Looking for His glorious appearing! Titus 2:13

Tumbling Euro not Enough to Save Germany' Factories
Dec 9th, 2014
Daily NewsThe Telegraph
Categories: Today's Headlines;Contemporary Issues

German industrial production data has failed to match the expectations of analysts, as the country faces lower growth next year

Germany's factories have not been able to take advantage of a euro rout. Photo: AP

Six Triggers That Could Renew a Eurozone Crisis in 2015
Dec 9th, 2014
Daily NewsThe Telegraph
Categories: Today's Headlines;Contemporary Issues

Tensions in the eurozone's largest economies could pull the region apart next year, as a number of political risks could bubble over, according to Nordea

The euro project could face fresh challenges in 2015. Photo: BLOOMBERG

Let the Headlines Speak
Dec 9th, 2014
Daily NewsFrom the internet
Categories: Today's Headlines;Contemporary Issues

Walgreens pulls 'swastika' wrapping paper off shelves
US retailer Walgreens announced Monday that it is removing all rolls of a wrapping paper from its shelves nationwide after a woman from the Northridge community of Los Angeles complained Sunday that there are swastikas in the design.  

Islamic State Claims ‘Radioactive Device’ Now in Europe
An alleged weapons maker for the Islamic State (IS) claimed that a “radioactive device” has been smuggled into an undisclosed location in Europe, according to an intelligence brief released Monday by the SITE Intelligence Group.  

Shallow undersea quake strikes off eastern Indonesia
A magnitude 5.7 earthquake jolted North Sulawesi in eastern Indonesia on Tuesday, the Indonesian Agency for Meteorological, Climatological and Geophysics said here. The quake struck at 10:09 a.m. Jakarta time (0309 GMT).  

Obama renews NSA snooping for 90 more days
President Obama has renewed the NSA’s phone-snooping program for another three months, with the administration saying Monday that it’s too important to let it expire right now, defying members of Congress who said it was time to ax the controversial program. Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. and National Intelligence Director James R. Clapper said Monday they’ve won a 90-day extension of the snooping authority from the secret court that oversees intelligence activities.  

China Takes Nuclear Weapons Underwater Where Prying Eyes Can’t See
China is preparing to arm its stealthiest submarines with nuclear missiles that could reach the U.S., cloaking its arsenal with the invisibility needed to retaliate in the event of an enemy strike.  

Iranian Officials Vow to Get Nukes, Target Israel, US Forces
During the past month, senior Iranian officials have been speaking openly about the possibility of launching military strikes against Israel and U.S. forces in the Middle East and of dragging out nuclear talks with the international community in order to obtain atomic weapons.  

Sharyl Attkisson: Obama Officials' Profanity Is Nothing New
Emmy Award-winning journalist and former CBS News correspondent Sharyl Attkisson says she's been the victim of profanity-laced tirades by Obama administration officials. Attkisson was asked about the revelation by recently-retired ABC News White House correspondent Ann Compton that President Barack went on a profane, off-the-record outburst over scandals he believed the press was overblowing.  

If thine eye offend thee…
In the book of Matthew (18:9), it states, “If thine eye offend thee, pluck it out and cast it from thee: it is better for thee to enter life with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into hellfire.” It seems to me that many Americans have plucked out both their eyes and cast them away, given that many seem unable to see the precipitous cliff for which we are heading.  

Syria calls for U.N. sanctions on Israel over air strikes
UNITED NATION - Syria asked the United Nations Security Council on Monday to impose sanctions on neighboring Israel, a day after accusing the Jewish state of bombing areas near Damascus international airport and in the town of Dimas, near the border with Lebanon.  

US, UK join major nuclear weapons conference
Vienna - The United States and Britain on Monday for the first time attended a global conference discussing the risks posed by nuclear weapons, reversing their snubbing of previous rounds.  

Syria, Iran accuse Israel of air strike; arms for Hezbollah are likely target
Israel did not confirm the strikes, reportedly near the Damascus airport and Lebanon's border, but analysts noted Prime Minister Netanyahu spoke earlier of dealing with regional threats.Israeli warplanes bombed two areas near Damascus on Sunday, the Syrian military said, drawing harsh criticism from the Syrian and Iranian foreign ministers.  

Large Banks Face U.S. Tougher - Than-global Capital Rule
Dec 9th, 2014
Daily NewsBloomberg Business Week
Categories: Today's Headlines;Contemporary Issues

Daniel Tarullo, Federal Reserve Board of Governors member, has said the U.S. requirement should be more stringent than the international standard and take into account how banks borrow money to determine how much more capital they need. Photographer: Alex Wong/Getty Images

Eight of the biggest U.S. banks are about to find out just how risky the Federal Reserve thinks they really are.

Global regulators have already agreed that the world’s biggest banks, including JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM:US) and Citigroup Inc. (C:US), need to have extra capital to absorb losses in a crisis. Fed Governor Daniel Tarullo has said the U.S. requirement should be more stringent than the international standard and take into account how banks borrow money to determine how much more capital they need.

The Fed proposal, to be announced today, may lower returns for shareholders of U.S. banks compared with firms in other parts of the world, according to analysts. The extra capital requirement could be heavier for firms such as Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Morgan Stanley that rely more on markets for short-term funding, instead of looking to depositors.

“The U.S. once again chooses to go its own way and exceed international minimums,” said Karen Shaw Petrou, managing partner of Washington-based research firm Federal Financial Analytics Inc. “We don’t know yet how it’s going to be structured, but if they squeeze the big banks too much, they’ll force some out of some businesses.”

In the wave of rules meant to prevent a repeat of the 2008 financial crisis, the Fed has made global agreements tougher when applying them to U.S. lenders. This rule will see the same treatment, according to Tarullo, the Fed governor in charge of bank supervision.

Banks should consider whether it makes sense to reduce their “systemic footprint” to minimize the extra capital requirement, Tarullo said in September. He said the Fed was putting emphasis on banks that rely the most on short-term funding because they are vulnerable to runs in a crisis.

Risk Weighted

The extra core-capital requirement could be as high as 4.5 percent of risk-weighted assets on top of the baseline 7 percent defined under rules known as Basel III, according to analysts including Citigroup’s Keith Horowitz.

That’s higher than the 2.5 percent maximum to be levied on banks deemed globally significant in an annual list issued by the Financial Stability Board, which advises the Group of 20 nations on bank regulation. Less complex firms would be held to the baseline capital ratio of 7 percent set by the 27-nation Basel Committee on Banking Supervision.

Wholesale Funding

A rule that targets firms that are more dependent on short-term funding from the markets could hurt New York-based Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs most. Such funding is about 35 percent of their liabilities, compared with about 20 percent for the others, according to data compiled by Keefe, Bruyette & Woods Inc.

Morgan Stanley (MS:US), which has the highest proportion of short-term wholesale funding, probably faces an extra charge of 3.5 percent, according to estimates yesterday from Citigroup analysts led by Horowitz.

Goldman Sachs will probably receive a 3 percentage-point surcharge. The central bank would bring JPMorgan’s surcharge to 3.5 percent, Bank of America Corp. (BAC:US)’s to 2.5 percent and State Street Corp.’s to 2 percent, according to Horowitz. He didn’t estimate a surcharge for Citigroup.

A Fed rule that instead emphasizes the absolute dollar amount of short-term funding, rather than the proportion of short-term funds to liabilities, could place a heavier burden on New York-based JPMorgan.

Bank of America

Among the eight U.S. banks on the FSB’s list of globally significant firms, JPMorgan ranks as the most systemically important. It had the most short-term wholesale funding at the end of September, according to data compiled by KBW. Its $483 billion of short-term funds was followed by Citigroup’s $432 billion and Bank of America (BAC:US)’s $407 billion.

A 1 percentage-point increase in JPMorgan’s capital requirement would lower the firm’s return on equity by about 1.1 points, KBW calculated in a report this week. Most banks could meet the requirement by holding onto a larger proportion of their earnings, KBW said.

KBW analysts led by Fred Cannon said that under Basel III rules, Morgan Stanley’s capital level is already at 11.8 percent, more than the maximum of 11.5 percent that could be imposed by the Fed. Goldman Sachs is at 10 percent, JPMorgan at 10.1 percent, Bank of America at 9.5 percent and Citigroup at 10.7 percent, according to KBW.

U.S. banks have complained that domestic regulators going beyond international standards put them at a disadvantage against overseas rivals. The Fed, together with other bank supervisors, already set tougher U.S. standards for liquidity and leverage.

With so many countries taking different approaches, international comparisons are difficult. For example, Switzerland has asked its two largest banks to have twice the capital level set by Basel, while defining capital more loosely.

To contact the reporters on this story: Jesse Hamilton in Washington at jhamilton33@bloomberg.net; Ian Katz in Washington at ikatz2@bloomberg.net; Yalman Onaran in New York at yonaran@bloomberg.net

Claimed That a Radioactive Device Has Been Smuggled Into EU
Dec 9th, 2014
Daily NewsThe Washington Free Beacon
Categories: Today's Headlines;War

Smoke billows behind an Islamic State group sign / AP

An alleged weapons maker for the Islamic State (IS) claimed that a “radioactive device” has been smuggled into an undisclosed location in Europe, according to an intelligence brief released Monday by the SITE Intelligence Group.

“A Radioactive Device has entered somewhere in Europe,” according Twitter user Muslim-Al-Britani, who claims to be a freelance jihadist weapons maker now working alongside IS (also known as ISIL or ISIS), according to tweets captured and disseminated by SITE.

The claim by Al-Britani comes just days after reports emerged that IS could have in its possession a dirty bomb, the elements of which were obtained via earlier IS raids on a university research facility in Mosul that contained uranium. Al-Britani is also responsible for the flurry of reports on the dirty bomb.

Al-Britani, who has disseminated on his Twitter feed “weapon instructions and manuals,” claimed on Nov. 23 that the “Islamic State does have a dirty bomb. We found some radioactive material from Mosul university,” according to the tweets reproduced by SITE.

While it is difficult to assess the veracity of Al-Britani’s claims, U.S. officials have expressed concern about IS potentially smuggling nuclear and radioactive material out of Iraq.

U.S. and Iraqi officials inked a pact in September meant to step up efforts to combat this type of smuggling, which the United States deemed a “critical” threat.

“There’s always a concern about radiological or radioactive sources,” a State Department official told the Washington Free Beacon at the time.

While the United States, at that time, was “not aware of any cases of these types of material being smuggled out of the country thus far,” ISIL could potentially use these radioactive materials to create a crude bomb, the official said.

“This is the kind of thing where if ISIL got its hands on enough radioactive sources or radioactive sources of a sufficient radioactivity level and they decided to turn it into a bomb and blow it up in a market, that would be a very unpleasant thing,” the official said.

Iraq reportedly informed the United Nations in July that terrorists had seized nuclear materials being housed at Mosul University. Some 90 pounds of uranium were said to have been stolen, according to reports.

Former Pentagon adviser Michael Rubin said that intelligence officials should be considering the information disseminated by purported IS confidants.

“Too often, counterterrorism officials plan to prevent replication of the last terror attack,” Rubin said. “Terror groups, however, plan to shock with something new.”

“Maybe Britani is lying, and maybe he’s not. But Western officials would be foolish to assume that just because something hasn’t happened yet, it won’t,” Rubin said. “The terrorist groups have the motivation and, thanks to post-withdrawal vacuum created in Iraq, the means to strike the West like never before.”

The threats also should factor into the ongoing debates about border control, according to Rubin.

“Perhaps it’s also time to recognize that open borders and successful counter-terrorism are mutually exclusive,” he said. “It’s a lesson that might fly in the face of Obama’s ideology, but reality will always trump political spin.”

China's New Long - Range Weapon Causes Non-lethal Pain from Afar
Dec 9th, 2014
Daily NewsPopular Science
Categories: Today's Headlines;Contemporary Issues

China Takes Nuclear Weapons Underwater Where Prying Eyes Cant See
Dec 9th, 2014
Daily NewsBloomberg
Categories: Today's Headlines;Contemporary Issues

China is preparing to arm its stealthiest submarines with nuclear missiles that could reach the U.S., cloaking its arsenal with the invisibility needed to retaliate in the event of an enemy strike.

Fifty years after China carried out its first nuclear test, patrols by the almost impossible-to-detect JIN class submarines armed with nuclear JL–2 ballistic missiles will give President Xi Jinping greater agility to respond to an attack.

The nuclear-powered subs will probably conduct initial patrols with the missiles by the end of this year, “giving China its first credible sea-based nuclear deterrent,” according to an annual report to Congress submitted in November by the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission.

Deploying the vessels will burnish China’s prestige as Xi seeks to end what he calls the “cold war” mentality that resulted in U.S. dominance of Asia-Pacific security. Since coming to power, Xi has increased military spending with a focus on longer-range capacity, including plans to add to the country’s tally of a single aircraft carrier.

“For the first time in history, China’s nuclear arsenal will be invulnerable to a first strike,” said independent strategist Nicolas Giacometti, who has written analysis for The Diplomat and the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “It’s the last leap toward China’s assured nuclear-retaliation capability.”

China’s nuclear-defense strategy is engineered to provide retaliation capability in the event of attack from nuclear powered nations as far away as the U.S. and also from Russia and India, according to Felix Chang, a senior fellow at the Foreign Policy Research Institute in Philadelphia.

Nuclear ‘Hedge’

While China doesn’t view North Korea as a direct nuclear risk, officials are concerned about what might happen if North Korea threatened South Korea or Japan and the region became unstable, Chang said.

China’s nuclear-armed submarines will be “useful as a hedge to any potential nuclear threats, including those from North Korea, even if they are relatively small,” he said.

The deployment of the submarines could pressure China to assure foreign militaries that its navy chiefs and political leaders can communicate with and control them. Chinese and U.S. ships and planes are coming into greater proximity in the Pacific as China asserts its claims to territory in the South China Sea and East China Sea, risking near misses or a clash.

Former U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said in an interview in January that ex-President Hu Jintao “did not have strong control” of the People’s Liberation Army. The “best example,” Gates said, was China’s roll out of its J-20 stealth fighter jet during a visit he made in January 2010. The event seemed to catch Hu unaware, Gates said.

‘Positive Control’

Since coming to power Xi has tightened his grip on the military, taking over as head of the Central Military Commission in November 2012, when he became Communist Party chief. Hu waited about two years before becoming chairman of the commission.

“China is going to have to reassure their adversaries that those submarines are under positive control at all times,” said Malcolm Davis, an assistant professor of China-Western relations at Bond University on Australia’s Gold Coast.

“Positive control” refers to the procedures to ensure the CMC’s absolute control of its nuclear assets, such as the authorization codes it would send to submarines, where, after verification by the commander and probably two other officers, missiles would be launched.

‘Potential Enemies’

“It demands that China set up appropriate command and control infrastructure to ensure that the CMC can keep in touch with the submarines, even when they are at sea and under the water,” said Davis. “The U.S., U.K., France and Russia all maintain such communications capabilities for ensuring positive control” of their submarines at sea.

By assuring potential enemies that weapons will only be fired if ordered by central command, China’s military would increase the deterrent value of its nuclear-armed submarines, he said.

“Those assurances are likely to be made at the highest level military-to-military meetings behind closed doors,” Davis said. Otherwise China is largely expected to keep its nuclear capabilities secret.

Lacking Transparency

“High-confidence assessments of the numbers of Chinese nuclear capable ballistic missiles and nuclear warheads are not possible due to China’s lack of transparency about its nuclear program,” the U.S. report to Congress said. The Pentagon hasn’t provided an estimate of the size of China’s nuclear warhead stockpile since 2006, according to the report.

China’s defense ministry did not reply to faxed questions about when regular patrols by nuclear-armed JIN-class submarines would begin, or China’s nuclear strategy.

The modernization of China’s nuclear forces is focused on improving the capacity to deter other nuclear powers, said Giacometti, speaking by phone from Brussels.

Until 2006, its only ballistic missile able to deliver a nuclear warhead to the continental U.S. was the liquid-fueled, silo-based DF-5A, he said. These were considered vulnerable because fueling takes a few hours during which the missile must remain in its silo. To protect them, China built mock silos and adopted a policy of secrecy that made a disarming first strike harder to execute.

In 2006, China introduced the land-based mobile DF-31A ballistic missiles, whose 6,959-mile (11,200 kilometer) maximum range could reach the U.S. The missiles are solid-fueled, so can be fired almost immediately if warheads are pre-fitted, Giacometti said.

U.S. Satellites

The U.S.’s intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities -- from satellites to high-altitude drones, such as the Northrop Grumman RQ-4 Global Hawk -- can monitor vast areas of territory and detect mobile intercontinental ballistic missile launchers, he said. Any information gleaned could be transmitted to U.S. strike assets, from long-range high-speed missiles to B-2 Spirit Stealth Bombers, to take out the launchers before they fire.

In comparison to the land-based launchers, nuclear-powered ballistic-missile submarines that rarely need to surface are much better at hiding.

Right now, China has three of those -- the JIN class -- and is likely to add two more by 2020, according to the Commission’s report. Each could carry 12 JL-2 missiles, which after a decade of development “appear to have reached initial operational capability,” it said.

Coastal Waters

The JL–2’s range of about 4,598 miles means China could conduct nuclear strikes against Alaska if it unleashed the missiles from waters near China; against Alaska and Hawaii if launched from waters south of Japan; against Alaska, Hawaii, and western continental U.S. if fired from waters west of Hawaii; and against all 50 U.S. states if launched from waters east of Hawaii, the report said.

“The big scoop would be determining where those submarine patrols will take place,” said Chang.

The submarines are expected to initially confine themselves to China’s coastal waters and the South China Sea where they could roam with little chance of detection. For the missiles to reach Hawaii or the continental U.S. the submarines would need to foray into the western Pacific and beyond, which Davis from Bond University said would be “more challenging because they’d have to run the gauntlet of U.S. anti-submarine capabilities.”

China’s advances are cause for concern in some parts of the U.S. defense establishment.

First Use

“We must continue to modernize our nuclear capabilities,” Admiral Harry Harris said Dec. 2 at his nomination hearing to become commander of the U.S. Pacific Command, when asked how the U.S. should respond to China’s build up. Harris said that he considered North Korea, which is developing its own nuclear arsenal, to be the biggest threat to security in Asia.

Analysts don’t expect China to modify its longstanding “no-first-use” nuclear policy that states its weapons will only be used if China comes under nuclear attack.

Having enhanced its nuclear-deterrence capability, China may begin to communicate more about the planned evolution of its nuclear forces, Giacometti said.

“More openness on China’s side might then open up more space for confidence-building measures and lay the ground for future arms control discussions,” he said.

Banks Urge Clients to Take Cash Elsewhere
Dec 9th, 2014
Daily NewsYahoo Finance
Categories: Today's Headlines;Contemporary Issues

.Banks are urging some of their largest customers in the U.S. to take their cash elsewhere or be slapped with fees, citing new regulations that make it onerous for them to hold certain deposits.

The banks, including J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., Citigroup Inc., HSBC Holdings PLC, Deutsche Bank AG and Bank of America Corp., have spoken privately with clients in recent months to tell them that the new regulations are making some deposits less profitable, according to people familiar with the conversations.

In some cases, the banks have told clients, which range from large companies to hedge funds, insurers and smaller banks, that they will begin charging fees on accounts that have been free for big customers, the people said. Bank officials are also working with these firms to find alternatives for some of their deposits, they said.

The change upends one of the cornerstones of banking, in which deposits have been seen as one of the industry’s most attractive forms of funding, said more than a dozen corporate officials, consultants and bank executives interviewed by The Wall Street Journal.

Deposits have traditionally been a crucial growth engine for banks. Banks generally pay depositors one interest rate and then make loans with higher rates, often collecting fees in the process. But deposits also can be withdrawn at any time, potentially leaving a bank short of cash if too much money is removed at once.

The new rule driving the action is part of a broader effort by U.S. regulators and policy makers to make the financial system safer. But the move may inconvenience corporations that now have to pay new fees or look for alternatives to their bank.

Sal Sammartino, vice president of banking at Stewart Title, a unit of Stewart Information Services Corp., a global title insurance company based in Houston, said he has had sleepless nights in recent weeks as he has negotiated with large banks to try to keep the firm’s deposits there. He declined to name the banks.

“Ultimately my balances aren’t as profitable for the banks, and that’s going to impact my business,” he said.

In an environment of slow economic growth with fewer opportunities to make loans and ultralow interest rates, some banks feel they have too much money on deposit.

Some banks, including J.P. Morgan and Bank of New York Mellon Corp., have also started charging institutional clients fees to hold euro deposits, mainly driven by the European Central Bank’s move to make firms pay to park their cash with the ECB. BNY Mellon recently started charging 0.2% on euro deposits. State Street Corp. said in its third-quarter earnings call in October that it planned to begin charging fees later this year on euro deposits.

U.S. banking rules set to go into effect Jan. 1 compound the issue, especially for deposits that are viewed as less likely to stay at the bank through difficult times.

The new U.S. rules, designed to make bank balance sheets more resistant to the types of shocks that contributed to the 2008 financial crisis, will likely have little effect on retail deposits, insured up to $250,000 by federal deposit insurance. But the rules do affect larger deposits that often come from big corporations, smaller banks and big financial firms such as hedge funds.

Hundreds of companies and other bank customers with deposits that exceed the insurance limits could be affected by the banks’ actions.

Overall, about $4 trillion in deposits at banks in the U.S. were uninsured, covering more than 3.5 million accounts, according to Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. data.

The rule primarily responsible involves the liquidity coverage ratio, overseen by the Federal Reserve and other banking regulators. The new measure, finalized in September, as well as some other recent global regulations, are designed to make banks safer by helping them manage sudden outflows of deposits in a crisis.

The banks are required to maintain enough high-quality assets that could be converted into cash during a crisis to cover a projected flight of deposits over 30 days.

Because large, uninsured deposits would be expected to leave most quickly, the rule will now require that banks maintain reserves that they cannot use for profitable activities like making loans. That makes it much less efficient or profitable for banks to hold these deposits.

The new rules treat various types of deposits differently, based on how fast they are likely to be withdrawn. Insured deposits from retail customers are regarded as more safe and require that banks hold reserves equal to as little as 3% of the sums.

But the banks must hold reserves of as much as 40% against certain corporate deposits and as much as 100% of some big deposits from financial institutions such as hedge funds.

Some corporate officials said the new rules could make it more expensive for them to keep money in the bank or push them into riskier savings instruments such as short-term bond funds or uninsured money-market funds.

“You’re going to see a lot of corporations that have had much simpler portfolios that are going to move toward more sophisticated portfolios,” said Tory Hazard, president and chief operating officer of Institutional Cash Distributors, a broker to large clients looking for places to hold their cash.

Some bankers said they are advising corporate clients to break up large deposits across several banks, including smaller ones not affected by all of the new rules. Others might be attracted to other products offered by banks or products being created by asset managers.

Some customers are negotiating for a reduction in the fees, said people familiar with the discussions.

J.P. Morgan told some clients of its commercial bank recently that it would begin charging monthly fees on deposit accounts from which clients can withdraw money at any time. The new charges will start Jan. 1 for U.S. accounts, according to an Oct. 21 memo reviewed by the Journal, and later for international accounts.

“New liquidity and capital requirements have changed the operating environment and increased the cost of doing business with financial institutions,” the memo read.

The change affects some hedge-fund customers, rather than corporate accounts. The charges include items such as a $500 monthly account maintenance fee for demand deposits and a $25 charge per paper statement.

Larger clients with broad, long-term relationships with their banks may get a break on the new fees, according to people familiar with the situation. Banks also are likely to differentiate between clients’ operational deposits, used for things like payroll, and excess cash that can be pulled more easily, the people said.

At a National Association of Corporate Treasurers conference in October, consultant Treasury Strategies noted that the new rules “will redefine the economics and dynamics of corporate banking relationships.”

Some argue that while it is a good policy on its face, the rule potentially magnifies problems in a recession by encouraging banks to hoard high-quality assets, potentially paralyzing markets for these assets such as Treasury securities and some corporate bonds.

“This proposal, which is supposed to promote financial stability, actually does the opposite,” said Thomas Quaadman, a vice president at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

Thomas Deas, treasurer at chemicals company FMC Corp. said dialogue is increasing between banks and corporate clients as company executives get their arms around the potential new fees.

Robert Marley, assistant treasurer at EnerSys Inc., a maker of industrial batteries in Reading, Pa., said he was recently told by banks that his company would need to move cash that had been sitting in short-term deposit accounts in Europe or face new fees. “I’m not happy about it,” he said.