion of consumer freedom and a bulwark against overzealous governments.

2015 third-worst year on record for UK anti-Semitic incidents, new figures show

The UK witnessed the third-highest number of anti-Semitic hate incidents in one year in 2015, according to figures from the Community Security Trust.

Of the 924 recorded anti-Semitic incidents, 86 were violent anti-assaults, an increase of 6 percent from 2014 and the highest number of violent incidents since 2011, four of which were classified as of “Extreme Violence,” meaning they involved potential grievous bodily harm or threat to life.

There were 65 incidents of damage and desecration of Jewish property; 685 incidents of abusive behavior, including verbal abuse, anti-Semitic graffiti, anti-Semitic abuse via social media and oneoff cases of hate mail; 76 direct anti-Semitic threats; and 12 cases of mass-mailed anti-Semitic leaflets or emails. All of these decreased from the 2014 totals.

Russia could overrun Eastern Europe in THREE DAYS, according to US predictions

Russia could overrun Eastern Europe in just three days because NATO has not been bolstering its fleet since Vladimir Putin took Crimea, according to US military predictions.

Testing every possible scenario in a series of war games, a US military think tank has concluded it would take a resurgent Russia between 36 and 60 hours to push its 27 heavily-armored battalions past NATO's lightweight 12 to occupy the Baltic States.

Most likely, the study found, Russia would start by launching a two-pronged attack across the Latvian border, sending heavily-armed battalions in from the north and the south. 

These battalions would push past the light-weight Latvian and NATO battalions before uniting to take the capital of Riga.

Once secured, the remaining part of Russia's 27 maneuver battalions would cross the Narva reservoir into Estonia to take the ethnic Russian north-east before heading to Tallinn, the capital.

NATO's only hope would be to concentrate its forces in Tallinn and Riga while stationing some delays along the main routes. But eventually, the West 'would have to launched a belated nuclear attack'. 

'The outcome was, bluntly, a disaster for NATO,' the report concludes. 

The report warns, NATO's ground forces are no match for Russia's. They do not have any battle tanks; all of Russia's do. And NATO would have little room for maneuver, annexed in by Russian forces in Kalingrad Oblast.

In the scenario given by the study, NATO would have one week's notice to defend Eastern Europe.

The study, carried out between 2014 and 2015, suggested even a combination of US and Baltic troops combined with US airstrikes would not be able to prevent Russia advancing.

Seven of NATO's 12 battalions in Eastern Europe are domestic fleets of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. They only have one heavy armored fleet, a single Stryker battalion, and no main battle tanks, the report explains. 

Though NATO's air power could put up a strong defense, it would be futile as its lightweight ground forces would be plowed down by Russia's. 

'The games' findings are unambiguous: As currently postured, NATO cannot successfully defend the territory of its most exposed members,' the report said.

Baltic Conflict Would Spell Defeat for US, NATO Against Russia

As the Pentagon prepares to quadruple its European defense budget, a new analysis from a US military think tank may offer an explanation for the striking increase. According to projections by the group, should war erupt, both the US and NATO would be decimated by Russia in less than three days.

On Tuesday, US Defense Secretary Ashton Carter presented his proposal for the Pentagon’s 2017 budget. The massive increase to European defense is meant to demonstrate a "strong and balanced approach to deter Russian aggression."

Spending in Eastern Europe will increase from a current $800 million to some $3.4 billion.

While this announcement came as a shock to many, a report released by the RAND Corporation this week may offer an explanation. According to the think tank’s analysis of NATO war games in Eastern Europe, both the US and NATO would suffer a crushing defeat if forced to confront the Russian military.

"The games’ findings are unambiguous: As currently postured, NATO cannot successfully defend the territory of its most exposed members," the report states.