AUDIO: ex Rich List writer Kevin Cahill on hidden wealth of EU NATO Rothschild bankster dynasty (hr2) http://politicsthisweek.wordpress.com/2014/05/15/bcfms-weekly-politics -show-with-tony-gosling/ _________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DbL7UsLZ7Lc
'When the British Cabinet issued the Balfour Declaration in 1917, it was over the strenuous objections of its only Jewish member, Edwin Montagu. But non-Jews, including many anti-Semites, tipped the scales. They saw Zionism as a way to advance British imperialism and the Masonic "New World Order."
rodin wrote:
Victor Rothschild - WWII puppeteer?
Quote:
Victor Rothschild held many jobs that served to disguise his true role which, I suspect, was that of a member of the Illuminati Grand Council. (The Illuminati represent the highest rank of Freemasonry.) He was not a lowly agent. He probably gave orders to people like Winston Churchill, FDR and Stalin.
For example, he ensured that the USSR supported the establishment of the State of Israel. "He knew the proper back-channels to reach decision-makers in Moscow," a KGB Colonel told Perry. "Let us just say he got things done. You only did that if you reached the top. He was very persuasive." (176)
When you control the money supply, you can be very persuasive, as Americans have learned.
The above from an article by Henry Makow, a geezer I have some time for. The Rothschild dynasty has certainly been at the core of the central banking scam that has lead us to the precipice of abject slavery.
Makow goes on to say
Quote:
The fact that Rothschild was protected until his death suggests this is a ruling class conspiracy. According to Greg Hallett, Anthony Blunt, a fellow spy, was an illegitimate son of George V, half-brother and look-alike to Edward VIII, the Duke of Windsor. Until his exposure in 1964, Blunt was Knighted and Curator of the Queen's art collection. He received immunity from prosecution in exchange for his confession.
Quote:
Many believe this conspiracy is "Jewish." Certainly Zionism, Neo Conservatism and Communism (in all its forms) play an important part. But consider this: the current Lord Jacob Rothschild, the Fourth Baron Rothschild is Victor's son by his first wife Barbara Hutchinson, a non-Jew who converted. In Jewish law, Jacob Rothschild is not a Jew. He married a non-Jew, Serena Mary Dunn and has four children. Clearly organized Jewry is merely a convenient instrument of the NWO agenda.
By the way, Meyer Amschel, Victor's only son by his second marriage, also to a non-Jew, 'committed suicide' in 1996.
Any comments on the bit in bold? It has a whiff of 'methinks he protesteth too much'...
Nat Rothschild
The Bumi affair? Sounds like something out of Dickens
Good guess, but you're thinking of Jarndyce and Jarndyce, the complicated and interminable court case at the centre of Bleak House. It certainly bears a striking resemblance to the interminable "Bumi affair" that's given its primary author, the banking scion Nathaniel Rothschild, more press coverage than horsemeat of late and which nobody really understands.
Calling it the "Bumi affair" makes it sound racy rather than complicated though.
Well it's complicated and racy too. Feuding billionaires, whistleblowers, mass boardroom resignations, alleged computer hacking, claims that $1bn (£6.4m) has mysteriously gone missing, that kind of thing.
Break it down for me. Who or what is Bumi?
Bumi is listed on the London Stock Exchange and its business comprises two stakes in Indonesian coal-mining businesses. It owns 85 per cent of Berau Coal, a coal miner based in the Indonesian province of East Kalimantan, as well as 29 per cent of the similarly sounding Bumi Resources, a holding company with coal-mining interests across Indonesia.
Who is behind Bumi?
As you've probably guessed by now, Nat Rothschild, of the Rothschild banking dynasty, is one of the co-founders. Indonesia's Bakrie brothers are collectively the other co-founder. There are three of them and, although they're not well known here, they're big in Indonesia. In fact, the eldest, 66-year old Aburizal, is expected to win the Indonesian presidential election next year. The other brothers are Indra and Nirwan (the one who branded it the "Bumi affair").
So why are the co-founders locking horns?
Mr Rothschild feels a bit of a Charlie because in November 2010 he did a deal with the Bakrie brothers without a huge amount of scrutiny. This saw him merging the $1bn-plus cash mountain he had raised from trusting investors with some of the trio's Indonesian coal-mining interests to create a company called Bumi with a lot of cash to spend. The basic premise of the deal was that Mr Rothschild could get the assets cheaply because Indonesia's dubious reputation for corporate governance left them "undervalued". He would then confer respectability (and value) on them through a London listing and the Rothschild name.
Sounds good to me
It sounded good to a lot of people and initially Mr Rothschild, an 18 per cent shareholder in Bumi, was able to magically "unlock" the value of the coal businesses to the point where only last May his personal fortune was valued at £1bn. It seemed as if 41-year old Nat, the latest in a long line of Rothschild financiers, had transformed his image from a playboy to the most savvy mover and shaker of his lineage.
I have a good nose for a but – and I feel the mother of all buts coming
Bingo. It wasn't long before Mr Rothschild decided he'd bought a share in a corrupt business and suspected that about $1bn had gone missing from the Indonesian coal businesses in which Bumi has a stake. This has prompted a series of increasingly hostile exchanges between Mr Rothschild, the Bakrie brothers and the Bumi board, not to mention an investigation by the Takeover Panel. Meanwhile, Bumi is working with Britain's Serious Fraud Office and the Indonesian authorities to try to get the bottom of what happened.
What do the Bakries say to all this?
They have strongly denied any involvement in financial irregularities. However, Bumi has confirmed that a forensic audit carried out by PricewaterhouseCoopers determined that hundreds of millions of dollars of assets are unaccounted for.
So this thing could drag on for a while
Absolutely. Tomorrow promises to be the greatest showdown of all. Mr Rothschild has made a proposal that is audacious even by his standards. He wants to oust 12 of the 14 people on Bumi's board, including chairman Samin Tan, and put his own team in there, with "his truly" as one of the directors. The outcome of the vote is too close to call. But whatever it is, there are likely to be plenty more twists and turns. For a start, Mr Rothschild said that if he wins he will sue the the Bakries for $1.5bn, while the Bakries have said they will "commence litigation [and] immediately call a new extraordinary meeting to appoint new directors". If Mr Rothschild loses, he has pledged to continue his war.
OK, Mr Rothschild may have lost more than $1.5bn of investors' money but he's done well in business otherwise, right?
Yes and no. He does have some track record of making a profit, with the Atticus hedge fund of which he was co-chairman making stellar returns in the early years. But this success has been clouded by the fund's closure in 2009 as the financial crisis took its toll, as well as a share price fall of more than a fifth following the flotation of Genel, the oil company run by former BP chief executive Tony Hayward, in which he is a key backer.
So the Bumi affair is "make or break" for him?
Well not "make" as such, but certainly "break" – a point not lost on Mr Rothschild himself, whose PR machine has unleashed an unprecedented number of emails in recent weeks to further his cause. Whatever happens now, after his fall from grace in the past few months, he is unlikely ever to be able to command the same respect again. There are some who say he will never raise another dollar from anybody. But, if he can push his plan through and improve Bumi's fortunes, he may just claw back enough to carry on in business – but it's a big if.
It's good Mr Rothschild is determined to retrieve funds for his shareholders but isn't he going about it a bit like a bull in a china shop?
A bit, yes. Sir Julian Horn-Smith, the former Vodafone deputy chief executive who is now Bumi's senior independent director, lamented what he called Mr Rothschild's "extraordinary demonstration of a confrontational style which does not create value for shareholders". Also, his apparent ability to bear a grudge could further put off potential backers in the future.
Rothschild, Mandelson and yacht spring to mind
Yes they do. In 2008, Mr Rothschild famously invited the now Chancellor George Osborne to a party that he and Peter Mandelson were attending on Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska's yacht in Corfu. That encounter ended in a glorious falling out after Mr Rothschild wrote a letter to The Times claiming that Mr Osborne tried to solicit a donation from Mr Deripaska while on the yacht – an accusation the latter vigorously denied. His letter was a retaliation against his prep school, Oxford and Bullingdon Club friend, Mr Osborne, whom he blamed for "dripping poison" to the newspapers about Gordon Brown, then Prime Minister.
Is there anything else I should be aware of?
Having declared at the weekend that his proposal was a shoo-in, Mr Rothschild has taken a couple of knocks this week, which leave the outcome genuinely too close to call. On Monday three investors thought to oppose his plan bought a 10 per cent stake in Bumi and yesterday Standard Life, thought to be a key ally of the scion, announced its opposition.
You mentioned Jarndyce and Jarndyce earlier. Does that have anything to teach the Bumi protagonists?
It just might. Dickens' fictional case centred on an inheritance and dragged on for so many generations that the legal costs eventually devoured the estate they were fighting over. A cautionary tale indeed.
By Andrew Critchlow, Commodities editor6:03PM BST 08 Jun 2015
In late 2010, Nat Rothschild’s cash vehicle Vallar essentially stumped up $3bn (£1.96bn) to create an Indonesian coal mining venture under the name of Bumi, in partnership with the country’s powerful Bakrie family.
The move came at a time where there appeared to be no limit to the world’s demand for industrial commodities. The decision to list in London gave investors more exposure to the unfolding boom in Asia’s demand for raw materials which saw thermal coal prices trading at $130 per tonne by the beginning of 2011.
Such was demand for shares that Vallar easily raised over $1bn when it initially floated.
Today, however, a tonne of the same grade coal that is used in power stations across China costs just $63 and investors are running away from mining stocks in their droves.
And, almost five years on from the start of Mr Rothschild’s bid to become a mining mogul in his own right - and share the spoils of Asia’s once unquenchable thirst for coal - his ambitions appear to have been left in tatters.
On Monday, he finally walked away from the Indonesian venture, now known as Asia Resource Minerals (ARMS), having lost a small fortune (in the region of £100m) along the way. He disclosed that his investment vehicle NR Holdings had accepted an improved offer of 56p per share from Asia Coal Energy Ventures (ACE), for its remaining stake in ARMS, valuing the company at just $200m (£131m).
Mr Rothschild’s entry into Indonesia’s mining industry in 2010 arguably coincided with the top of the so-called commodities “super-cycle”, when China’s demand for coal was surging ahead. Investors will now be hoping that his exit could signal the slump has finally come to an end.
Following the news, the London financier was scathing about his involvement with the Indonesians and what had morphed into ARMS.
“It has been a very difficult experience,” said Mr Rothschild from Switzerland. “It’s a bloody good outcome all things considered.”
The deal with ACE – which is backed by Argyle Street Management and the Sinarmas group – will at least allow bond holders to recover all of their money even if shareholders are left to lick their wounds. The Sinarmas group is owned by Indonesian business tycoon Eka Tjipta Widjaja.
Mr Rothschild argues that the demise of Bumi and its successor ARMS had more to do with the Bakrie family and alleged corporate wrongdoing than the collapse of coal and commodity prices.
He told The Telegraph he remains interested in the sector and that some of the money from exiting ARMS will be used to invest in a “basket” of coal assets outside Indonesia where he has no plans of returning.
Coal prices are at multi-year lows
“I would have been happy to have waited another five years for the coal price to rebound,” said Mr Rothschild who is also a major shareholder in Genel Energy, the Iraq-focused oil company which is led by former BP boss Tony Hayward. However, he was clear that he won’t be venturing back into Indonesia’s resources industry in the future.
Trouble started when shares in Bumi were suspended in 2013 after the company was ordered by its auditors to verify that contracts at a majority-owned Indonesian company did not contain hidden liabilities. Later, Mr Rothschild fell out publicly with the Bakries and led the board in trying to engineer a split with the family. A separation was finally agreed the following year, which led to the company being renamed ARMS.
Mr Rothschild has spent the last year battling for control with ARMS other major major shareholder ACE. Their new deal, which will see NR Holdings sell its 17.2pc remaining stake in the company, will mean that equity investors have recovered around $700m since June 2014.
“Through his efforts and close cooperation and support from the ARMS board, additional value has been obtained for ARMS shareholders through the increased price of our offer,” said ACE in a statement. “We look forward to working together with Mr Rothschild and the ARMS board in order to conclude our offer successfully and to resolve the current situation at Berau in Indonesia.”
Berau is one of Indonesia’s largest open-cut coal mines and a major supplier of the fuel to China. Berau Coal Energy - which aims to produce over 26m tonnes of coal this year - had been at the centre of the tussle for control of ARMS, its controlling shareholder.
“We also look forward to restoring the long term prospects of the ARMS group after the restructuring proposed by ACE,” the company added.
However, reviving the fortunes of this Indonesian coal mining giant will be tough, with few experts predicting a significant turnaround in coal prices in the near future. _________________ www.lawyerscommitteefor9-11inquiry.org www.rethink911.org www.patriotsquestion911.com www.actorsandartistsfor911truth.org www.mediafor911truth.org www.pilotsfor911truth.org www.mp911truth.org www.ae911truth.org www.rl911truth.org www.stj911.org www.v911t.org www.thisweek.org.uk www.abolishwar.org.uk www.elementary.org.uk www.radio4all.net/index.php/contributor/2149 http://utangente.free.fr/2003/media2003.pdf
"The maintenance of secrets acts like a psychic poison which alienates the possessor from the community" Carl Jung
https://37.220.108.147/members/www.bilderberg.org/phpBB2/
Chancellor George Osborne is to begin selling the government’s 80% stake in Royal Bank of Scotland at a loss, saying any further delay could jeopardise the economy.
In his annual Mansion House speech last night, Osborne said that a “decision point” has been reached, signalling an initial sale of shares in the bank in the coming months.
“The longer we wait, the higher the price the whole economy will pay,” Osborne said, citing Bank of England governor Mark Carney’s comments that a sale would promote financial stability and a more competitive banking sector.
The Chancellor said his decision is also backed by Nathaniel Rothschild, commissioned by the Treasury to review a potential sell-off of the bank.
Rothschild’s review said an initial “small disposal” of shares would benefit all parties and improve the “marketability” of the government’s remaining holding.
“Sending a strong signal that RBS is on the road to normality may also bring further benefits to the bank and to the government as a shareholder,” the review said.
Carney, in correspondence with Osborne published yesterday evening, said it is “in the public interest for the government to begin to return RBS to private ownership”.
RBS has suffered seven consecutive annual losses and Q1 2015 results suggest another year in the red.
The government’s stake in the bank is currently valued at £32bn, well below the £45bn injected into by Gordon Brown’s Labour government at the height of the financial crisis in 2008.
Rothschild’s report suggested fees paid by the bank to the Treasury since 2008 would reduce the loss to £7.2bn at current prices. The profit made on the Treasury’s reduction in its Lloyds Banking Group stake would also offset the taxpayer’s losses on RBS.
But critics argue other factors, such as the cost of capital involved in holding a £45bn stake over five years, should also be taken into account.
Osborne’s Mansion House speech also revealed a further £500m Lloyds stake sale, which lowers the Treasury's holding below 18%, and a halving of the government’s 30% position in Royal Mail. The latter sale was completed this morning.
He remained tight-lipped over the future of the government’s bank levy, however, despite reports that the levy could be restructured.
Throughout its distinguished history, the Rothschild family has sensibly stuck to the idea of letting the money do the talking. Even when things got tough, as they often did in the shape of dynastic feuds, swindles, wars and untimely deaths, the great banking clan maintained a seemly silence.
Then along came Twitter, with its irresistible ability to saturate the whole of humanity with your deepest, private thoughts. A few quick clicks and anyone could play a part in the slow death of decorum. At first, the format looked better suited to low-grade celebrities, but last week we had the sorry spectacle of a husband and wife from two of Britain’s grandest families – the Rothschilds and the Goldsmiths – carpet-bombing the Twitterverse with details of their marital woes.
First to let loose was handsome Old Etonian Ben Goldsmith, 31, who married 29-year-old heiress Kate Rothschild in 2003’s “Society Wedding of the Year”. Sadly, the Goldsmiths recently broke up over Kate’s close relationship with Jay Electronica, a dishevelled American rapper described by the music critic of Los Angeles Weekly as “sounding much better than his name would suggest”.
ADVERTISEMENT
Ben, the youngest son of the late billionaire Sir James Goldsmith, and his socially dexterous wife Lady Annabel, took to Twitter to attack his wife’s behaviour – particularly in calling the police after a row – as “appalling”. He then scoffed at her decision to hire a public relations company to “fix her reputation”, suggesting that it was “a bit late, surely? How about focusing on her devastated children?”
At which point it got nasty. Record producer Kate hit back on her Twitter feed, saying: “Ben in a rational mood would be the first to say that my devotion to the children is unshakeable. I am with them now as I always am.”
She added: “…none of you have any idea what I went through along with my husband. Then we separated for a while, anger and bitterness following that time led to a very one-sided story being deliberately released in order to shame and hurt me.”
As for Mr Electronica, a 35-year-old from New Orleans, with such hits as B------ and Drugs to his credit, Kate wrote: “He saved my life in many ways, and I am eternally grateful to him.”
Although the couple have since declared an end to their public badmouthing, the question of why such privileged, programmed-for-discretion types would think of playing out their break-up on Twitter in the first place lingers on.
The Goldsmiths, for all their flamboyance, have long tended to take a dim view of anyone knowing too much about their inner family affairs. Last year, Ben’s older brother, the Conservative MP Zac Goldsmith, demanded new laws to prevent sites like Twitter dodging court injunctions to dish the dirt on the private lives of well-known people. Legislation was necessary, he claimed, “to distinguish between what is in the public interest, and what is merely of prurient interest to some of the public”. He and his ex-wife had earlier taken out an injunction to prevent publication of their private emails.
Then there’s big sister, Jemima, a fan of Hacked Off, the pro-privacy pressure group, fronted by her ex-boyfriend, Hugh Grant. Last year Jemima got into a flap when someone on Twitter alleged that she was behind a super-injunction to prevent the publication of photographs showing her in an embrace with TV loudmouth Jeremy Clarkson.
Perhaps the Goldsmiths’ concept of discretion was learnt at the knee of their rascally father, Sir James, who – despite openly maintaining a mistress and second household in Paris – took his privacy seriously enough to once perform a “citizen’s arrest” on a newspaper reporter who asked what he considered a personal question.
Things haven’t been so different over at the Rothschilds. Starting out as a down-on-its-luck family of mid-18th-century German street traders, they practically invented the modern banking industry and became, as Niall Ferguson puts it in his best-selling book, The House of Rothschild, “the richest family in all of history”.
The Rothschilds didn’t manage this by deliberately publicising their embarrassments, or dishing out soap operatic tittle-tattle to the masses. Headlines and confessionals are not the Rothschild way, and it is no secret that the family’s senior ranks are dismayed by the high-profile and ultimately unsuccessful libel action pursued earlier this year by Kate’s cousin, Nathaniel Rothschild, against a newspaper which, he claimed, had accused him of improper links to a Russian oligarch.
What is going on? Psychologists suggest that Twitter has a particular appeal to people with limited self-esteem, in that it gives them recognition and a theoretically infinite platform for their thoughts. “We live in the most narcissistic age ever,” says David Lewis, a cognitive neuropsychologist at the University of Sussex. “Using Twitter suggests a level of insecurity, whereby, unless people recognise you, you cease to exist.”
Twitter, according to this analysis, flatters the idea that other people actually care what you think, and about the minutiae of your everyday life.
The Goldsmiths may be a social cut above the fray, but when it comes to getting even they aren’t very different from the likes of actress Demi Moore and her toy-boy husband Ashton Kutcher, who, after years of trumpeting the blissfulness of their relationship on Twitter, ended it with a series of bitter tweets. Or singer John Mayer, who, with exquisite irony, had to inform his Twitter followers that he had been dumped by actress Jennifer Aniston for spending too much time on Twitter.
On Friday, Ben and Kate finally called a truce. “It is a matter of regret to us,” they said in a joint statement, “that at a time when our emotions, and those of our friends, have run high, things have been said in public which should have been kept private. We accept our full share of responsibility for this.”
It wasn’t quite over, though. Mrs Goldsmith pointedly changed her Twitter account back to her maiden name. Someone has to have the last word.
Follow @telegraphtech
RELATED ARTICLES
'I'll come see you', says Goldsmith’s love rival
Divorce for Goldsmith-Rothschild dynasties
Diamond Jubilee: Starbucks apologises to Irish followers over Twitter gaffe _________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
Oh Very close to criminals
Skip to navigationSkip to content
HSBC appoints Rothschild for restructuring of private banking arm
Revamp to include selling portfolios of riskier clients and shrinking lender’s global footprint
A Swiss national flag flies over Lake Geneva
https://next.ft.com/content/fb8b0bc2-a717-11e5-9700-2b669a5aeb83
DECEMBER 20, 2015 by: Emma Dunkley, Retail Banking Correspondent
HSBC has appointed advisers to spur the final phase of its private banking restructuring, after its Swiss unit came under heavy fire earlier this year for helping rich customers dodge taxes.
Europe’s biggest bank has appointed Rothschild to help manage the restructure, which involves selling portfolios of riskier clients and shrinking its global footprint, said people familiar with the process.
The move to reduce the private bank comes after Stuart Gulliver, chief executive of HSBC, unveiled plans in the summer to help simplify the global group and focus on core markets, including Asia.
KPMG is also working with HSBC to help it retrench and cut the geographical scope of the private banking unit, to match the scale of the retail and corporate divisions, one source said.
As part of Mr Gulliver’s broader strategy, HSBC is shrinking the investment bank and commercial division, has sold its lossmaking Brazil operations and is attempting to exit from its Turkish business.
“Gulliver has a sword of Damocles over his head,” said one person familiar with the planned divestment, referring to the US deferred prosecution agreement imposed on the bank over sanctions and money-laundering offences. “He has too many risks to manage. Getting out of high-end banking would help ease his load.”
Although HSBC’s private bank is profitable — with profit before tax of $261m in the first nine months of this year, down from $554m the year before — it has been plagued by high-profile conduct issues and it now falls outside of the bank’s core strategy.
HSBC came under scrutiny at the start of the year after its Swiss private banking arm was exposed as having run accounts for tax-dodging clients.
Secret files on HSBC were leaked to news organisations, alleging that its private bank provided large, untraceable cash bundles in foreign currencies to customers, and colluded with them to conceal accounts from tax authorities.
Stuart Gulliver, group chief executive officer of HSBC Holdings Plc, pauses during a news conference in Hong Kong, China, on Tuesday, Aug. 2, 2011. HSBC, which plans to eliminate 30,000 jobs globally by the end of 2013 to curtail surging salary costs, said a
HSBC has already started to shrink its global private banking division. It announced in October an agreement to sell its Bermuda private banking and trust operations, as part of unwinding the $1.3bn acquisition of the Bank of Bermuda in 2003.
It sold $12.5bn of Swiss private banking assets last year to Liechtenstein’s LGT Group, cutting the number of countries in which it has customers from more than 150 to about 70.
Mr Gulliver has come under mounting pressure to deliver on cost cuts. The bank has suffered a drop in revenue every year since he took over as HSBC chief executive in 2011.
The chief executive promised in June to cut another $5bn of costs by 2017, as part of a new “pivot to Asia” strategy aimed at cutting its underperforming business units in Europe and the Americas.
The bank is also undertaking a review of its domicile, scrutinising whether to move its headquarters out of the UK.
Hong Kong — HSBC’s home before 1992 — has long been assumed the bank’s first choice of domicile. However, more recent conversations within the bank have centred on the US as a viable alternative.
Additional reporting by Patrick Jenkins _________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
£170m Rothschild to wed Page 3 Elle: Banking heir Nat stuns high society by naming the day with glamour girl who dated Coogan
By Charlotte Griffiths, Diary Editor For The Mail On Sunday
00:00 17 Apr 2016, updated 03:25 17 Apr 2016
He's the banking millionaire who over the years has been linked to Vogue cover girls, fashion muses and even the great-great-granddaughter of Kaiser Wilhelm II.
But now Nat Rothschild has surprised his high society friends by popping the question… to a former topless model.
The 44-year-old financier – said to be worth £170 million – is to marry glamour girl Loretta Basey, the ex-girlfriend of comedian and actor Steve Coogan.
The couple became engaged in December and will marry later this year close to Nat’s home in the upmarket Swiss ski resort of Klosters.
A week later they will travel back to Britain for a wedding party – with just 100 people invited – at a friend’s house in Wiltshire.
Until recently, Loretta, 25, went by the name Elle Basey, and posed topless on Page 3 more than 20 times, and nearly naked for lads’ mags.
She also appeared on the Sky Sports show Soccer AM wearing little except an Arsenal shirt. As a child she played Rosie Webster in the ITV soap Coronation Street.
A year ago, Old Etonian and Oxford graduate Nat was seemingly looking for love via dating app Happn.
So I’m very happy to report that he has fallen for Loretta, who accompanied him to the Unicef Halloween ball in London last year while wearing a skimpy leopard-print leotard, lion tamer’s jacket and fishnet tights, and wielding a whip.
It marks a dramatic turnaround for Loretta, who has left her topless modelling days behind her and changed her first name. She now works for private jet company Advanced Air Management.
One source tells me: ‘She is very down to earth, and from an ordinary family, so it’s quite a contrast for Nat. But she’s certainly a lovely girl.’
Nat’s formidable 79-year-old father Jacob, the 4th Baron Rothschild, is believed to have met his future daughter-in-law and liked her.
Loaded: 0%Progress: 0%00
Nat has been married before, to Annabelle Neilson, the best friend of supermodel Kate Moss and a muse of the late fashion designer Alexander McQueen.
They tied the knot in Las Vegas in 1995, divorcing three years later.
More recently he dated Vogue model Eliza Cummings and Princess Florence von Preussen, the great-great-granddaughter of Kaiser Wilhelm II.
Nat counts Chelsea Football Club owner Roman Abramovich and former BP boss Tony Hayward among his pals, while his political contacts include Peter Mandelson and Chancellor George Osborne – the pair first met at top prep school Colet Court and at Oxford they were both members of the notorious Bullingdon Club.
In October 2008 it was revealed that Mandelson and Russian tycoon Oleg Deripaska had met when they both went to Corfu to attend a party hosted by Nat.
Osborne was also at the event and Nat later alleged wrongly that the then Shadow Chancellor tried to solicit a donation from the oligarch for the Conservative Party. _________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 18335 Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
Posted: Fri Apr 29, 2016 12:32 am Post subject:
Is this the one you're after?
UK's super-rich hide wealth, cultivate aura of 'invisibility'
Interview with Kevin Cahill, journalist and author of 'Who Owns Britain', and former joint compiler, with Philip Beresford, of The Times Rich List. The Times Rich List is discussed and how it only covers the rich with visible assets - not the many who hide their wealth for example in tax havens. Also: police and the Mafia; land holdings; home ownership; The nineteenth century Irish Land League and their success in overturning the power of absentee landowners in Southern Ireland. land value taxation; home ownership and reduction in poverty; help to buy; UK billionaires and poverty in Wales; financial recovery built on sand. Fracking and the Rothschilds and Rockefellers investing with Dick Cheney in Genie Oil and Gas - The Wealth Fund and snapping up companies for peanuts, Martin looks at the possible fracking bubble, Ukraine. Clip from YouTube film 'The Rothschild Myths' purporting to explain the hidden wealth and ownerships of the Rothschild banking dynasty, including Reuters business information and news service, Associated Press and controlling interests in both the London Gold market and Royal Dutch Shell.
http://www.radio4all.net/index.php/program/75646
bob wrote:
Hi, the link posted above for the radio interview with Kevin Cahill is down...
Yeah that's the one, thanks Tony. I was surprised by Kevin's opinion on some things, and his response to the 'Rothschild Myths' video was very interesting.
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 18335 Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
Posted: Sat May 14, 2016 1:14 pm Post subject:
Rothschild Bank Now Under Criminal Investigation Over Missing $4 Billion in Global Corruption Probe
Jay Syrmopoulos May 12, 2016 5 Comments
Last year the veil of invincibility seemingly came off the secretive Rothschild banking empire, as Baron David de Rothschild and his company the Rothschild Financial Services Group were indicted by French prosecutors for allegedly defrauding British pensioners in a scheme that saw large sums of money embezzled.
Only two months ago, we reported on the Swiss branch of the Edmond de Rothschild Group announcing that they were the target of a French criminal probe “regarding a business relationship managed by a former employee.”
Now, the Luxembourg unit of Rothschild banking empire is being investigated by the Luxembourg state prosecutors office — alleged to have sent hundreds of millions of dollars to an account at a bank in Luxembourg that originated from 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB).
The fund, 1MBD, was established by Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak in 2009 as a government investment fund. There have been widespread accusations of corruption surrounding Razak after $1 billion dollars in deposits into his personal bank accounts were revealed. The deposits totaled hundreds of millions of dollars more than had previously been exposed by probes into state fund 1MDB, according to the Wall Street Journal.
The Luxembourg investigation stems from an international probe of money that may have flowed from the Malaysian government investment fund, which is at the center of various worldwide corruption probes.
According to a report in the WSJ:
The Luxembourg unit of Edmond de Rothschild Group, a private bank that manages money on behalf of wealthy clients, said it is “cooperating” with an official investigation of money that may have flowed from a Malaysian government investment fund at the center of various world-wide corruption probes…
The Luxembourg investigation widens probes of 1MDB already under way by authorities in Switzerland, Malaysia, Singapore, Hong Kong and Abu Dhabi. Swiss authorities said in January that 1MDB-related losses from misappropriation could reach $4 billion. The Luxembourg prosecutor said its case was connected to the investigation in Switzerland.
1MDB was created to invest in local energy and real-estate projects to boost the Malaysian economy. The fund amassed $11 billion in debt which it has struggled to repay. Last July,The Wall Street Journal reported that almost $700 million was transferred to Mr. Najib’s bank accounts via a web of entities, money which investigators believe originated with 1MDB. 1MDB has denied sending money to Mr. Najib’s accounts and denied wrongdoing and said it is cooperating with probes
“Edmond de Rothschild Europe is actively cooperating in the judicial proceedings,” a spokeswoman for the Edmond de Rothschild Group told the WSJ.
The Edmond de Rothschild Group oversees roughly $164 billion in assets, according to Bloomberg. The private bank and asset management firm to the elite was founded by Edmond de Rothschild in Paris in 1953. Edmond’s son Benjamin de Rothschild succeeded his father as head of the group in 1997. Last year, Benjamin appointed his wife, Ariane, chairwoman of the executive committee. The Swiss unit traces its roots to the acquisition of Banque Privee in Geneva in 1965.
But the history of the Rothschild banking empire stretches far further back in time.
According to The Richest:
The Rothschild Family as we know it is descended from Mayer Amschel Rothschild, who was born in what is now Frankfurt, Germany. The son of Jewish moneychanger and trader Amschel Moses Rothschild, Mayer Amschel Rothschild was the fourth of 8 children, and went on to establish a huge international banking empire.
Through his 5 sons, Mayer Amschel Rothschild expanded his banking business, which was founded in the 1760s, to international areas and, as such, managed to bequeath his huge wealth, unlike many rich members of the Jewish community at the time. Mayer Amschel’s 5 sons were each stationed at one of the major European financial centres, one in Frankfurt, London, Naples, Vienna, and Paris.
This passing on of Mayer Amschel’s wealth and business meant that his sons could continue to build on the foundations of their father’s success. In the 19th century the Rothschild Family were at the height of their powers, and were known all around the financial world. Their great fortune and ingenious business minds meant that they carried great power during this time. They utilised this power by affecting some very significant events in human history in order to profit greatly from it. This included backing the British forces with huge sums of money during the Napoleonic Wars (more on that later) and funding Brazil’s claim for independence from Portugal.
The Rothschild banking dynasty is a family line that has been accused of pulling the political strings of many different governments through their control of various economic systems throughout the world. Historically, there is ample evidence to show that the family has used insider trading to bilk money from both private and public funds.
Towards the end of the Napoleonic Wars, in 1813, Nathan Mayer Rothschild saw Napoleon’s war efforts as a threat to his business practices and decided to step in to help defeat the French conqueror. He became the most important financier of the British war effort pouring the equivalent of $900 million dollars in today’s dollars in 1815 alone. The defeat of Napoleon, and subsequent ending of the Napoleonic Wars, which started in 1803 and raged throughout the continent for 12 years before finally coming to an end in 1815.
During the Battle of Waterloo in the Napoleonic wars, Nathan Rothschild was responsible for one of the oldest cases of “insider trading,” which led to the Rothschild family robbing a whole nation blind. When the battle of Waterloo took place in 1815, horse messengers were the fastest method of communicating information. The Rothschild’s took advantage of this by having their own spies on the frontlines of the battle that would then expedite the information to the family faster than the messengers used by the military.
When the British won the battle, Nathan Rothschild, was, of course, the first to know, and he immediately went to the stock exchange and started selling stocks while putting out the rumor that the French had won the war. This created a panic on the floor of the stock exchange and investors all over England began frantically selling their stocks. With the price of all stocks plummeting Rothschild was able to buy out the whole English market for a fraction of its cost. When word returned that the English had actually been victorious, the value of the market soared, and overnight Nathan Rothschild expanded his family’s wealth and cemented their position as one of the richest, and most influential families in the world.
Although the Rothschild family now keeps a very low public profile, they still have significant business operations across a wide spectrum of sectors. While you may not find any one particular Rothschild on the Forbes’ most rich list, the family is estimated to control $1 trillion dollars in assets across the globe, thus having a strong voice across the geopolitical spectrum that many perceive as a hidden hand manipulating events silently from behind a veil of virtual secrecy and silence.
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 18335 Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2016 11:35 pm Post subject:
Their success began with Mayer Amschel Rothschild (1744-1812). Born in the ghetto (called "Judengasse") of Frankfurt-am-Main, he developed a finance house and spread his empire by installing each of his five sons in European cities to conduct business. An essential part of Mayer Rothschild's strategy for future success was to keep control of their businesses in family hands, allowing them to maintain full discretion about the size of their wealth and their business achievements. Mayer Rothschild successfully kept the fortune in the family by carefully arranged marriages between closely related family members. His sons were:
Amschel Mayer Rothschild (1773-1855) - Frankfurt
Salomon Mayer Rothschild (1774-1855) - Vienna
Nathan Mayer Rothschild (1777-1836) - London
Calmann Mayer Rothschild (1788-1855) - Naples
James Mayer Rothschild (1792-1868) - Paris
James Corbett is of the belief that there is no coordinated plan or centre of power but collusion among those with undue power and influence. That was the assessment Critical Thinking arrived at a couple of years ago; since when further work has revealed patterns which suggest the key to global power is money and control of money is in the hands of the Rothschilds. Moreover, as one digs, more and more instances of history betray the Rothschilds' hand.
http://www.freecriticalthinking.org/daily-pickings/1936-rothschilds-mi mac-and-9-11
So while seemingly disconnected players seem to be acting independently and often in opposition, the common thread is always Rothschilds. Cecil Rhodes, Rockefellers, Carnegie, JP Morgan, George Soros, the Bolshevik Revolution, the rise of Mao in China and many of those accredited with power over geopolitics are, or were, all backed by Rothschilds which is why the work of those trying to expose the reality of who rules is so important.
Rudy Panko Subscribe to Rudy PankoTue, Feb 28 | 9,226 60
Report Ad
John McCain certainly "gets around". The famous Arizona warmonger and Moloch worshipper has a lot of fancy friends, too:
The above Guardian article — yes, it's real — is from McCain's presidential election bid back in '08. It contains some fun little morsels:
"The question is whether or not the Rothschilds paid for the event, the venue, the catering, or any other related costs," said Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton.
Tickets to the event cost $1,000 to $2,300, and the luncheon dress code was "lounge suits," the Washington Post reported in March.
"Lounge suits" — is that what they call whatever they were wearing in Eyes Wide Shut? We can only assume.
The friendship is still going strong, by the way. Wikileaks tweeted this out yesterday:
Close Hillary Clinton friend Lynn Forester de Rothschild (Economist publisher) is a trustee of the Saudi funded John McCain Institute.
— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks)
February 27, 2017
And a Twitter hero sent us this delightful follow-up to our story about German altruism in Greece:
@RussiaInsider @netmex
No shock ...... pic.twitter.com/Sau2YTTgz4
— james lee (@4bins)
February 27, 2017
No comment.
977
466
ON FIRE
Greece to Surrender Gold, Utilities and Real Estate in Exchange For Pieces of Paper Printed in Brussels
Matthew Allen 15,141
The Body Count Grows: Covert War Is Being Waged Against Russia
RI Editorial Board 13,725
Beijing Just Made Its Geopolitical Position Crystal Clear: China Stands With Russia
Rudy Panko 11,562
ARTICLES BY AUTHOR
US Threatens to Cut Funding For Kiev Terrorism After Putin Weaponizes Diplomacy
Iran's Fully Operational S-300 Systems Wait Patiently For US Freedom Bombers
Making Scary 'Webs': A Tutorial For Serious Media Outlets
The NSA Wiretaps Every Future President
It's Now or Never: Trump Declares Open War on the Deep State
All articles
RELATED ARTICLES
Here's Why Sanctions Actually Help Russia 8,863 4
BBC Publishes Patently False Ukraine Situation Maps Alexander Mercouris 4,032 2
Foreign Minister Lavrov. Russia is scoring nothing but wins over the last week. _________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 18335 Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
Posted: Sun May 07, 2017 11:44 pm Post subject:
As Hollande's Minister of Economy, the former banker at Rothschild and Cie bank saw through many of the austerity reforms that made the incumbent so unpopular.
Prince Charles and wife Camilla on Corfu vacations at Rothschild Villa
July 27, 2017
Charles, Prince of Wales, and his wife Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall, arrived at the airport of Corfu Wednesday afternoon for their summer vacations. Prince Charles and the Duchess of Cornwall will enjoy the blue Ionian Sea, the clean fresh air and an unknown number of quite days.
Prince Charles, wife Camilla and their entourage were transferred to Mayor’s Skala where they got on board of a speedboat under UK flag.
Where did they go to?
According to amna.gr, the speedboat carrying the royal couple docked in the small harbour of Kerasia in the north-east of Corfu.
In Kerasia is the luxury Rothschild Villa located. The royal couple will spend for one more time their summer vacations there.
The villa with its unique architecture has dominated the island for more than 40 years, within a vast estate in Kerasia that is filled with ancient pines, waterfalls and rich vegetation.
Security measures since the royal couple’s arrival are now extremely tight, with both security personnel and trained dogs guarding the grounds.
The villa has often hosted both royals and celebrities, while it was a favourite summer retreat for Princess Diana.
Kerasia is 40 km northeast of Corfu town and is considered one of the most beautiful locations on the island, nestling around an impressive beach with white pebbles, lush vegetation and clear blue waters. There is only one traditional taverna in the area, which is a remote and idyllic retreat for all.
Image result for Prince Charles wedding camilla
Prince Charles, 68, and Camilla Parker Bowles, 70, were married in 2005.
One year later, the scion of the most (in)famous name in all of finance, is back and in his latest letter to RIT Capital Partners investors, Lord Jacob Rotschild has released what is perhaps his gloomiest outlook ever; here are the highlights:
We do not believe this is an appropriate time to add to
risk. Share prices have in many cases risen to
unprecedented levels at a time when economic growth is
by no means assured. The S&P is selling at 25 times
trailing 12 months’ earnings, compared to a long-term
average of 15, while the adjusted Shiller price earnings
ratio, which averages profits over 10 years, is
approximately 30 times.
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 18335 Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
Posted: Sun Aug 20, 2017 12:38 pm Post subject:
After an education at Eton and Trinity College, Oxford, Rees-Mogg worked for the prestigious Rothschild investment bank, before joining Lloyd George Management in Hong Kong, and then founding his own firm, Somerset Capital Management.
He subsequently made several unsuccessful attempts to become an MP, including in Central Fife, where he took his nanny canvassing with him in a Mercedes, before winning the safe Tory seat of North East Somerset in 2010.
Jay Syrmopoulos––In what is a sure signal to oligarchs across the globe, Lord Jacob Rothschild, founder and chairman of RIT Capital Partners, has substantially minimized his exposure to what he views as a risky and unstable U.S. capital market. In the half-yearly financial report for RIT Capital Partners, Rothschild explained the company’s aggressive moves to significantly reduce exposure to U.S. assets.
“We do not believe this is an appropriate time to add to risk. Share prices have in many cases risen to unprecedented levels at a time when economic growth is by no means assured,” Rothschild said in his semi-annual report.
Additionally, Rothschild stated that he believes quantitative easing (QE) programs employed by central banks, such as the Federal Reserve Bank in the U.S. will “come to an end.”
FREE - Tactical Flashlight - Limited Amount
75% OFF - 9 IN 1 Survival Corepak
This $204.68 Toolbox Saves 68% Monthly Electricity
Powered by Plutus ads
Rothschild was quoted in the report as saying, “The period of monetary accommodation may well be coming to an end.”
Signaling a potential disaster in the making in the United States financial markets, Rothschild reduced the investments RIT Capital Partners has in the U.S. dollar by nearly fifty percent. On December 31, 2016, RIT Capital Partners reported a 62 percent net value asset investment in U.S. dollars. In the latest report released by RIT Capital Partners on June 30, 2017, the company has a 37 percent net value asset investment in U.S. dollars.
Over that same period of time, Rothschild increased RIT’s investment in Sterling and the Euro.
Just last year, the bond manager of what was once the world’s largest bond fund had a dire prediction about how “all of this” will all end. And by “all of this,” he means the propping up of financial markets by central banks.
When the U.S. stock market is trading at all-time highs, but Lord Rothschild is divesting RIT from those same markets, the central bank manipulation of market valuations becomes apparent.
Additionally, it’s worth noting that Rothschild’s RIT investment portfolio has returned roughly 2,000% since its formation – so he obviously understands how to position his assets to get big returns on investments, thus these recent moves should be a red flag to every American.
In explaining his recent investment moves, Rothschild, the RIT chairman stated:
“We have a particular interest in investments which will benefit from the impact of new technologies, and Far Eastern markets, influenced by the growing demand from Asian consumers.”
The report also noted that RIT had invested in Social Capital, a tech investment firm based in Silicon Valley, and that Francesco Goedhuis, Chief Executive of J. Rothschild Capital Management, will serve on the company’s advisory board. Social Capital provides seed funding for companies in the education, finance, and health care business sectors.
Rothschild also mentioned the advent of a fourth industrial revolution in the RIT Capital Partners report, noting, “As the ‘Fourth Industrial Revolution’ develops, it becomes increasingly important for your Company to be able to assess investment opportunities in the innovation driven changes which are affecting almost every business sector.”
The fourth industrial revolution will be driven by new technologies that work to integrate the digital, biological, and physical worlds. Rothschild indicated in the report that the fourth industrial revolution was a driving factor in his investment in Social Capital.
The latest report is simply a continuation of a narrative that was clearly seen in Rothschild’s last half-yearly RIT report when he stated:
The six months under review have seen central bankers continuing what is surely the greatest experiment in monetary policy in the history of the world. We are therefore in uncharted waters and it is impossible to predict the unintended consequences of very low interest rates, with some 30% of global government debt at negative yields, combined with quantitative easing on a massive scale.
To date, at least in stock market terms, the policy has been successful with markets near their highs, while volatility on the whole has remained low. Nearly all classes of investment have been boosted by the rising monetary tide. Meanwhile, growth remains anaemic, with weak demand and deflation in many parts of the developed world.
Many of the risks which I underlined in my 2015 statement remain; indeed the geo-political situation has deteriorated with the UK having voted to leave the European Union, the presidential election in the US in November is likely to be unusually fraught, while the situation in China remains opaque and the slowing down of economic growth will surely lead to problems. Conflict in the Middle East continues and is unlikely to be resolved for many years. We have already felt the consequences of this in France, Germany and the USA in terrorist attacks.
SPONSOR: Become INVISIBLE on the internet for less than $3.33
A rags-to-riches musical about the Rothschild family’s creation of a banking dynasty and fight against anti-Semitism in Europe is to be performed in Britain for the first time. It will challenge age-old conspiracy theories about the family, the creators say.
‘Rothschild and Sons’ follows the family’s rise from their humble home in a Jewish ghetto in Germany to the founding of its financial empire and growing political influence under the guidance of patriarch Mayer Rothschild.
Set in the 1800s, it also details the assistance in funding Napoleon’s defeat, persecution for being Jewish and how the family secured a declaration of rights for European Jews in the midst of an oppressive era.
They also assisted Brazil with independence from Portugal, funded Cecil Rhodes in the creation of Rhodesia (present-day Zimbabwe), and have a long history with the Rio Tinto mining company.
The family has also frequently been the subject of conspiracy theories that some have written off as anti-Semitic.
Theories include that they control all of the world’s wealth and financial institutions, funded the losers and winners of all wars to make a profit, are linked to secret societies such as the Illuminati, heavily influence the US Federal Reserve and even sank the Titanic.
Today, their wealth is estimated to be up to $1 trillion. Rothschild heirs live all around the world.
The musical’s New York-based songwriter Sheldon Harnick says he hopes the musical challenges conspiracy theories about the Rothschilds. He said he did extensive research, and hopes the show “makes people see them all as human beings.”
The musical first premiered on Broadway in 1970 titled ‘The Rothschilds’, but was rewritten and renamed.
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 18335 Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
Posted: Fri Nov 03, 2017 11:19 am Post subject:
Was Israel created in Edinburgh – by candlelight?
admin / 1 day ago
Was Israel created in Edinburgh……by candlelight?
http://www.tomminogue.com/tom/?p=3517
As today is the 100th anniversary of the signing of the Balfour Declaration or Balfour Letter written by the then Conservative Foreign Secretary, Arthur Balfour, 1st Earl of Balfour, it seems appropriate that we take a look at the background to his Magnum opus.
But first a look at the conservative and Conservative & Unionist nature of perhaps one of Scotland’s most influential societies: The Speculative Society of Edinburgh.
The membership of ‘The Spec’ as it is commonly known is drawn mainly from a small pool of middle and upper class graduates of The University of Edinburgh, and those outsiders they choose. The maximum number of ordinary members in any session (Wednesday evenings between September and March) is thirty.
Photo of the private debating room of The Spec in Old College illuminated by candles
New members must be invited by two ordinary members, a proposer and a seconder, and then gain approval of two thirds of the current ordinary membership. After acceptance an ordinary member must attend for three sessions before completing his course and gaining extraordinary privileges. So each year about ten new boys take the place of those who graduate.
So The Spec is a self-perpetuating elite. And a very conservative elite with a disproportionately great influence in Scots life and in particular the judiciary.
Keeping it in the family.
The Spec’s self-perpetuating influence is best illustrated by the number of senior lawyers from the same family who have dominated the law in Scotland. Take for instance the Clyde family, which boasted three generations of Law Lords and almost three Lord Presidents of the Court of Session.
I say almost, because the First and Second Lords Clyde were not joined by their grandson/son as head of the judges in Scotland. The third Lord Clyde, James John, lost out narrowly in the race for the top judge’s job to J. A. David Hope.
Lord Hope, after serving as Lord President moved south to the House of Lords and was until recently Deputy President of the Supreme Court.
The Hopes are another clan, like the Clydes, in which Spec membership seems to run in the family. J. A. David Hope’s father was also a Spec member.
Now I don’t know if the five lawyers mentioned above were the ablest of their generation and this accounted for their success in life, but to me it seems odd that they have much in common, in that is they all went to Edinburgh Academy, all took law degrees at the University of Edinburgh and all were invited to become members of the all-male Speculative Society of Edinburgh. Oh, and another thing, they were all conservative, at least with a small c.
The right-wing/racist politics of The Spec.
Don’t take my word for it on conservative, take heed of J. A. David Hope, who, when a young advocate in 1968, wrote an article entitled “Current Politics and the Society’s Debates”, for the vanity publication “History of The Speculative Society Bicentenary Edition”. LINK
This article sets out the Society’s long established right-wing credentials and the fact that no left-wing government ever won a vote of confidence in a 30 year sample of debates on the question: “Is the present government unworthy of the confidence of the country?”
The young author examines debates and essays of the period, but, perhaps not surprisingly, omits some for that period, such as that of Mr St John in February 1955 who posed the question “Do the Wogs begin at Calais Carlisle”.
But Mr. Hope does reveal the fact that the society thought that it was impossible for white and coloured races to live together; was in favour of barring coloured immigration to all of the Empire’s dominions, and believed a colour bar should be maintained.
The Spec confers an Honorary Membership on the Hon. Arthur J. Balfour.
Mr. Hope also revealed in his article that in 1904 The Hon. Arthur J Balfour, M.P., former Prime Minister, and leader of the Conservative Party was made an Honorary Member of the Speculative Society.
This is not a trifling honour as according to Section II; Art. 2 of The Laws of The Speculative Society of Edinburgh: “Honorary Members shall enjoy the same privileges with extraordinary members, and shall have precedence to all others on the roll.”
A. J. Balfour would have been the perfect candidate for an honour by the Spec as he was known for his racist views. It’s believed by many that his infamous letter to Baron Rothschild in 1917 which promised the country of another people, the Palestinians, to a third people (of a certain religion), the Jews, was motivated, not by a wish to see poor, working-class Jews fleeing anti-Semitic persecution in Eastern Europe achieve a homeland in Palestine, but by a wish that they would not settle in Britain.
Balfour opposed immigration into Britain by the subjects H M Government ruled or had once ruled, far less those it didn’t rule.
Singing the praises of Protestantism, Royalism & Unionism.
Balfour’s Empire Loyalist racism was hardly uncommon in this country at that time and was prevalent in the all-male sodality that was the Speculative Society of Edinburgh. Though a Scottish institution it was, in it’s attitudes, very much a northern branch of the British Empire.
This mindset is demonstrated in a response to a speech given by a law professor, John Hepburn Miller, Head of Constitutional Law & History, Edinburgh University, at a dinner to celebrate the 150th anniversary of the Spec in 1914 (The ever active Honorary Member A. J. Balfour, under the chairmanship of Lord Rosebery, was a key player on the organising committee for this celebration).
Prof. Miller stated in his toast to “The Imperial Forces”: “we had the good fortune to live under a constitution which has been the envy of the whole civilised world; and if that has been our good fortune, and if the Protestant succession has been secured, let us never forget, sir, that that fortunate state of matters is due in no small measure to the standing Army, and likewise to one who was the idol of his men, that great captain of his age – I refer to William Augustus, Duke of Cumberland”. LINK
This glimpse of the arrogant attitudes prevalent in the Speculative Society in 1914 is enlightening in that it reveals them to be those of a white, Anglo-Saxon, Protestant elite of Scots governing North Britain.
Lauding Butcher Cumberland (recently voted by a noted historian Professor Rab Houston, chairman of modern history at St Andrews University as being among Britain’s greatest villains and most hated of the last Millennium) in the land where he carried out his butchery and being ostensibly anti-Catholic seems shocking. But was the Spec mindset simply reflecting the mores of the times?
The Scottish establishment before WWI was anti-Scottish Nationalist and anti-Irish/RC. It feared the latter group might lead to the rise of the former ideal, so when Balfour and Rosebery deliberately chose their speakers, they knew that what they were going to hear would have a bitter Orange flavour.
Has The Spec moved on since Balfour’s day?
If we fast-forward to 1983 we find the great-nephew of A. J. Balfour, Gerald Arthur James Balfour, Viscount Traprain, the 4th Earl of Balfour (a Mason and son of a Grand Master Mason of Scotland) had also joined The Spec and echoed his great-uncle’s sentiments by writing a letter to the Daily Telegraph hailing the apartheid South African government as deserving “the full support of the west in maintaining western values” by segregating whites not only from blacks, but from Indians as well.
Such thinking is hardly a surprise, as it is well established that The Spec was founded by Masons of the Canongate Kilwinning Lodge in Edinburgh at a time when freemasonry was a form of social control, governed by aristocrats who believed in a pecking order at home and abroad in our colonies.
But has the membership of the Spec moved with the times since then, or are they still the same old-boys bigoted elite – a Scots Bullingdon Club?
I can say from my limited personal experience (having known only one member of The Spec socially) that it hasn’t, move with the times that is.
Nicholas Hardwick Fairbairn who succeeded another Spec Member, Sir Alec Douglas-Home as MP for Kinross was to my certain knowledge a racist, sexist bully and a religious bigot (It was later alleged he was much worse but I know nothing of this). How such a man became Solicitor General of Great Britain in 1979 I will never know.
How he was knighted an even bigger mystery, but then he was joining a select few who are looking more ignoble with each passing day’s revelations.
A few exceptions that prove the rule.
Apologists will attack this critique by pointing to the odd Spec member who is of Asian ancestry; a Scottish nationalist, a RC, a decent man from the working classes, or even, even,…wait for it…a woman (Princess Anne was rumoured to be the first woman to have joined recently)!
But these are untypical individuals, simply tokenism; grudging concessions to the growing concerns about a sexist, quasi Masonic society at the heart of Scots life. To me, they are the exceptions that prove the rule.
Those who pounded the table in approval of Prof. Miller’s bombast at the North British Hotel in 1914 are no longer with us, but it is the Spec’s proud boast that it is unchanged over the years and I believe this to be true. The cast of characters may have changed but their heirs and attitudes (like Fairbairn’s) have not.
The Spec’s part in the creation of Israel?
What is, unarguably the case, is that 100 years ago The Speculative Society of Edinburgh, a bastion of conservatism was, in the actions of their Honorary Member Arthur Balfour, pivotal in the creation of the state of Israel.
A. J. Balfour’s active membership of The Spec began in 1904 and continued at least until the 150th anniversary celebrations in 1914. His was no nominal honour whereby the diploma he received was tossed in a drawer and forgotten. No, he was active in the society and would have mixed with the movers and shakers of the day.
In 1904 the persons who immediately preceded him in being bestowed honorary membership were Sir William Turner, Principal of Edinburgh University then The Earl of Rosebery. Coincidentally the same three men, led by Rosebery as Chairman, headed the Spec’s 150th anniversary celebration committee.
I wonder if this talented trio came together again three years later in formulating the Balfour Declaration?
Did they draft it in The Spec’s private rooms in the Old College?
Was it written in quill-pen and ink, beneath the 16 candle chandelier (with one holder left vacant) before sending it to the F.O. for approval/typing/onward transmittal?
That of course may be fanciful speculation, but two of them, Balfour and Roseberry, had an active interest in politics. Both were former Prime & Foreign Ministers and both had Rothschild interests.
Balfour was for many years a Conservative colleague, friend and fellow aristocrat of Walter, the 2nd Baron Rothschild while Rosebery was married to Walter’s kinswoman, Hannah de Rothschild.
Beyond mere speculation is the fact – evidenced by the arrogant tone of the speeches at the 1914 celebrations – that the members of The Spec were rabid Empire Loyalists who would approve of Great Britain giving part of a country that didn’t belong to them to their chosen friends in the aristocracy.
To these privileged men Britannia ruled the waves and could do as she jolly-well pleased.
Conclusion
Israel today is a state which exhibits apartheid of the sort that A. J. Balfour and his great-nephew approved of. It segregates Palestinians from Jewish settlers, in lands that the Israeli government occupy illegally. That is something that Scotland in general and the Speculative Society of Edinburgh in particular should be ashamed of.
The old-boys’ network which nurtured the attitudes that allowed this to take place in our name, giving disproportionate power to a privileged few, is alive and well in Alba today.
When I first researched The Spec in 2002 over two thirds of Scots Law Lords were undeclared members and today our most influential businessmen, (E.g. Sir Angus Grossart, Scotland’s Mr. Fixit according to Bloomberg), bankers and senior judges are members.
Surely we must examine these organisations, which are the very antithesis of the meritocracy, we, as a modern nation, should be striving to achieve?
In my opinion a future, independent Scotland, would do well to distance itself from our part in past attitudes and crimes carried out in the name of the British Empire.
Perhaps a first step in this act of contrition would be for the Saltire flag to be flown at half-mast from public buildings on the anniversaries of such events?
https://yournewswire.com/russian-tv-rothschilds-educates/ _________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
Simon Bell in Moscow, Lucinda Kemeny and Andrew Porter
November 2 2003, 12:00am,
The Sunday Times
The Sunday Times can identify Lord (Jacob) Rothschild as the secret holder of the large stake in Yukos that was previously controlled by Mikhail Khodorkovsky, the oil company’s chairman.
Khodorkovsky, reputed to be Russia’s richest man, was last week arrested by Russian prosecutors on charges of fraud and tax evasion. His imprisonment has triggered a trustee agreement he put in place with Rothschild a few months ago.
Rothschild, 67, now controls the voting rights on a stake in Yukos worth almost £8 billion. This places him at the centre of a dispute with the Russian state. It is widely believed that the charges being brought against Khodorkovsky are a response to his political ambitions to succeed Vladimir Putin as Russia’s president.
As part of a sweeping restructuring of the oil industry, Yukos is created by merger of two state companies – Siberian oil producer Yuganskneftegas and Volga refining company Kuibyshevnefteorgsintez.
DECEMBER -1995
Still in state hands, Yukos comes close to bankruptcy amid falling output and rising debt; it owes the government alone $3.5bn.
1995-96
Through a series of share offers, Yukos becomes the first fully privatised integrated oil company in Russia. In late 1995 Mikhail Khodorkovsky,using his holding company Menatep acquired a major Russian oil producer, Yukos, which had debts exceeding $3.5 billion, FOR $300 MILLION .
1998-2001
Khodorkovsky launches a major restructuring and modernisation programme, with the aim of making Yukos one of the few large Russian to match international standards for corporate behaviour and financial stability. The idea is first mooted of merging with Sibneft, another large producer then controlled by billionaire Boris Berezovsky (Jewish Oligarch)
In a Foreign Affairs article on the situation in 1998–99, Lee Wolosky, a former counterterrorism official under the Clinton administration, described how Khodorkovsky had engaged in massive asset stripping of Yukos subsidiaries following the 1998 financial crisis: After three international banks acquired approximately 30 percent of Yukos following a default on a loan to an affiliated bank,Khodorkovsky sought to turn Yukos into an empty shell. He forced it to convey its most significant asset – its controlling position in oil production subsidiaries – to unknown offshore entities. At the same time, he attempted the mother of all share dilutions: by transferring a massive number of new shares to offshore entities he is believed to control
I Prosecutors conducted an extensive investigation into Yukos for offences that went beyond the financial and tax-related charges. Reportedly there were three cases of murder and one of attempted murder linked to Yukos, if not Khodorkovsky himself.One area of interest to the Prosecutor-General included the 1998 assassination of the mayor of Nefteyuganskin the Tyumen region, Vladimir Petukhov. Nefteyugansk was the main centre of oil production within the Yukos empire. Suspicions arose in Nefteyugansk because Petukhov had publicly and frequently campaigned about Yukos’ non-payment of local taxes.
Ammnesty International has declared this Crooked Murdering Shyster a Prisoner of Concience
2001
Yukos shares are listed in New York, London, Frankfurt, Berlin and Munich . Yukos becomes a major supplier to China after the acquisition of a refinery and other assets in the Russian Far East.
2002
The company’s global ambitions step up a gear, with the acquisition of Lithuania’s main oil company, a move into Slovakia, and plans to develop an pipeline to China.
2003
Khodorkovsky gets into his first public row with the Kremlin, disagreeing over state control of the pipeline industry. He complains publicly about corruption, and begins openly funding various opposition parties, including the communists. In short a mainly business dispute with the state is transformed by PR firms into a political dispute
2 JULY, 2003
Platon Lebedev, a major Yukos shareholder, is arrested and accused of having illegally acquired shares in Apatit, a fertiliser company, in 1994. Mr Khodorkovsky is questioned and released two days later.
16 JULY, 2003
Russian tax authorities say they are to audit Yukos’s books, as the investigation into the Apatit deal is dramatically widened. Yukos’s offices are raided and records taken away.
25 OCTOBER, 2003
Khodorkovsky is arrested, flown to Moscow and charged with various counts of fraud of tax evasion.
30 OCTOBER, 2003
The Russian authorities freeze the 44% stake in Yukos owned by Menatep Bank, Mr Khodorkovsky’s main investment vehicle. Previously, Yukos had announced a $2bn dividend to shareholders – an attempt to extract money from the firm ahead of any possible confiscation.
2 NOVEMBER , 2003
CONTROL OF MIKHAIL KHODORKOVSKYS SHARES IN YUKOS HAVE PASSED TO JACOB ROTHSHCILD , under a deal they concluded prior to Mr. Khodorkovsky’s arrest, the Sunday Times reported.Mr. Rothschild now controls the voting rights on a stake in Yukos worth almost $13.5 billion, the newspaper said in a dispatch from Moscow. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2003/nov/2/20031102-111400-3720r/
3 NOVEMBER , 2003
Mr Khodorkovsky resigns as chief executive of Yukos in favour of Simon Kukes (American Jew), and is reported to have handed his interest in the company over to associates outside Russia. Mr Kukes tries to distance Yukos from Mr Khodorkovsky, pouring cold water on previous plans to sell the company to a foreign investor.
11 MARCH, 2004
More than $5bn belonging to Yukos shareholders is frozen in Switzerland, after Moscow argues that the money has been stolen. Arrest warrants are issued for another 10 of the company’s senior associates.
16 JUNE, 2004
Khodorkovsky’s trial finally begins, with the threat of up to 10 years in prison. The case is immediately adjourned.
19 DECEMBER, 2004
Auction of Yuganskneftegas in Moscow, which is sold to little-known firm Baikalfinansgrup, for $9.35bn.
NOW UP TO THIS POINT JACOB ROTHSCHILD OWNS 44 PERCENT OF YUKOS THE BBC DOESNT SAY WHETHER THE SHAREHOLDERS (ROTH AND CO) OR THE CREDITORS (STATE OF RUSSIA) GET THE 9 BILLION —–REMEMBER KODORKOVSKY PAID JUST 300 MILLION FOR YUKOS
23 DECEMBER, 2004
State-owned oil firm Rosneft – itself preparing for a merger with state-controlled gas group Gazprom –buys Baikal, thus acquiring Yuganskneftegas.The unit is effectively renationalised.
12 JANUARY, 2005
Mikhail Khodorkovsky hands over controlling stake in Yukos parent firm Menatep to fellow shareholder Leonid Nevslin, by now resident in Israel. (Yukos now consists of just Kuibyshevnefteorgsintez (oil refinery) and cash profits )
14 FEBRUARY, 2005
Yukos sues Rosneft, Baikal, and Gazpromand one of its units, claiming damages of $20bn for their alleged role in the Yuganskneftegas sale.(Remember they paid 300 million and now claim 20 billion dollars )
15 MARCH, 2005
Rosneft sues Yukos over an $11bn back tax bill allegedly owed by Yuganskneftegas.
25 MARCH, 2005
Ex-Yukos security chief Alexei Pichugin convicted of murder and attempted murder.
19 APRIL, 2005
Russian court freezes more of Yukos’ assets as its own former unit Yuganskneftegas accuses it of having paid below-market prices for its oil and demands $6bn in compensation.
31 MAY, 2005
After 12 days of summing up the trial, the judges find Mikhail Khodorkovsky and Platon Lebedev guilty of six charges including tax evasion and sentence them to nine years in prison each.
1 AUGUST, 2006
Troubled Russian oil firm Yukos has been declared bankrupt by a court in Moscow
, clearing the way for the firm to be liquidated.The decision ends a three-year court battle for survival, after Yukos was hit with a huge back tax bill.
17 AUGUST, 2006
Russian prosecutors have launched a criminal investigation into former bosses of bankrupt oil company Yukos, accusing them of asset-stripping.Ex-chief executive Steven Theede and three others are said to have switched $10bn in assets outside Russia beyond the reach of liquidation proceedings.The four have denied wrongdoing, one of them accusing Russian authorities of a “vendetta” against ex-Yukos personnel.Yukos has broken into two, one arm managing foreign assets outside Russia.
20 SEPTEMBER, 2011
The European Court of Human Rights has ruled in a case between the oil company Yukos and the Russian government – but not come down clearly on either side.It dismissed claims that Russia had abused the law to destroy the firm, but found its legal rights were violated.However, the court said the Russian authorities had carried out “legitimate actions… to counter the company’s tax evasion”.The authorities had begun pursuing Yukos in 2002, accusing it of creating shell companies to hide revenue from the tax authorities.
20 DECEMBER, 2013
On 19 December 2013, President Vladimir Putin said he intended to pardon Khodorkovsky in the near future.He did so on the following day, stating that Khodorkovsky’s mother was ill and Khodorkovsky had asked for clemency. Khodorkovsky was released from prison on the same day he was pardoned, and immediately left for Berlin, Germany.
Simon Bell in Moscow, Lucinda Kemeny and Andrew Porter
November 2 2003, 12:00am,
The Sunday Times
The Sunday Times can identify Lord (Jacob) Rothschild as the secret holder of the large stake in Yukos that was previously controlled by Mikhail Khodorkovsky, the oil company’s chairman.
Khodorkovsky, reputed to be Russia’s richest man, was last week arrested by Russian prosecutors on charges of fraud and tax evasion. His imprisonment has triggered a trustee agreement he put in place with Rothschild a few months ago.
Rothschild, 67, now controls the voting rights on a stake in Yukos worth almost £8 billion. This places him at the centre of a dispute with the Russian state. It is widely believed that the charges being brought against Khodorkovsky are a response to his political ambitions to succeed Vladimir Putin as Russia’s president.
In this Alux.com video we'll try to answer the following questions: • Who are the Rothschilds?! • Who is a part of the Rothschild family?! • Who is the Rothschild family?! • Is the Rothschild family evil?! • Does the Rothschild family control the world?! • Does the Rothschild family control the world banks?! • Who is Jacob Rothschild?! • Are the Rothschilds controlling the world?! • Are the Rothschilds manipulating the world?! • Are the Rothschilds manipulating gold market?! • Is the Rothschild family influencing politics?! • Is the Rothschild family influencing the economy?! • Is the Rothschild family a conspiracy?! • Is the Rothschild family conspiring against the world?!
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 18335 Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
Posted: Sat Mar 09, 2019 11:50 pm Post subject:
Evidence Nathan Rothschild made his fortune out of deception and trading after the outcome of the 1815 battle of Waterloo was known.
The New York Times, in its April 1, 1915, edition, reported that Baron Nathan Mayer de Rothschild had attempted to secure a court order to suppress a book written by Ignatious Balla entitled The Romance of the Rothschüds on the grounds that the Waterloo story about his grandfather was untrue and libellous. The court ruled that the story was true, dismissed the suit, and ordered Rothschild to pay all court costs.
https://seekingalpha.com/instablog/25783813-peter-palms/4550246-rothsc hild-formula
The rise of the Rothschild ZOG 911 Money Master NWO
The next morning, Rothschild was at his usual post in the London Exchange. Everyone noticed how pale and exhausted he looked. Suddenly, he started selling, dumping large quantities of securities. Panic immediately swept the Exchange. Rothschild is selling; he knows we have lost the Battle of Waterloo. Rothschild and all of his known agents continued to throw securities onto the market.
Balla says,
"Nothing could arrest the disaster. At the same time he was quietly buying up all securities by means of secret agents whom no one knew. In a single day, he had gained nearly a million sterling, giving rise to the saying, ‘The Allies won the Battle of Waterloo, but it was really Rothschild who won.’" *
In The Profits of War, Richard Lewinsohn says,
"Rothschild’s war profits from the Napoleonic Wars financed their later stock speculations. Under Metternich, Austria after long hesitation, finally agreed to accept financial direction from the House of Rothschild." 47
46 Ignatius Balla, The Romance of the Rothschilds, Everleigh Nash, London, 1913
* The New York Times, April 1, 1915 reported that in 1914, Baron Nathan Mayer de Rothschild went to court to suppress Ignatius Balla’s book on the grounds that the Waterloo story about his grandfather was untrue and libelous. The court ruled that the story was true, dismissed Rothschild’s suit, and ordered him to pay all costs. The New York Times noted in this story that "The total Rothschild wealth has been estimated at $2 billion." A previous story in The New York Times (May 27, 1905) noted that Baron Alphonse de Rothschild, head of the French house of Rothschild, possessed $60 million in American securities in his fortune, although the Rothschilds reputedly were not active in the American field. This explains why their agent, J.P. Morgan, had only $19 million in securities in his estate when he died in 1913, and securities handled by Morgan were actually owned by his employer, Rothschild."
47 Richard Lewinsohn, The Profits of War, E.P. Dutton, 1937
The last thing I ever wanted to do was write about France’s likely next president, Emmanuel Macron, but here we are. This post was inspired by a very telling Financial Times article sent to me by a reader, but we’ll get to that in a bit.
Most Americans paying attention to global affairs have some conception of his opponent, nationalist firebrand Marine Le Pen, but Macron is likely to be very much a black box. I hope today’s post changes that.
Any knowledge you may have on Macron probably comes from mainstream news outlets, which have been uniformly gushing about the socialist-centrist Rothschild protege.
As an example, just take a look at the following title from a January article published at Foreign Policy.
You’d think this guy was the second coming or something. Naturally, the gushing continues beyond the title. Here are the first few paragraphs.
In some of his many previous lives, 39-year-old Emmanuel Macron has been a philosophy student, an investment banker, and a minister of economy. It is not surprising, then, in his current life as an independent candidate for the French presidency, he does not always speak like other candidates. And it’s not only the substance of his language that stands out but also, sometimes, his choice of language. Last week, in a speech at Berlin’s Humboldt University, Macron spoke in impeccable English on the imperative of giving Europe a chance.
And of giving the future a chance: Macron’s speech offered a powerful and convincing case that he is the last great French hope for a European future based on a common market and a common morality, a single currency and a singular commitment to the continent’s core values.
Though his immediate audience was Humboldt’s faculty and students, Macron was in fact addressing a far wider audience. He was seeking to mobilize French as well as German youths, and — in a reference to the program that allows EU citizens to study in other member states — the non-Erasmus as well as the Erasmus generations. Based on the audience’s response to his speech, and his surging poll numbers in France, Macron — despite not having the support of an established party, or perhaps becausehe doesn’t — is no longer the dark horse but instead the white knight for a growing number of French voters. However, what this particular knight promises, beyond verve and vitality, is not yet clear.
This author certainly isn’t holding back on the Macron infatuation. Within the first three paragraphs alone he refers to the man as “the last great French hope” and a “white knight.” Amazing.
But that’s not the most telling part of the above excerpts. I find it particularly remarkable that the author positions this manufactured candidate as some sort of outsider. Sure, he may not have the backing of an established political party, but those who do back him have far more power than that.
I came to this conclusion based on an extremely enlightening article published in the FT titled, Emmanuel Macron’s Rothschild Years Make Him an Easy Election Target. Based on the title, you’d think that the man merely had a normal, brief stint at the bank, but you’d be wrong. As you read, it becomes clear that he was groomed from day one by a Rothschild partner and ended up on a fast track like I’ve never seen before. But first, let’s examine the first two paragraphs of the article, which betrays the man’s intentions.
When Emmanuel Macron told friends in 2008 he was joining Rothschild, the prestigious investment bank, the then 30-year-old civil servant was warned it could scupper a future career in politics.
“You’re conscious that banking is not any kind of job? And Rothschild not any kind of bank?” said one friend to the man who, nine years later, would become frontrunner in France’s presidential election.
Contrary to media myths about a “white knight” who came out of nowhere to save France, this character has had his eye on high political office for at least a decade. Indeed, it appears Macron has been groomed by powerful financiers for a very long time. As the FT also notes:
The graduate of ENA, the elite school that breeds France’s future leaders, came recommended by powerful alumni of the institution, including François Henrot, a longtime Rothschild partner. But young bankers were not so impressed.
“He was the guy who would constantly say ‘thank you’,” a former colleague said. “He didn’t know what ebitda [earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortisation] was. He didn’t try to hide it. And instead of looking it up in a corporate finance book, he asked around, which was disarming.”
Yet it wasn’t just a Rothschild sponsor who took the young Macron under his wing…
What Mr Macron lacked in technical knowledge and jargon at first, he made up for with contacts in government, says Sophie Javary, head of BNP Paribas’ corporate finance in Europe, who was asked by Mr Henrot to coach Mr Macron in the first year.
This is straight up bizarre. It appears Macron was so important to banking interests the had to form a consortium of firms to all pitch in to help him out. Yet it gets stranger still.
On the Atos deal, Mr Macron “had a fairly junior role at the time — he would be asked to redo the financial models on Excel, the basics,” recalled an adviser. But a few days after the deal was announced, Mr Macron was made a partner. A few months later, he stunned colleagues and rivals by winning a role in Nestlé’s purchase of Pfizer’s infant food operations.
As someone who spent ten years on Wall Street, I can tell you with certainty that you don’t go from updating excel models at a junior level to partner overnight. Someone extraordinarily powerful was pulling all sorts of strings for this guy. There seems to be little doubt about this.
Further hints that Macron is a total manufactured elitist creation can be seen with the following.
At the bank, Mr Macron mastered the art of networking and navigated around the numerous conflicts of interest that arise in close-knit Parisian business circles, making good use of his connections as an Inspecteur des Finances — an elite corps of the very highest-ranking graduates from ENA.
In 2010, he advised, for free, the staff of Le Monde when the newspaper was put up for sale. Journalists at the daily started doubting his loyalty when they happened upon him in conversation with Mr Minc, who was representing a bidding consortium that the staff opposed. They did not know that it was Mr Minc, a fellow Inspecteur des Finances, who had helped the young Mr Macron secure his interview at Rothschild.
A media executive who was part of the same consortium recalled: “It wasn’t clear who Emmanuel worked for. He was around, trading intelligence, friends with everyone. It was smart, because he got to know everybody in the media world.”
Indeed, who does he work for? I’m sure the French people would like to know.
Meanwhile, Macron is like a conspiracy website’s wet dream. Not only was he groomed by Rothschild bankers, he was also a Bilderberg meeting attendee in 2014. Of course.
Incredibly enough, Macron’s personal life is just as bizarre. Wikipedia notes:
Raised in a non-religious family, he was baptized a Roman Catholic at his own request at age 12.
Impressive that the man figured out religion at such a young age, but what’s even more bizarre is what he did three years later. At 15, shortly after discovering Jesus, he decided to seduce his high school teacher who was 24 years older and married with three children. I’m not in the habit of quoting Slate, but an article on this topic published there was excellent. We learn:
At 39, Emmanuel Macron would be France’s youngest-ever president. His wife, Brigitte Trogneux, just turned 64. The two met when Macron was 15 years old; Trogneux was his high-school drama teacher. After putting off the young Macron’s advances for a while, Trogneux eventually divorced her husband—the father of her three children—and moved to Paris to be with Macron, who’d left his hometown to finish high school in the capital city. They married more than a decade after meeting, in 2007.
Media accounts of their once-illicit relationship have offered it as evidence of Macron’s daring personality and willingness to break with tradition, qualities that helped make him a presidential frontrunner without a political party or any experience in elected office. “Their love affair was the kind of audacious undertaking that has defined Mr. Macron’s life and career,” the New York Timesreports. “His sheer drive, his focus and his willingness to leapfrog in a country where most success is built step by step make him more like the entrepreneurs he admires than a typical politician.” The Associated Press writes that, “from his teenage romance with a teacher to his recent ambition to become president, Emmanuel Macron often is described as unconventional and tenacious.”
This is a strange way to frame a romantic relationship between a teenager and his 40-year-old teacher. If Macron were a young woman who’d seduced her male high-school teacher away from his wife and family, her determination and ultimate success would not be proffered as signs of her leadership skills, the beginning of a life as an effective politician. She would be cast as an opportunistic Jezebel with daddy issues who slept her way into every political role she got. If Macron were an ex-teacher who’d left his wife to be with a teenage student, we’d rightly cast doubt on his maturity and morals. Depending on the details of the case, I might think he should have lost his teaching job and wonder which combination of possible gross reasons caused him to reject women his own age.
Swap Macron and Trogneux’s gender again, and the story of a goal-oriented romancer would be spun as a conventional tale of an unhinged, desperate homewrecker. Conquering resistance through patient pursuit would, to most observers, seem like obsessed-stalker behavior coming from a young girl and sexual-predator behavior coming from an older man. Macron’s disregard of Trogneux’s initial rejection—and his dogged fixation on making her his girlfriend despite her marriage and his age—don’t ring such alarm bells because we’re far more used to seeing older men with way-younger women.
What’s most notable about the above is how corporate media such as The New York Times celebrates Macron’s less than savory behavior in his pursuit of Trogneux. It may not be fake news, but it certainly looks a lot like pro-Macron propaganda.
Finally, I’d like to end with the following tweet, which I think summarizes the situation.
Michael Krieger
@LibertyBlitz
Macron is like the fiat money of politicians.
Created out of thin air to help bankers steal everything.
165
8:26 PM - Apr 24, 2017
Twitter Ads info and privacy
162 people are talking about this
The bottom line is Macron is a total fake. Indeed, he’s almost embarrassingly phony, but will it matter? My feeling is that he will probably win the May 7th runoff, but I don’t think the spread will be anywhere near as wide as everyone is predicting. I continue to think that it won’t be France, but more likely Italy, which will put the final nail in the EU coffin.
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 18335 Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
Posted: Wed Mar 20, 2019 1:37 pm Post subject:
Rothschild heir, 47, sings praises of sex dolls as he claims that 'when you make love to your wife there can be some problems'
By SEBASTIAN SHAKESPEARE FOR THE DAILY MAIL
Despite being a scion of one of Britain's richest banking dynasties, Lord Rothschild's only son and heir, Nathaniel, has never shied away from controversy.
Now it appears he has outdone himself by making a very revealing contribution to the debate about sex dolls.
The 47-year-old financier shared a link to an article on Twitter yesterday about the increasing popularity of lifelike robotic sex dolls — also known as 'love droids' — in Japan, which claims their surging use is threatening the country's inhabitants with extinction.
Wading in on the discussion, which has attracted research by academics in Britain and the U.S., Old Etonian Nat wrote: 'When you make love to your wife there can be some problems, with a doll none of that matters.'
It's unlikely the remark will be well-received by his second wife, former Page 3 model Loretta Basey, 27, to whom he refers in his online profile with the bio: 'Happily married to Loretta with five spoilt dogs.'
The comment will also do little to help heal a long-running family feud, which emerged when Nat (who now lives in Switzerland) married Loretta in 2016.
Neither his 82-year-old philanthropist father nor his mother Serena attended the ceremony at the Swiss ski resort Klosters or the wedding party at Stowell Park, Wiltshire.
One person who did attend the nuptials was Labour peer Peter Mandelson, with whom Nat shares an intimate history.
In 2005, the pair went on what Nat described as a 'delightful' trip to a Siberian sauna, where they were beaten with birch twigs by a 25-year old male banya-keeper.
Nat's candid opinions on sex dolls do, however, give a glimpse into his otherwise closely guarded personal life.
When he divorced the late socialite Annabelle Neilson, who died earlier this month, it was understood that to secure a financial settlement she was required to revert to her maiden name and sign a confidentiality agreement, promising to never discuss their three-year marriage.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
