Eyewitness: Munich Terrorist Targeted Children, Screamed ‘Allah Akbar’

It is widely being reported that the Munich attacks were purported by ‘right wing’ extremists, who were mad over the influx of migrants. Using that logic, one has to ponder why they’d shoot up a German shopping mall and not a heavily migrant-populated neighborhood. One eyewitness said one of the killers had ‘neo-nazi’ boots on.

Nevertheless, there are conflicting reports coming out. One woman, who was there, said she saw terrorists targeting children who were eating, screaming ‘Allah Akbar.’

“I come out of the toilet and I hear like an alarm, boom, boom, boom,” she told CNN’s Dugald McConnell. “He’s killing the children (…) The children were sitting to eat. They can’t run.”

Loretta said the gunman was right behind her but had his back to her. She sd her 8-year-old son had been in the bathroom with the shooter, whom she described as heavyset and wearing dark clothing. She said the man yelled “Allahu akbar!”

The jury is out. However, the media seems to be convinced this was not an islamic inspired attack.

Police are reporting 8 people are dead.

It is being reported on Sky News that was, in fact, a ‘right wing’ attack. Talk about a black swan event. My head is now going to explode.

Six people are killed and no one has been apprehended, thus far.

An eyewitness, who happens to be a Sky News employee, said one of the shooters was wearing ‘neo nazi’ boots. Moreover, he was ranting and raving about being a German and something or another about mistreatment of foreigners.

Some crazy person actually had a conversation with one of the shooters. BEHOLD.

The majority of the media I am consuming now suggests a ‘right wing’ nazi attack, nothing to do with the animals from ISIS.

‘IT’S TOO EARLY TO SPECULATE. We need to reserve judgement. It could be a jihadist or right wing attack.’ -SKY NEWS, 2016

I’d like to remind you, terror is good for stocks. It gets people riled up, forcing more QE. Bear in mind, we’re all gonna end up in pods, like in the matrix, powering robots. But, in the interim, the virtual reality, created by our central banks, is all that matters.

Does it make sense for eatery stocks to trounce higher after a gunman shoots up a Mcdonald’s in Munich? Of course not. But if you try to understand the pretzel logic of all this, your heads might explode. It’s perverse and done almost in a mocking manner.

This is the ultimate wall of worry. Nothing can surpass the menace of Islamic terrorism at malls, beaches, celebrations of life. As such, stocks are rallying, squeezing the heads of all those shorting into this news flow. This is the very worst dislocation of stock prices with reality I’ve ever seen.

These are horrible people, the very worst people in the world.

Police are telling people to avoid all public places and to lock themselves up at home.

Reports suggest at least a dozen are dead. German officials aren’t giving many details at the moment.

All we know now, multiple shooters, at least 3, killing innocent people. First thing that comes to mind is tet offensive. The barbarians from ISIS are conducting operations on a wide scale.

The men, who are still at large, were wearing all black and black mask. Although the identity of the killers hasn’t been revealed yet, dollars to donuts, the religion of peace has inspired these lunatics to kill in the name of their God.

Americans have never been richer. Household wealth stands at $20 trillion, mostly in the well to do coastal cities of this great steak’d nation. There are some who believe this peak wealth statistic is a harbinger of doom, one that speaks to excess in the financial cycle, disconnected from the economics.

Since 2009, households have seen their holdings of stock and mutual funds nearly double, to $20.6 trillion. Only 6 percent of that gain can be ascribed to new flows of money into the funds or share purchases, according to calculations by Carson, director of global economic research at AllianceBernstein LP in New York. The rest is due to price appreciation.

As a share of disposable personal income, household net worth hit a record high 652.7 percent in the first quarter of last year. (For comparison purposes, the high during the housing boom was 648.3 percent at the end of 2006.) It’s since slipped, to 640.4 percent on March 31 of this year, as equity and house price gains have slowed

Does this graph mean anything? Trying to not be such an intolerable cynic here, isn’t it entirely possible that household wealth, the very thing the Fed has been trying to buoy, might continue to surge upwards to new levels? Or, does that way of thinking fall into the ipso facto world of ‘this time is different’, which we both know rarely happens?

Some might argue the data points Joe Lavorgna are worried about are completely useless stuff, backward looking subterfuge. However, Joe wants all of us to give recession a chance.

Hey, anything can happen, right?

According to the firm’s Chief U.S. Economist Joseph LaVorgna, looking at the index of leading economic indicators — a measure by the Conference Board that includes economic indicators believed to change before the broader business cycle — brings cause for concern.

“While consumer spending was relatively sturdy in the second quarter and nonfarm payroll growth rebounded solidly last month, the downward trend in the growth rate of the LEI indicates that near-term risks to growth remain to the downside,” he writes.

Here’s a chart from the note, where recessions are shaded in grey. “As the chart below illustrates, in the past two business cycles, an outright year-over-year decline in the LEI after a prolonged period of growth has presaged recession,” LaVorgna says.

As of right now, recession doesn’t look likely. However, should we dive lower towards the end of 2016, fueled by energy prices falling to levels that place a sundry of American oil companies in financial distress, the narrative will quickly change from one of recovery to wrought with panic.

It’s hard to take such a bad firm seriously. I mean, really, Wedbush Morgan is the Rodney Dangerfield of investment banks. You know it. I know it.

Their scatter brained skepticism on Nintendo and Pokemon Go are, generally, incomprehensible. We all knew that Nintendo had a partner and everyone knew the revenue split. What exactly is new here, other than valuation?

Wedbush is skeptical about the game’s staying power and economics with Nintendo booking only modest profits from Pokémon Go and likely struggling to achieve its FY:17 guidance given its bullish 3DS software expectations and the potential for NX to slip out of the year Niantic is the publisher of the game and likely pays The Pokémon Company a royalty for the underlying IP. In addition, mobile revenues are split 70% / 30% between the publisher and the applicable storefront. Assuming Nintendo owns 32% of Niantic, matching its stake in The Pokémon Company, they believe that in a best case scenario Nintendo would be entitled to 22.4% of revenues or profits (70% times 32%), and any benefit will likely show up in non-operating income.

I’m not a fan of buying into a 100% melt up. But I do recognize when something special takes hold of people. Pokemon Go is something Nintendo will profit from, immensely. The question is, how sustainable is the hype?

They’ve been bullish on the stock since 2013. However, their price target has been achieved and they feel the risk reward no longer favors investors at these levels. As such, they’ve downgraded the stock and have quietly removed a price target.

BTIG Research downgrades FB to Neutral from Buy noting “While we were SELL rated on Facebook after its IPO due to concerns over it ability to pivot to mobile, we reversed to a BUY rating in October 2013, with the stock at $49.40. With Facebook stock now over $120, exceeding the $117 price target we set one year ago this week, we believe the risk/reward is no longer compelling. Facebook remains one of the only ways to play the shift of legacy media ad dollars to mobile and its advertising growth rate remains staggeringly high, especially for a $348 billion market cap company. However, investor expectations over the past year have risen dramatically and we now feel the bar is simply too high. In turn, we are downgrading the stock to Neutral from Buy and removing our price target.”

The company has been the dominant recipient of ad dollars for social media, period. BTIG would like nothing more than for them to suffer a pig’s death now, in order to look right and the lecture all of us about the virtues of risk analysis.