Global Research, April 21, 2018
Url of this article:
https://www.globalresearch.ca/
“War
is good for business” and foreknowledge of US-UK war plans is an
invaluable instrument for investors and institutional speculators.
The
value of Lockheed and BAE shares soared on the World’s stock markets,
on the Monday morning following the Friday April 14 (local time)
bombing of Syria.
Philip May,
husband of Britain’s Prime Minister Theresa May happens to be a senior
executive of Capital Group which is a major holder of both Lockheed
Martin and British Aerospace (BAE) shares:
The fact that Philip May is both a Senior Executive of a hugely powerful investment firm, and privy to reams of insider information from the Prime Minister – knowledge which, when it becomes public, hugely affects the share prices of the companies his firm invests in – makes Mr May’s official employment a staggering conflict of interest for the husband of a sitting Prime Minister. (Tom D. Rogers, Disgusting Conflict of Interest: Theresa May’s Husband’s Investment Firm Made a “Financial Killing” from the Bombing of Syria, April 17, 2018 (emphasis added)
Staging the Attack on Syria
The
Pentagon had ordered a massive deployment of naval forces in the
Eastern Mediterranean. The British government had put its Royal Air
Force bombers on standby. The USS Truman aircraft carrier was en route
to the Eastern Mediterranean.
Meanwhile,
Russia had initiated on the Wednesday prior to the US-led attacks major
war games off the Syria coastline. In turn, Russia’s Ministry of
Defense had warned that they would respond with their state of the art S-400 missile defense system,
not only against the JASSMs and Tomahawk missile attacks but also
against coalition warships, jet fighters and air force bombers deployed
in the Eastern Mediterranean.
Russia S-400 deployed in Syria
While
the broader public was led to believe that a major confrontation
between Russia and the US-led coalition was imminent, with potentially
devastating consequences, a handful of officials in the upper echelons
of the US, UK and French governments were privy to the precise details
and timing of the bombing operation against Syria which took place after
the closing of the World’s stock markets on Friday evening, April 13
(ET). They had advanced knowledge that a confrontation between Russia and the US-led Coalition forces would not take place.
Was Philip May privy to top secret information. transmitted to him by U.K. Prime Minister Theresa May? Did he have prior knowledge of the exact nature of the April 14 attack on Syria as well as its outcome?
Was this information also made available to a handful of Trump cronies, family members and partners on Wall Street?
Did
France’s President Emmanuel Macron– who has ties to powerful financial
interests– share some of this secret information with his financial
friends including the Rothschilds and Goldman Sachs?
Screenshot Bloomberg Business Week, April 19, 2018
Secret Agreement with the Russians
While
a few US, UK and French senior officials and their financial cronies
had foreknowledge of what was going to happen, the vast majority of
financial brokers were totally in the dark. They did not know whether to
bet up or down on Aerospace and Defense stocks including Lockheed
Martin, Raytheon, etc.
The
terms of the top secret agreement with Russia were that Russian
military assets would not be targeted and in return Russia promised NOT
to respond militarily against the US led coalition.
The
attack was staged. There was no concrete military objective. A costly
“face saving” propaganda operation to boost public support for Trump’s
presidency?
Over
100 missiles were directed against three targets. Those targets had
been agreed upon with the Russians. The US, British and French officials
and their financial cronies not only knew when the attack would take
place, they also had secret information on the likely outcome of the
attacks which had been carefully negotiated with Russia.
Syria’s
air defense system responded to the missile attacks with Soviet era
technology. The media heralded the attack as a “success” and Lockheed
Martin, Boeing, Raytheon and BAE stocks skyrocketed on Monday morning at
the opening of major stock markets.
Dow Jones U.S. Selected Aerospace and Defense Index (April 16-20, 2018)
Had
Russia effectively retaliated by targeting US war ships and knocking
coalition jet fighters out of the sky, the outcome would have been
markedly different. In all likelihood, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, BAE,
etc. stocks would have plunged.
On
the day prior to the alleged Douma chemical attacks (April 6), the
value of Lockheed shares had tumbled by 3.46 percent to 334.66 rising to
353.38 on the 19th of April, i.e. a cumulative rise of 5.5%
Did
a handful of powerful financial operators have secret information
(handed to them by politicians in high office) which enabled them to
predict the outcome and “place their financial bets” on a rise in the
stock values of major defense contractors including Northrop Grumman,
Lockheed Martin, BAE, Raytheon and Boeing.
Raytheon produces the Tomahawk cruise missiles which were used in the Syria attack. Lockheed Martin produces the JAMMs.
A Financial Killing?
Are
we talking about billions of dollars accruing to the families and/or
cronies of top US, UK, French government officials? The bonanza
earnings resulting from equity transactions as well as the trade in
options needs to be carefully assessed.
War, Politics and Insider Trade
More
generally, insider trade constitutes a routine process of enrichment of
the financial elites. Powerful financial actors have access to
foreknowledge pertaining to crucial political and military decisions
(e.g. through their social ties to politicians).
Foreknowledge of statements and decisions pertaining to Brexit, for instance, by Britain’s Prime Minister also constitutes an invaluable instrument in the hands of powerful financial interests and institutional speculators.
Conflict of interest and corrupt politics are central to reaping the profits of insider trade.
Disclaimer: The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article.
Copyright © Prof Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, 2018
