Earlier this year, the Pentagon publicly accused China for the first time of being behind attacks on the US. The Washington Post reported last month that Chinese hackers had gained access to the Pentagon's most advanced military programs. The director of national intelligence, James Clapper, identified cyber threats in general as the top national security threat. Obama officials have repeatedly cited the threat of cyber-attacks to advocate new legislation that would vest the US government with greater powers to monitor and control the internet as a means of guarding against such threats. One such bill currently pending in Congress, the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (Cispa), has prompted serious concerns from privacy groups, who say that it would further erode online privacy while doing little to enhance cyber security. In a statement, Caitlin Hayden, national security council spokeswoman, said: "We have not seen the document the Guardian has obtained, as they did not share it with us. However, as we have already publicly acknowledged, last year the president signed a classified presidential directive relating to cyber operations, updating a similar directive dating back to 2004. This step is part of the administration's focus on cybersecurity as a top priority. The cyber threat has evolved, and we have new experiences to take into account. "This directive establishes principles and processes for the use of cyber operations so that cyber tools are integrated with the full array of national security tools we have at our disposal. It provides a whole-of-government approach consistent with the values that we promote domestically and internationally as we have previously articulated in the International Strategy for Cyberspace. "This directive will establish principles and processes that can enable more effective planning, development, and use of our capabilities. It enables us to be flexible, while also exercising restraint in dealing with the threats we face. It continues to be our policy that we shall undertake the least action necessary to mitigate threats and that we will prioritize network defense and law enforcement as the preferred courses of action. The procedures outlined in this directive are consistent with the US Constitution, including the president's role as commander in chief, and other applicable law and policies."

As the Süddeutsche itself reports, news that Deutsche Bank conducts offshore operations isn't new. As the paper notes, such activities aren't as prolific at Deutsche as at Switzerland's UBS, where the records traced at least 2,900 offshore entities. Back in 2009, it was already public knowledge that Deutsche Bank had some 500 subsidiaries in places known to be tax havens.

Still, the paper claims, the government has done little to stop a German firm from engaging in the kind of financial behavior Berlin has been aggressively combatting in countries like Luxembourg, Switzerland and Cyprus. The paper quotes the financial policy point man in parliament for the Green Party, Gerhard Schick, criticizing both the government and the business model of firms like Deutsche Bank. He alleges the banks may be contributing to the shielding of money laundering activities, tax evasion and money linked to corruption. He also alleges that Chancellor Angela Merkel's conservative government "at the very least tolerates these illegal structures and is possibly protecting them." In an interview with SPIEGEL ONLINE published on Friday, the head of Germany's Federal Financial Supervisory Authority (BaFin), Elke König, said her authority, although not responsible for taxes, would investigate if banks appeared to be systematically violating or helping people to violate tax law. "Banks have a special responsibility," she said.

For Deutsche Bank, Germany's largest bank, the revelations are creating a second wave of unwelcome scrutiny this week. On Wednesday, the Financial Times reported that Germany's central bank, the Bundesbank, has launched an investigation into claims the bank hid billions of dollars of losses on credit derivatives during the financial crisis. Bundesbank investigators plan to fly to New York next week as part of the inquiry into claims that the bank miss valued credit derivatives in order to hide losses as high as $12 billion and avoid a government bailout.

It was always going to be an unusual but memorable moment as Italy's parliament reconvened after the recent inconclusive elections, with members of the maverick party founded by comedian Beppo Grillo taking their places for the first time.

And so it is proving. Southern Europe editor John Hooper writes:Not since the dawn of the Italian Republic after the Second World War, when ex-Communist partisans arrived in force, has there been an opening of parliament anything like today’s.The representatives of the Five Star Movement (M5S) unexpectedly respected the rule that male Italian lawmakers must wear ties (though, in line with the M5S’s enivronmentalist principles, many chose a black one bearing the words “No Coal”). But from the moment that the movement’s deputies entered the Chamber, it was clear they were going to be awkward to deal with.Instead of taking up a position on the left or right of the semi-circle in which the members of the lower house sit, the M5S’s deputies (who prefer to be called “citizens”) ranged themselves around the back.“Neither right nor left, but above (and beyond),” chirped one of their number, Tiziana Ciprini, on her Facebook page.The whole episode reflected the view that the movement’s co-founder, the comedian, Beppe Grillo, put to me in an interview last month: that the M5S cannot be fitted into conventional political categories.It is one of things that worries many Italians about the M5S. Most of the so-called grillini are passionately committed to progressive causes (they eschew the mineral water that is everywhere available in parliament in favour of tap water, for example).  But denying the existence of left and right is a classic sign of populism. And Mussolini did it all the time.

The International Monetary Fund said on Thursday that it would not disburse funds under its part of the EU-IMF package unless the eurozone delivers on a bond "buy-back" scheme, which is supposed to cut Greece’s burden by 10pc of GDP and is deemed crucial for restoring long-term viability. If the IMF withdraws, Finland and Holland will also pull out of the programme. "This has become a really big problem," said Raoul Ruparel from Open Europe. The dispute comes as Moody’s said the EU-IMF deal to unlock €44bn in bail-out payments to Athens merely papers over cracks and does little to alleviate Greece’s "extreme economic and social fragility".  "We believe that the country’s debt burden remains unsustainable," it said. Moody’s warned that there can be so lasting solution until EU states and official creditors agree to write down their holdings, now the lion’s share. Private investors are furious at demands that they take a second "haircut" of 70pc on residual holdings, after already taking a 53.5pc loss earlier this year, while official creditors still refuse all loses.   Having given guarded and subsequently misleading support for the latest Greek bail out plan, Ms Lagards has now done her job, which is to carry out IMF policy, not French, Euro or personal
inclinations. This whole Greek farce is a tragedy for the Greeks and everyone connected with them and their failed economy.
She should have made the IMF position clear at the meeting rather than offer false hope to so many, and she should be condemned for that.   The Greeks, meanwhile seem to have two options.
Leave the Euro, or alternatively, leave the Euro.

The only moral approach to this nightmare is for the EU to allow/encourage/force Greece to return to its own currency and instead of pouring endless zillions into the bottomless pit of keeping Athens in this latest piece of European utopian insanity, the EU/IMF etc should use what funds it can donate to help the Greek economy benefit from its newly minted but devalued Drachma to rise again from the dangerous and irrational EMU.

Handful....

"Drachma" is an ancient Greek currency unit and translates as a "handful", which is a lot less than what Greece will need to pay off all its debts.

For two years, everyone has been asking what would happen if Greece left the euro and went back to the drachma. Now that time may be upon us. ... With Greece unable to devalue its currency, the country is hobbled with crippling debt payments it cannot afford. Even though it has cut its debt in half, Greece has been subject to much social unrest as five years of recession and bailout-imposed spending cuts have bitten hard.

Last week, a majority of Greeks voted for parties that want to rip up the country's bailout agreement with the European Union and International Monetary Fund (IMF) - including neo-Nazis.

The biggest winner was the leftist anti-bailout coalition, Syriza, whose share of the vote more than tripled and who describe the austerity imposed by the bailout as "barbaric".

Syriza is among those holding talks about forming a government, one that rejects policies of austerity, and if it comes to pass, a Syriza-led government will definitely not adhere to the terms of the bailout.....So how would Greece leave the euro?

No big announcement

In reality, the new prime minister probably will not announce it on TV one day, between broadcasts of the lottery and the football.

The new government will want to renegotiate some parts of the bailout, but if that doesn't happen, then Greece could simply stop paying its debt.

That would be a euro default.  Actually, a second, as Greece technically defaulted on its debts when it renegotiated a 50% write-off of its debts with its creditors earlier this year....And that would put the ball back in Brussels' court

Finland has objected to a Franco-German plan to make decisions on using the

Finland has objected to a Franco-German plan to make decisions on using the eurozone bail-out fund easier, saying it is an "alarming" move. Finnish finance minister Jutta Urpilainen on Wednesday (7 December) said she could not accept Paris and Berlin's push, outlined in a letter sent to Brussels on Wednesday evening, that decisions on the eurozone's rescue mechanisms should be made by majority vote rather than by unanimity. ”In the future, consensus would no longer be required. From the Finnish perspective, it is a very alarming arrangement, and one that Finland cannot accept," she said, according to YLE, Finland’s public broadcaster. The Finnish parliament on Thursday (8 December) will decide on the constitutionality of the proposal, hours before the start of summit negotiations in Brussels, expected to last until the early hours of Friday morning. The country's constitutional law committee heard constitutional law expert Kaarlo Tuori on Wednesday, who said that the proposal would infringe upon the rights of Finnish taxpayers. “Finland will give up its veto rights when it comes to [the still-to-be-implemented, permanent bail-out fund, the European Stability Mechanism] decisions,” Tuori said. “Without its own consent, Finland could be committed to decisions that concern using tax money paid by Finnish taxpayers.” The committee’s chair, Miapetra Kumpula-Natri, said the committee's decision will tie the hands of Prime Minister Jyrki Katainen when he negotiates at Friday’s crucial EU summit, YLE reports. The Franco-German plan, put forward on Monday, aims to avoid having the decision-making held up by just one country, as happened earlier this year when Slovakia's domestic politics delayed ratification of the current bail-out fund. Under the proposal, a super majority - corresponding to 85 percent of capital in the European Central Bank - would be enough to secure use of the fund's money. Critics, however, point out that this would still give a de facto veto to the big countries. Separately, the biggest opposition party in the Netherlands on Wednesday said that elections should be called if the Franco-German plans, which include suggestions for tighter economic governance, are put in place.

Germany said European Union leaders won’t provide the complete fix to the euro-area debt crisis that global policy makers are pushing for at an Oct. 23 summit. German Chancellor Angela Merkel has made it clear that “dreams that are taking hold again now that with this package everything will be solved and everything will be over on Monday won’t be able to be fulfilled,” Steffen Seibert, Merkel’s chief spokesman, said at a briefing in Berlin today. The search for an end to the crisis “surely extends well into next year.” Group of 20 finance ministers and central bankers concluded weekend talks in Paris endorsing parts of an emerging plan to avoid a Greek default, bolster banks and curb contagion. They set the Oct. 23 summit of European leaders in Brussels as the deadline for it to be delivered. On the summit agenda is how any recapitalization of Europe’s banks “might be carried out in a coordinated way” and how to make the European Financial Stability Facility, the EU’s rescue fund for indebted states, as effective as possible, Seibert said. The leaders will also discuss ways to tighten economic and financial policy, he said. The euro retreated from a one-month high against the dollar after Seibert’s comments, following last week’s biggest gain in more than two years on speculation that European policy makers are stepping up efforts to stop the crisis. German 10-year bonds rallied and the Stoxx Europe 600 Index pared an advance of as much as 1.5 percent and was up 0.3 percent at 12:47 p.m. in Frankfurt.

The real estate sector and the capital market

The real estate sector and the capital market have been among the worst hurt by the crisis in the last three years. However, real estate companies have been less affected than other sectors, such as industry and constructions, and have become some of the most valuable entities on the RASDAQ market.
Generalcom Bucureşti (GECM), controlled by French businessman Alain Bonte, currently has the biggest capitalisation on RASDAQ, of over 300 million RON (70 million euros), higher even than in 2007, before the crisis, when both the Stock Exchange and the real estate market were at all-time highs. Unirea Shopping Center (SCDM), the company held by Dan Adamescu which owns Unirea shopping centre in central Bucharest, is valued at nearly 200 million RON (46 million euros) at present, around 45% less than in July 2007. How can this paradox be explained?One reason is that these companies are not real estate developers, which have in fact been significantly hurt by the crisis, they are instead companies that own real estate assets and make revenues from renting them out. Second, most of them inherited high street stores in big cities, which means they have little trouble finding tenants.Unirea Shopping Center (SCDM), the company held by Dan Adamescu which owns Unirea shopping centre in central Bucharest, is valued at nearly 200 million RON (46 million euros) at present, around 45% less than in July 2007. How can this paradox be explained?One reason is that these companies are not real estate developers, which have in fact been significantly hurt by the crisis, they are instead companies that own real estate assets and make revenues from renting them out. Second, most of them inherited high street stores in big cities, which means they have little trouble finding tenants.

The Bank of England decided against any new stimulus measures

LONDON — With the economic recovery showing some resilience in Europe, the Bank of England and the European Central Bank left their main interest rates at record lows on Thursday.
The Bank of England decided against any new stimulus measures for Britain, a day after the Federal Reserve moved to buy an additional $600 billion in government bonds to strengthen the United States economy. The British bank left its bond purchasing program at £200 billion, or $322 billion, and its main interest rate at 0.5 percent.
And the president of the European Central Bank, Jean-Claude Trichet, indicated at a news conference Thursday in Frankfurt that the Fed’s move would not force the bank to change its monetary strategy, adding that the current rate at 1 percent was “appropriate.”