Will Ireland Turn Not To The EU, But To An Independent non-Euro Neighbour?

The British loan to bail out Ireland’s banks is again being mentioned in the media, here in the WSJ –

Moreover, as Cameron pointed out Thursday, a bilateral loan would likely require the government borrowing money to make available to the Irish, driving up already sky-high U.K. borrowing.


So how’s this?  Cameron and Osborne suddenly finding they have access to significant and substantial extra funds to stop the financial world from falling into a new crisis by rescuing Ireland’s banks?


You might be forgiven for seeing the work of Foundation X involved here.  This would be a way of saving Ireland’s banks without referring to the eurozone and the EU.  It’s a resumption of sovereign states acting bilaterally, and not supranationally.  It’s a sign that central banks that underlie the assumption of power by the EU, are tiring of the bureaucratic and corrupt behemoth they’ve had a hand in creating, and they prefer to work through London to set up a quicker and more effective rescue for Ireland.


This British loan might be sufficient to save Ireland’s membership of the Euro, but the political situation in Ireland will ultimately decide that.  The Irish might note, however, that in their hour of greatest need and threat, the EU was effectively next to useless, and that it was an independent non-Euro government that was able and willing to provide the neighbourly help required.  That in itself must have consequences.

The Tap Blog is a collective of like-minded researchers and writers who’ve joined forces to distribute information and voice opinions avoided by the world’s media.
Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail

7 Responses to “Will Ireland Turn Not To The EU, But To An Independent non-Euro Neighbour?”

  1. Twig says:

    Pardon my ignorance, but why is Foundation X using the UK govt as a “middleman”? Couldn’t they deal directly with Ireland?

  2. Tapestry says:

    It was something Lord James said. Along the lines of Foundation X had selected the UK as the best place to channel funds back into the banking system, and build stability.

    I took that to mean that they found the EU far too complicated and bureaucratic, and the US too scary and corrupt.

    The Rothschilds seem to be British despite their origins, and the Royal family who are known to be part of the central banks’ owners or the providers of the wealth they control.

    It’s as if the Fed and its owners has separated off and is dealing with the US, and the British end is dealing with Britain and possibly Ireland.

    The crisis is stopping the central banks from seeing themselves as a single entity, and the separation is putting them back into a national mentality.

    Can’t all be bad, as it was their willingness to form a one world government that underlies many of our troubles like the EU.

  3. Robin says:

    This is the central banks of which countries ?

  4. Tapestry says:

    Not sure I get the question, Robin.

  5. Robin says:

    Which central banks ? Of France ? Germany ? ECB ?

  6. Tapestry says:

    Osborne is talking about Britain’s bail-out being a bilateral bail-out and not associated with saving the Euro, but saving Ireland’s banking system.

  7. Robun says:

    You mention central banks . What are their names ?

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.