Herman Van Rompuy: The nation state is a lie and its advocates are a danger

Tyler Durden reports Ugly 30 Year Comes At 4.32%, Gaping 5 Bps Tail To WI, Lowest Bid To Cover In A Year Today’s $16 Billion 30 Year Auction was about as bad as they get: the yield was 4.32% (highest since May 13), a 5 bps tail to the WI, the Bid To Cover was 2.31, a collapse from October, and the worst since November 2009. Primary Dealers and Directs saved the day taking down 62%, with Indirects responsible for 38.4%.

I write that on November 5, 2010, the world pivoted from the age of credit liquidity and prosperity into the age of austerity and debt deflation, as the interest rate on the US Government Bond, $TYX, rose to 4.12%, and as the world’s major currencies, DBV, peaked at 24.1 and the world’s emerging market currencies. CEW, peaked at 23.47.

The twin spigots of credit liquidity were Bank of Japan ZIRP lending for carry trades loans, and quantitative easing by the US Federal Reserve, this being both QE 1 and the anticipation of QE 2.

But now, credit liquidity has been poisoned by the bond vigilantes calling the FOMC’s actions monetization of debt.

The economic fathers, Milton Friedman, and Alan Greenspan, begot the floating currency regime. But as documented in Associated Press Currency Row Hangs Over Summit Of Global Leaders, many want to replace with a new global economic order.

As of today, through globalization, and the rise global corporatism, the hand of the bond traders and the power of the currency traders is sovereign with the currency traders having commenced a global currency war on November 5, 2010 bringing debt deflation to both bonds and stocks.

The chart of world government bonds, BWX, shows that the world governments have lost their sovereign debt seigniorage.

The European Financials, EUFN, in addition to the Interest Rate on the US 30 Year Interest Rate, $TYX, are the current focal points of the global currency war, which started November 5, 2010 as the global currency traders have established global corporatism and themselves as sovereign over humanity, by calling the world’s currencies major currencies, DBV, and emerging market currencies, CEW, lower against the US Dollar, $USD, causing debt deflation in both stocks, ACWI, and bonds, AGG.

I believe that out of intensifying bond deflation by bond vigilantes calling sovereign debt, BWX, lower and bank debt interest rates higher, and greater competitive currency deflation at the hands of currency traders, the seigniorage of the European periphery countries will fail, and that they will default on their sovereign debt.

Eventually I believe a Global Seignior and Global Sovereign will arise and institute unified regulation of banking globally, this as referred to, in the James Politi and Gillian Tett Financial Times article, NY Fed Chief In Push For Global Bank Framework, and that the Seignior will oversee all matters of debt and credit, and implement a universal currency system, that is a global currency system, that will likely first be used by Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece and Spain, as they will have lost their sovereign debt seigniorage and the ECB will have stopped buying their debt.

Perhaps Robert Rubin, Co-Chairman of the Council On Foreign Relation, the CFR, or European Council President Herman Van Rompuy will rise to be the world’s Sovereign and institute global governance as he said November 9, 2010:  ”We have together to fight the danger of a new euro-scepticism. … This is no longer the monopoly of a few countries. In every member state, there are people who believe their country can survive alone in the globalised world … It is more than an illusion: it is a lie!”, reports OpenEurope in November 10, 2010 Daily Briefing.

One can read the full EU Press release of his speech here. And Mark Alexander provides the reference to the Daily Telegraph report: Euroscepticism leads to war and a rising tide of nationalism is the European Union’s “biggest enemy”, Herman Van Rompuy, the president of Europe has told a Berlin audience

Related Reading:

1) … Bill Cash MP writes The European Union Economic Governance proposals raise questions of sovereignty

2) … The Freedom Association writes: Yesterday, the Financial Secretary to the Treasury, Mark Hoban, moved a motion in the House of Commons on the subject of European Union Economic Governance. The House of Commons was asked to take note of several European Union Documents following the recent European Council meeting that took place on 28-29 October 2010.  He insisted that none of the conclusions of the EU Economic Governance Task Force chaired by Herman Van Rompuy “encroaches on Parliament’s economic sovereignty” and as regard to the plans for macro-economic surveillance, no sanctions will apply to the UK.

Roger Helmer MEP, former Chairman of The Freedom Association, had the following to say on the EU Budget and the EU’s economic governance: Yesterday, several MPs refused to accept this further transfer of power to the EU and defied the whip (some, of the 2010 intake, for the first time). In total, 25 Conservative MPs voted No, along with a clutch of DUP MPs and rebel Labour backbenchers. The following is a list of those who voted against the transfer of more power to Brussels: Steve Baker, Brian Binley, Peter Bone, Andrew Bridgen, Douglas Carswell, Bill Cash, Christopher Chope, James Clappison, Philip Davies, David Davis, Richard Drax, James Gray, Gordon Henderson, Philip Hollobone, Julian Lewis, Jason McCartney, David Nuttall, Andrew Percy, Dominic Raab, Mark Reckless, John Redwood, Richard Shepherd, Sir Peter Tapsell, Andrew Turner, Martin Vickers. The Freedom Association would like to congratulate all these MPs for taking a stand and defending Britain’s economic freedom, despite the pressure from party whips.

3) … Jonathan Isaby in ConservativeHome article 25 Backbenchers,  Including Several First-Time Rebels, Defy The Whip In Latest Europe Rebellion writes Angela Merkel made it clear that economic governance should apply to all EU states, not just the eurozone. Barroso declared with reference to economic governance: “Europe must show it is more than 27 different national solutions”. He said 27, not 16. It is clear that his intention is that the new arrangements apply to the UK. Van Rompuy went out of his way to warn against creating what he called “dividing lines” between 27 member states and 16 eurozone countries. What were clear assurances to be welcomed and embraced in early summer had, by the onset of autumn, become dividing lines to be done away with.

“Paragraph 34 of the Van Rompuy report states that there will be a new legal framework “applying to all EU Member States”. Can the Minister explain what part of “all” excludes Britain? Regardless of paragraphs 35 and 39, or reference to protocol 15 of any treaty, such wording creates ambivalence at the very least. It suggests that EU institutions will now be able to legislate in areas of UK national competence in which they could not previously legislate. Has the precedent now been set? Is the field occupied? Is not the stage set for the day when some other Minister returns from Brussels to explain to the House how we have been sadly outvoted?

“So who is right? Ministers who assure us, or Eurocrats who do not? How can we explain the differences between Ministers’ assurances and what lies in the small print of what is before the House today? At best, this can be explained by sloppy drafting by officials, but if that is the case, why are we employing sloppy drafters to negotiate matters of such fundamental importance? Are those officials the ones on whom we will depend to turn the contents of the Van Rompuy report into the treaty changes? I cannot support the motion, as it will mean a further transfer of powers from this country to Brussels. I urge colleagues to oppose it.”

In the event, 25 Conservative MPs voted in the No lobby to oppose the approval of the documents, along with a clutch of DUP MPs and rebel Labour backbenchers (Conservative and Lib Dem MPs were whipped to vote in favour, the Labour line was to abstain).

4) AmpedStatus relates in article We Need A Rally To Restore The Rule Of Law And/Or The Constitution, that Ben Bernanke has committed a coup with his QE program: “The Federal Reserve represents global banking interests who have overstepped their legal authority. Their Quantitative Easing program is an explicit violation of the Constitution. By deliberately devaluing the dollar and causing the price of basic necessities to rise, the Federal Reserve is, as a matter of strategic policy, sacrificing a significant percentage of the US population for the benefit of a few global bankers. In the process, they are also igniting a global currency war that threatens the security of the American people. In clear terms, the Federal Reserve’s actions represent a declaration of war against the people of the United States.”

5) May29.org in article Obama Pushes Idea Of New World Order While In India relates the report from The Economic Collapse and relates: Although it received very little coverage in the mainstream media, Barack Obama made some comments about globalism during his speech in Mumbai, India that were very eye-opening.  As he was discussing the new realities of world trade in 2010, Obama warned against “those who see globalization as a threat” and he spoke of the “integrated world” in which we all now live.  But is merging the entire globe into a one world economy, a one world financial system and a one world labor market really the best thing for the American people?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: