Today’s News 12th January 2020

  • An Empire Self-Destructs
    An Empire Self-Destructs

    Authored by Jeff Thomas via InternationalMan.com,

    Empires are built through the creation or acquisition of wealth.

    The Roman Empire came about through the productivity of its people and its subsequent acquisition of wealth from those that it invaded.

    The Spanish Empire began with productivity and expanded through the use of its large armada of ships, looting the New World of its gold.

    The British Empire began through localized productivity and grew through its creation of colonies worldwide – colonies that it exploited, bringing the wealth back to England to make it the wealthiest country in the world.

    In the Victorian Age, we Brits were proud to say, “There will always be an England,” and “The sun never sets on the British Empire.”

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    So, where did we go wrong? Why are we no longer the world’s foremost empire? Why have we lost not only the majority of our colonies, but also the majority of our wealth?

    Well, first, let’s take a peek back at the other aforementioned empires and see how they fared. Rome was arguably the greatest empire the world has ever seen. Industrious Romans organized large armies that went to other parts of the world, subjugating them and seizing the wealth that they had built up over generations. And as long as there were further conquerable lands just over the next hill, this approach was very effective. However, once Rome faced diminishing returns on new lands to conquer, it became evident that those lands it had conquered had to be maintained and defended, even though there was little further wealth that could be confiscated.

    The conquered lands needed costly militaries and bureaucracies in place to keep them subjugated but were no longer paying for themselves. The “colonies” were running at a loss. Meanwhile, Rome itself had become very spoiled. Its politicians kept promising more in the way of “bread and circuses” to the voters, in order to maintain their political office. So, the coffers were being drained by both the colonies and at home. Finally, in a bid to keep from losing their power, Roman leaders entered into highly expensive wars. This was the final economic crippler and the empire self-destructed.

    Spain was a highly productive nation that attacked its neighbours successfully and built up its wealth, then became far wealthier when it sailed west, raiding the Americas of the silver and gold that they had spent hundreds of years accumulating. The sudden addition of this wealth allowed the Spanish kings to be lavish to the people and, as in Rome, the Spanish became very spoiled indeed. But once the gold and silver that was coming out of the New World was down to a trickle, the funding for maintaining the empire began to dry up. Worse, old enemies from Europe were knocking at the door, hoping to even old scores. In a bid to retain the empire, the king entered into extensive warfare in Europe, rapidly draining the royal purse and, like Rome, the Spanish Empire self-destructed.

    In the Victorian era, the British Empire was unmatched in the world. It entered the industrial revolution and was highly productive. In addition, it was pulling wealth from its colonies in the form of mining, farming and industry. But, like other countries in Europe, it dove into World War I quickly and, since warfare always diminishes productivity at home whilst it demands major expense abroad, the British Empire was knocked down to one knee by the end of the war.

    Then, in 1939, the game was afoot again and Britain was drawn into a second world war. By the end of the war, it could still be said that there would always be an England, but its wealth had been drained off and, one by one, its colonies jumped ship. The days of empire were gone.

    Into the breach stepped the US. At the beginning of World War I, the US took no part in the fighting, but, as it had experienced its own industrial revolution, it supplied goods, food, and armaments to Britain and her allies. Because the pound and other European currencies could not be trusted not to inflate, payment was made in gold and silver. So the US was expanding its productivity into a guaranteed market, selling at top dollar, using the profits to create larger, more efficient factories, and getting paid in gold.

    Then, in 1939, it all happened again. Although the US eventually joined both wars, they did so much later than Britain and her allies. At the end of World War II, the US had a lively young workforce, as they had lost fewer men to the war. They also had modern factories, which had been paid for by other nations, that could now be used to produce peacetime goods for themselves and the rest of the world more efficiently than anyone else.

    And (and this is a very big “and”) by 1945 they owned or controlled three quarters of the world’s gold, as they’d drained it away from the warring nations in the early days of the war. This allowed the US to invite the post-war leaders to Bretton Woods to explain that, as the holders of the world’s wealth, they’d dictate what the world’s default currency would be: the dollar.

    But this was all threatened by the fact that, when the now-poorer nations of the world sold their goods to the US, they, too, beginning with the French, wished to be paid in gold.

    And so, in the subsequent years, the gold in Fort Knox was beginning to travel back to the east, from whence it had come in previous years. In 1971, this flow was shut off, as the US, still the foremost empire, had the power to simply remove all intrinsic value from the dollar and turn it into a fiat currency. Payment in gold ended.

    Fast-forward to the post-millennium era and we see that America, like the previous empires, ended its acquisition of gold after World War II, yet its people became spoiled by political leaders who promised ever-increasing bread and circuses. The productivity that led to its initial strength was dying off, and it was spending more than it was bringing in. Finally, it sought to maintain its hegemony through warfare, thereby creating a dramatic drain to its wealth.

    Like other empires before it, the US is now on the verge of relinquishing the crown of empire. If there’s any difference this time around, it’s that its collapse will very likely be far more spectacular than that of previous empires. However, just as in previous collapses, those who least understand that the collapse is around the corner are those who are closest to its centre. Clearly, the majority of Americans are worried about their future yet cannot conceive of their country as a second-rate power. And those who hold the reins of that power tend to be the most deluded, delving ever-deeper into debt at an ever-faster rate, whilst expanding welfare and warfare without any concept of how it might all be paid for.

    It’s understandable, therefore, that those of us who are on the outside looking in find it easier to observe objectively from afar and see the coming self-destruction of yet another empire.

    As stated in the first line of this essay, “empires are built through the creation or acquisition of wealth.” They tend to end through the gradual elimination of the free-market system, the metamorphosis to a welfare state, and, finally, through the destruction of wealth through costly warfare.

    Does this indicate the “end of the world”? Not at all. The world did not end with the fall of Rome, Spain, England, or any one of the many other empires. The productive people simply moved to a different geographical location—one that encourages free-market opportunity. The wealth moved with them, then grew, as the free market allowed productive people to make it grow.

    Freedom and opportunity still exist and indeed flourish. All that’s changing is the locations where they are to be found.

    *  *  *

    Unfortunately, most people have no idea what really happens when an economy collapses, let alone how to prepare… We think everyone should own some physical gold. Gold is the ultimate form of wealth insurance. It’s preserved wealth through every kind of crisis imaginable. It will preserve wealth during the next crisis, too. But if you want to be truly “crisis-proof,” there’s more to do… How will you protect yourself in the next crisis? New York Times bestselling author Doug Casey and his team just released a PDF guide that will show you exactly how. Click here to download it now.


    Tyler Durden

    Sat, 01/11/2020 – 23:30

  • Walmart Testing Robots For Fulfilling Grocery Orders
    Walmart Testing Robots For Fulfilling Grocery Orders

    A Walmart Supercenter in Salem, New Hampshire, has been the first store to test a new kind of technology that will use robots to collect grocery items for online order fulfillment. 

    Walmart is one of the largest companies in the world by revenue, with at least 2.3 million employees in the US, has seen rapid increases in labor costs that are forcing unwanted margin compression. 

    The solution offered by C-suite executives has been a pilot program of automating a warehouse in Salem with the goal of deploying robots to eliminate employees and save costs.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    The new robot is called Alphabot, and it’s ten times faster than a human worker – this would increase productivity in the warehouse, driving down the need for new hires during peak holiday periods when orders increase.  

    Alphabot operates inside a 20,000-square-foot warehouse that retrieves refrigerated and frozen items ordered for online grocery.

    Once the robot completes an order, it delivers it to a workstation, where a human checks, bags, and delivers the final order. 

    Brian Roth, a senior manager of pickup automation and digital operations for Walmart, said Alphabot would transform the company’s online grocery operations in the early 2020s. 

     

    “By assembling and delivering orders to associates, Alphabot is streamlining the order process, allowing associates to do their jobs with greater speed and efficiency,” Roth said. “Ultimately, this will lower dispense times, increase accuracy and improve the entirety of online grocery. And it will help free associates to focus on service and selling, while the technology handles the more mundane, repeatable tasks.”

    Roth expects the robots to increase fulfillment speeds and create more convenience for customers that would rival Amazon.

    Walmart said the pilot program in Salem had been underway for six months. The rollout of automating other warehouses across the country could be nearing. 

    The trend in automation will undoubtedly lead to significant layoffs at Walmart through 2030. As we’ve mentioned before, automation will displace at least 20 million US jobs in the coming years.


    Tyler Durden

    Sat, 01/11/2020 – 23:00

  • In Era Of Big Tech Censorship, Big Pharma Intoxication, & Big Government Surveillance, Soleimani's Death A "Win" For No One
    In Era Of Big Tech Censorship, Big Pharma Intoxication, & Big Government Surveillance, Soleimani’s Death A “Win” For No One

    Authored by Mike Adams via NaturalNews.com,

    To those who are celebrating the death of Qasem Soleimani, I ask this simple question: How does his death make you better off in America?

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The First Amendment in America is just as dead as Soleimani, and no one in government — not even Trump — is lifting a finger to defend and restore online free speech. Instead, we all remain enslaved subjects under a fanatical left-wing techno-cult that’s far more insane than Soleimani’s followers ever could have imagined. Yes, Soleimani’s body was shredded by advanced missile technology, but the free speech that once existed in America is no less eviscerated under the malicious censorship war being waged by Google, Facebook, Twitter and YouTube.

    Soleimani may be dead, but censorship is alive and well in America, and no one in any position of power is fighting against it.

    The Pentagon said Soleimani had to be taken out because he was planning “imminent” combat operations against United States persons. Yet Big Tech has already completed its online combat operations against tens of millions of Americans, having successfully banned, demonetized, smeared, slandered and de-platformed nearly every voice that supports the very freedoms America is supposedly fighting for in the Middle East. This abundantly demonstrates the absurdity of any claim that blowing up people in Iraq or Iran somehow makes us “more free” in America. The claim that the Pentagon is “fighting for freedom” is total propaganda.

    If firing missiles at Middle Eastern terrorists made America more free, I would say “fire away!” But Soleimani’s death didn’t end Jack Dorsey’s ban of conservative Twitter accounts, nor Sundar Pichai’s blacklisting of the NaturalNews.com domain from Google, and it has already become abundantly obvious that Hellfire missiles are wasted in Iraq while the real terrorists — such as Sundar Pichai — continue to operate their daily “combat operations” across the ‘net, in total violation of America’s laws and civil rights.

    At least the Iranian people had the sense to mourn the death of their leader, no matter how radical his ideas may have been. Yet here in America, almost no one even recognizes they’ve already lost the very freedoms we all pretend our military is fighting for.

    It’s all just glorious bulls##t.

    Soleimani’s death is not a win for America. It’s a distraction from the massive, gaping losses America is suffering every day right here at home as far more dangerous techno-terrorists run their fanatical oppression schemes across the ‘net, violating the basic human rights of tens of millions of American citizens.

    Big Pharma Intoxication

    At the same time Soleimani’s body was blown to bits, over 100 million Americans were also taking toxic prescription drugs, including mind-altering drugs that have turned America into a zombie land of over-medicated, chemically-altered “toxizens,” ripe for mass media programming. (Because only a brain damaged zombie could watch CNN’s Brian Stelter for more than a few seconds without wanting to plunge their own head into a blender…)

    No matter how much the Pentagon bombs Middle Eastern terrorists, the truth is that America’s mental health is being chemically carpet bombed every single day that Big Pharma is allowed to advertise on television, directly to consumers.

    It’s insane. The FDA “legalized” direct-to-consumer advertising in 1997, and since then, Big Pharma has taken over the corporate media, the tech giants and now even retailers like Amazon.com, which is set to become America’s retail pharmacy and drone delivery giant beginning this year.

    Think about it: In Iraq, drones deliver Hellfire missiles that explode on impact and destroy a nation’s terrorism network. In America, drones deliver psychiatric drugs that blow away human minds and destroy a nation’s cognitive capacity. Frankly, I’m not sure which weapon is more dangerous to society. Soleimani never poisoned the American people with FDA-approved chemical weapons that are falsely labeled “antidepressants.” And Soleimani didn’t bribe 44,000 doctors with kickbacks and free trips to motivate them to prescribe toxic, deadly drugs to patients who don’t need them.

    Soleimani may be dead, but so is America if we don’t stop the mass medication scourge that’s causing widespread brain damage across our own citizens.

    Soleimani didn’t kill 20 million people since January 1, 2000, but guess what? The cancer industry did.

    Doctors, hospitals, pharmaceuticals and medical mistakes have killed over 15 million people in that same time frame. Yet we dare to talk about “protecting Americans” by bombing one man who couldn’t even dream of such large-scale casualties?

    Big Government surveillance threatens us all

    Even as Soleimani was being “Hellfired,” nothing at all was being done to hold James Comey, John Brennan and Barack Obama responsible for the outrageous criminal offenses they committed by conspiring to spy on American citizens — and even frame them — in order to try to destroy Donald J. Trump and overthrow the 2016 election.

    Soleimani could have only dreamed of carrying out the kind of treasonous crimes against America that were successfully achieved by Comey, Brennan and Obama, among others. (Oh, and should I even mention how Soleimani was Obama’s best friend in the Iran nuke deal that turned out to be a complete hoax anyway?)

    Not only did this cabal of deep state traitors carry out deliberate, malicious crimes of illegal surveillance right here at home; Obama actually gave Iran $150 billion to fund their terrorism programs. That included $1.8 billion in physical cash that was stacked on pallets and flown on military cargo planes, delivered directly to Iran. Guess who was the key person in the center of the nuke deal negotiations, by the way? Soleimani, of course. He was Obama’s co-conspirator to transfer cash from the United States to Iran as a way to re-launch Iran’s nuclear weapons development program while funding terrorism on the side.

    Yet no handcuffs have been placed on Obama, nor will they ever be, most likely. So illegal surveillance, money laundering and directly funding America’s foreign enemies is somehow okay in America? Are we supposed to clap like ignorant morons when Trump strikes a Middle Eastern terrorist but completely ignore the far more dangerous terrorist who used to occupy the White House?

    And if this illegal surveillance — authorized by a corrupt FISA court — is not halted and outlawed in America, then aren’t all of us subject to the same sinister surveillance methods that were used against Trump?

    Soleimani may be dead, but no one in America has been held accountable for the crimes of sedition and treason that were deliberately carried out against this nation and our elections process.

    Killing Soleimani didn’t stop the deep state here in America, in other words. And that means we’re all still vulnerable to the unaccountable criminal activity that continues to be carried out by outright traitors like Schiff, Nadler, Pelosi and others.

    Bombing foreign terrorists is as stupid as punching a corpse and screaming “Victory!”

    We’re told by everyone that Soleimani “was a bad guy” who “killed thousands of Americans.”

    The exact same thing could be said about the CEOs of the pharmaceutical companies, by the way. Or the CEOs of tech giants, whose malicious censorship actions now deliberately suppress lifesaving information about nutritional cures and anti-cancer foods that could save countless lives every year in America.

    If our criteria for who gets bombed has now come down to justifying sudden terminations of bad guys “who killed thousands of Americans,” then theoretically shouldn’t abortion centers be at the top of such a list? Abortion was the leading cause of death in America for all of 2019, and while I don’t wish any violence on abortionists, they quite overtly wish violence — and carry out violence — against innocent human children, both born and unborn.

    So Trump kills Soleimani and neocons celebrate, all while Planned Parenthood murders human babies while the Left celebrates. Slap me if I’m off track here, but I still fail to see how anyone is “winning” in all this.

    “…[B]efore Trump’s obsession with attacking Iran, the past four US Administrations lied ceaselessly to bring about wars on Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, Serbia, Somalia, and the list goes on,” writes Ron Paul at RonPaulInstitute.org. “At some point, when we’ve been lied to constantly and consistently for decades about a “threat” that we must “take out” with a military attack, there comes a time where we must assume they are lying until they provide rock solid, irrefutable proof. Thus far they have provided nothing. So I don’t believe them.”

    America is falling into the abyss of fanaticism and foolishness

    The problems in our world today are characterized by too much blood, too much political fanaticism and too much government. We are all living under the thumb of senseless tribalism, political posturing and stupefying incompetence at every level of government itself. And the people running Big Tech, Big Pharma and Big Government are irrational, insane, fanatical lunatics who value nothing but their own power and profit.

    The radical Left celebrates infanticide, just as the radical right celebrates blowing up terrorists on the tarmac. Meanwhile, America is falling into the abyss of mass medication, techno-fascism and government tyranny, all while everyone is too distracted by Hollywood loon bags to notice we’ve already lost the war for freedom.

    If Trump thinks this is making America great again, then we’re in worse trouble than I thought. America is no better off today than it was last week, and the priorities of not just Trump but seemingly everyone in Washington D.C. are so out of whack with reality that we stare in awe and wonder what planet these people think they’re on. (Oh, and in addition to Hunter Biden collecting millions from Burisma, Chelsea Clinton reportedly bagged $9 million for sitting on the board of some venture capital firm, once again proving that incompetence pays in Washington.)

    Hasn’t America already achieved energy independence thanks to all the fracking? So why are we still meddling in the Middle East and wondering why their people kill our soldiers when we are occupying their land with a foreign military presence? If Iran sent troops to occupy America’s cities, you can bet every patriot in America would be targeting them with any weapon at hand. Why are we surprised when the people of other nations carry out acts of violence against our soldiers who occupy their lands?

    The hypocrisy in all this is beyond insane. Maybe instead of fighting a war with Iran to prove who has the biggest missiles, we should just bring the troops back home and let the Middle East solve its own problems, which go all the way back to the Old Testament days of the Bible, by the way. There is no solution in the Middle East that’s ever going to come from a Western military force anyway, and those who pretend such solutions exist are laughably delusional.

    If we restore freedom, real justice and the rule of law in America, then maybe we’ve earned the right to meddle in other nations’ problems, having proven we are really good at making nations great again. But until that day comes, every dollar spent on foreign interventions is a dollar that isn’t spent here at home, materially impacting the lives of everyday American people who are losing their jobs, their livelihoods, their communities and even their sanity because no one in Washington gives a crap about real America anymore.

    That is why we suffer, folks.

    At least Soleimani’s suffering is over. For the rest of us, we have to endure this persistent madness until the big collapse mercifully arrives.


    Tyler Durden

    Sat, 01/11/2020 – 22:30

    Tags

  • World's Tallest Geyser Breaks Eruption Record
    World’s Tallest Geyser Breaks Eruption Record

    Yellowstone’s Steamboat geyser is the world’s tallest currently active geyser and it has been really active lately.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    In 2019, it counted 48 eruptions, according to the USGS Yellowstone Volcano Observatory. As Statista’s Katharina Buchholz details, this number by far surpassed the previous record set in 2018 of 32 eruptions.

    Infographic: World’s Tallest Geyser Breaks Eruption Record | Statista

    You will find more infographics at Statista

    The last time the geyser was remotely this active was in 1964, when it counted 29 eruptions. Records published on the National Park Service website go back as far as 1878, also showing that the geyser has in the past gone years without erupting even a single time.

    “Yellowstone’s thermal areas are the surface expression of the deeper magmatic system, and they are always changing,” R. Greg Vaughan, a research scientist with USGS, wrote.

    “They heat up, they cool down, and they can move around.” And Yellowstone has undergone some changes as of late, such as the eruption of Ear Spring, and the newly active Steamboat Geyser.

    A geyser is a vent through which hot water and steam from below the Earth’s surface can erupt. According to geology.com, geysers are extremely rare phenomena that only occur when many conditions are met. As a result there are only about 1000 geysers in the world. Generally, a geyser forms if water accumulates underground in the proximity of magma, is heated up quickly and ejected onto the surface as steam.

    Michael Poland, the scientist in charge of the Yellowstone Volcano Observatory, said the irregularity of Steamboat is just “a geyser being a geyser.” Poland added: “Steamboat clearly has a mind of its own “and right now it’s putting its independence on display.”


    Tyler Durden

    Sat, 01/11/2020 – 22:00

  • The Politics Behind Banning Russia From The Olympics
    The Politics Behind Banning Russia From The Olympics

    Authored by Michael Averko via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

    There’ve been ongoing propaganda pieces that skirt over some inconvenient realities, for those seeking to unfairly admonish Russia in the Olympic movement.

    One case in point is the January 2 Reuters article “Use 1992 Yugoslavia Precedent for Russians in Tokyo – Historian“. With a stated “some Russians“, that article suggestively under-represents the actual number of 2018 Russian Winter Olympians at Pyeongchang, while supporting a hypocritically flawed aspect, having to do with Yugoslavia in 1992.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The downplaying of Russian participation at Pyeongchang, is seemingly done to spin the image of many Russian cheats being kept out. At the suggestion of the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA), the International Olympic Committee (IOC) closely vetted Russians for competition at the 2018 Winter Olympics. In actuality, the 2018 Russian Winter Olympic participation wasn’t so off the mark, when compared to past Winter Olympiads – something which (among other things) puts a dent into the faulty notion that Russia should be especially singled out for sports doping.

    At the 2014 Sochi Winter Olympics, Russia had its largest ever Winter Olympic contingent of 232, on account of the host nation being allowed a greater number of participants. The 168 Russian Winter Olympians at Pyeongchang is 9 less than the Russians who competed at the 2010 Winter Olympics. Going back further, Russian Winter Olympic participation in 2006 was at 190, with its 2002 contingent at 151, 1998 having 122 and 1994 (Russia’s first formal Winter Olympic appearance as Russia) 113.

    The aforementioned Reuters piece references a “historian“, Bill Mallon, who is keen on using the 1992 Summer Olympic banning of Yugoslavia (then consisting of Serbia and Montenegro) as a legitimate basis to ban Russia from the upcoming Summer Olympics. In this instance, Alan Dershowitz’s periodic reference to the “if the shoe is on the other foot” test is quite applicable. Regarding Mallon, “historian” is put in quotes because his historically premised advocacy is very much incomplete and overly propagandistic.

    For consistency sake and contrary to Mallon, Yugoslavia should’ve formally participated at the 1992 Summer Olympics. The Olympic banning of Yugoslavia was bogus, given that the IOC and the IOC affiliated sports federations didn’t ban the US and USSR for their respective role in wars, which caused a greater number of deaths than what happened in 1990s Bosnia. The Reuters article at issue references a United Nations resolution for sanctions against Yugoslavia, without any second guessing, in support of the preference (at least by some) to keep politics out of sports as much as possible.

    Mallon casually notes that Yugoslav team sports were banned from the 1992 Summer Olympics, unlike individual Yugoslav athletes, who participated as independents. At least two of the banned Yugoslav teams were predicted to be lead medal contenders.

    Croatia was allowed to compete at the 1992 Summer Olympics, despite that nation’s military involvement in the Bosnian Civil War. During the 1992 Summer and Winter Olympics, the former USSR participated in individual and team sports as the Unified Team (with the exception of the three former Soviet Baltic republics, who competed under their respective nation). With all this in mind, the ban on team sports from Yugoslavia at the 1992 Summer Olympics, under a neutral name, appears to be hypocritical and ethically challenged.

    BS aside, the reality is that geopolitical clout (in the form of might making right), is what compels the banning of Yugoslavia, unlike superpowers engaged in behavior which isn’t less egregious. Although a major world power, contemporary Russia lacks the overall geopolitical influence of the USSR. Historian Stephen Cohen and some others, have noted that post-Soviet Russia doesn’t get the same (for lack of a better word) respect accorded to the USSR. This aspect underscores how becoming freer, less militaristic and more market oriented doesn’t (by default) bring added goodwill from a good number of Western establishment politicos and the organizations which are greatly influenced by them.

    On the subject of banning Russia from the Olympics, Canadian sports legal politico Dick Pound, continues to rehash an inaccurate likening with no critical follow-up. (An exception being yours truly.) Between 2016 and 2019, Pound references the Olympic banning of South Africa, as a basis for excluding Russia. South Africa was banned when it had apartheid policies, which prevented that country’s Black majority from competing in organized sports. Russia has a vast multiethnic participation in sports and other sectors.

    As previously noted, the factual premise to formally ban Russia from the Olympics remains suspect. The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) is set to review Russia’s appeal to have the recommended WADA ban against Russia overturned, as Western mass media at large and sports politicos like Pound continue to push for a CAS decision against Russia.


    Tyler Durden

    Sat, 01/11/2020 – 21:30

    Tags

  • "I Am Ready, Able & Willing To Defend Myself": Mob Rat Sends Threatening 'Open Letter' To Former Associates
    “I Am Ready, Able & Willing To Defend Myself”: Mob Rat Sends Threatening ‘Open Letter’ To Former Associates

    In a move that’s seemingly unprecedented in the history of American organized crime, a gangster-turned-government witness has published an open letter to his former criminal associates, warning them that if they’re thinking about trying to whack him, they should probably reconsider – for their own sake.

    Former Genovese family soldier Michael “Cookie” D’Urso penned the letter, which was first shared with Gang Land News, a premium site that aggregates news about the American Mafia. D’Urso addressed the letter to several ‘former associates’ who were ‘overheard’ by law enforcement sources discussing D’Urso’s new identity and whereabouts.

    First, some background: D’Urso was a mob soldier in the early 1990s when he survived a bullet to the head, allegedly fired over a gambling debt during a late-night card game at a social club in Williamsburg. One of his cousins was killed in the incident, but D’Urso survived.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    D’Urso, more than 20 years ago

    He took it on the chin when his Genovese bosses forbade him from retaliating for the shooting. But it wasn’t until he caught wind that then-acting Genovese boss Farby Serpico had threatened to have him whacked that he decided to turn state’s witness, becoming one of only a handful of Genovese family members who have violated their oath of secrecy.

    His testimony eventually helped the Fed’s jail more than 70 mob members and associates, including the current Genovese boss Liborio Bellomo.

    Of course, all that was more than 20 years ago. D’Urso, now 49, has been living under a new identity provided by the witness protection program since then.

    But, as he acknowledged in the letter, D’Urso still ventures into his old neighborhood from time to time. It’s during these visits that he warned any passing wiseguys should think twice if they think they’re going to boost their rep by taking D’Urso out.

    In his letter, D’Urso insists that those who “know him” understand that he only cooperated to save his own life from being taken out by rivals for whom he had no respect, and that he would have done “100 years” in prison “for the right people.”

    Even if he’s not armed with a gun, D’Urso warned that he’s a black belt in ju-jitsu and mixed martial arts, and that anyone who attacks him “will need a gun” – a bat or a knife simply won’t do it.

    If the bosses are intent on rubbing him out – so be it, D’Urso said. But anyone involved in the plot should keep in mind that they will likely be caught and prosecuted. And their bosses could eventually face life imprisonment.

    A LETTER TO THE MOB:

    This letter is a heads up to the individuals who were seen and overheard during the Christmas holidays at the TBar Steak & Lounge on the Upper East Side talking about me.

    Law enforcement folks told me you were talking about my new identity and where I might be living today. I hope that 20 years later, no one would be so stupid to get himself into very serious trouble over me.

    While I still have some respect for the life I once lived and the life that some of my old friends and acquaintances still choose to live, rest assured I WILL NEVER GET CAUGHT SLEEPING AGAIN. I am ready, able and willing to defend my family and myself. Also, I have very capable ex-law enforcement friends with gun permits who are with me all the time. And don’t forget, there are cameras everywhere today that can track people to and from any location.

    As you know, I didn’t create this mess. I was extremely loyal until my life was in danger for the SECOND time. The people that got in trouble because of me can thank Farby for threatening me on the phone and putting me in the position that led to me cooperating. What boss gets on the phone to actually threaten someone? Did he not expect a response? As a street guy was I supposed to just let someone I don’t know abuse me? No f- -king way.

    I hate the fact that some of my Bronx friends got caught up in my cooperation. They are legitimate tough guys. They know who they are. If I had been with them before, I believe they would have been by my side the second I got shot and would have helped me get even. I am truly sorry you guys got wrapped up in the investigation.

    There was only one person who raised a finger to try and help me get revenge when I got shot, and my cousin got killed.

    Unfortunately he [Editor:Vito Guzzo] got 38 years in prison. He was arrested before I cooperated. He was facing the death penalty and I paid for his capital punishment attorney while I was cooperating. The government didn’t need me to convict him.

    When Sammy Meatballs [Editor:Salvatore Aparo] came to me with tears in his eyes and said, “If I send for you don’t come,” I knew that Farby was going to have me killed. I had no choice but to reach out to the government. Those of you who truly knew me know that I would have done 100 years for the right people and the right reasons.

    There could not be a brotherhood without loyalty. But no real man can ever accept being told not to seek retribution when someone shoots you in the head and kills your cousin.

    I understand why people have to act like tough guys when my name gets brought up. I would do the same if I was in their shoes. But just because I have been respectful and not rubbed anything in any of your faces, do NOT think that I will go on the defense if I see any of you. I am not running and I don’t need a weapon to protect myself. I am a black belt in Brazilian Ju-Jitsu and have been training in mixed martial arts for over 14 years. A bat and a knife won’t help you so you will have to use a gun.

    But if you, and your bosses, feel that getting me is worth risking life in prison, then come find me. Just keep in mind that your bosses will get prosecuted for the murder as well.

    And rest assured that if I feel my life is threatened, I WILL BE ON OFFENSE, NOT DEFENSE. I FEAR NO ONE AND NEVER WILL. And remember that there is no statute of limitations for the murder of a federal witness. And you’d be surprised to find out how many confidential informants there are in your circle, who would love to tell the feds they heard about a murder plot to kill me.

    To the gangsters in my neighborhood: If you stop and think, you will realize that I left all of you out of my cooperation on purpose. I didn’t hurt any of you. I didn’t seek you out. I could have started a beef to draw you out. But I didn’t want to see anyone in the neighborhood get in trouble whether we were on good terms or not.

    I bring this up because I still come in and out of the neighborhood every so often. If you see me, do yourself a favor and do not confront me. It may look like I’m alone but I’m not. Again, I am respectful but fear no one and you might not be happy with the outcome of a confrontation.

    Everyone should just focus on their families, their well-being, and staying out of jail. Continue to make money the smart way and leave the violence that gets you life in prison alone. For those of you that have money, find ways to keep it and for those of you that don’t, find ways to make it without violence. Times are different today.

    Cookie

    And for anybody who thinks the five families aren’t still active in the New York area, one recent report from NBC New York delves into how the mafia has changed and evolved since John Gotti’s imprisonment in the early 1990s.


    Tyler Durden

    Sat, 01/11/2020 – 21:00

  • Deep Breaths As We Go From Crisis To Status Quo
    Deep Breaths As We Go From Crisis To Status Quo

    Authored by Peter van Buren via TheAmericanConservative.com,

    History will judge the long-term impact of the death of Qassem Soleimani. In the short-to-medium term, let’s step back from the fear-mongering and instead focus on the geopolitical factors that make the large-scale war many fear unlikely.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    For Iran to provoke such a war is suicide. They have no incentive to escalate to that level, though they may conduct attacks consistent with previous decades. Those attacks, and the U.S. responses, will in the current political and media climate (#WWIII was trending on Twitter and frightened youngsters crashed the Selective Service website worried a draft is forthcoming) consume our attention far beyond their actual impact. But they will in reality cycle inside the rough rules of what diplomats call escalation dominance, the tit-for-tat trading of controlling the moment, trying to stay under the victims’ threshold of response. Emotion is for amateurs.

    The most recent series of events bear this out. According to our government officials, Iran and/or its proxies have fired on U.S. bases in Iraq multiple times, initiating the current escalation that included Soleimani’s assassination and this week’s missiles launched from inside Iran at American bases at Al Asad and in Erbil. Yet according to one long-time regional observer, “This doesn’t yet feel like a major escalation. Iran can claim it took revenge. Feels more like an escalation to deescalate.” Among other signals, the missiles’ long flight time, over some 200 miles, gave obvious warning to areas already on alert.

    Foreign Minister Mohammed Javad Zarif tweeted that Iran was finished fighting and was not actively pursuing further escalation. Trump undertook no immediate counterattack, and in a speech spoke only of further economic sanctions alongside some vague thoughts on future agreements. The two countries’ actions add up to a collective “we’re done if you’re done.”

    This was all to be expected. Iranian leaders know their country can be destroyed from the air. As only a regional power, it suffers from a massive technological disadvantage in any direct conflict with the U.S. It is far beyond the days in which Marines were driven from Somalia after “Black Hawk Down” in 1993, or out of Lebanon after the 1983 bombing of the Marine barracks by Iranian proxy Hezbollah. Unlike years past, America is willing to take a punch to throw back two. Iran’s political leaders are aware of the limits of asymmetric warfare in this world, especially because America’s lack of dependence on Persian Gulf oil means 2020 is not 1991.

    Iran, under sanctions, is near totally dependent on what oil it can export. Oil requires massive infrastructure, all of which can be bombed. Iran’s military operates in large part out of fixed sites. Its navy is small and its bases can be destroyed from the air, its harbors mined from above and below the water. Iran’s military strength is ranked 14th globally below Brazil and Italy; the U.S. is ranked first.

    I’ve been to Iran. I saw the martyrs memorial outside the main marketplace in the holy city of Mashhad, with the names of Iranians who died fighting the U.S. in Iraq from 2003 forward. Soleimani has already joined the pantheon of martyrs as of this week, but he is neither the first nor the last soldier to die in this ongoing long war.

    Iran’s government, meanwhile, is a tense coalition of elected civilians, unelected military, and theocrats. None would stay in power following a major war. They face an almost schizophrenic population, happy to chant “death to America” but equally open to the idea—albeit on more liberal terms than five American presidents, Republican and Democrat, have been willing to offer—of finding a way out from under sanctions that would release their potential and open them to the world.

    Iran understands its limits. Think about the provocations it has been forced to endure without escalation: U.S. troops landing in-country in a failed hostage rescue in 1980; U.S. support for Iraq in using weapons of mass destruction and the provision of intelligence that allowed the Iraqis to rain missiles on Iranian cities in the 1980s; the U.S. shooting down an Iranian civilian aircraft, killing some 300 innocents in 1988; and the U.S. invading and occupying Iran’s eastern border (Iraq 2003) and western approaches (Afghanistan 2001) and maintaining bases there. 

    In 2003, when Iran reached out following initial American military successes, George W. Bush flippantly declared them part of an Axis of Evil. U.S. forces then raided an Iranian diplomatic office in Iraq and arrested several staffers in 2007. The U.S. has kept crippling economic sanctions in place for decades, conducted the Stuxnet cyberattack in 2010 to destroy Iranian nuclear centrifuges, and initiated another cyberattack in 2019—never mind what the Israelis have done covertly. Nothing led to a wider war. Soleimani died in context.

    Iraq, politically and geographically in the middle, has every reason to help calm things down. Despite the rhetoric, the Iraqi government needs the U.S. in situ as a balance against Iranian hegemony and as a hedge against the rebirth of ISIS. The recently passed, non-binding resolution for U.S. troops to leave Iraq carries no weight. It was passed by a divided government in caretaker status, applies only to the withdrawal of the anti-ISIS joint task force, and lacks both a timetable to happen and a mechanism to enforce it. Even that symbolic vote was boycotted by Iraq’s Sunni and Kurdish (so much for losing the Kurds as allies) legislators, illustrating the difficulties a coalition Iraqi government faces in getting anything done.

    Should Iraq somehow find a way to move against the U.S. troop presence, promised American sanctions on Iraqi oil would devastate the economy and likely topple a government already besieged by its citizens of all backgrounds for failing to provide necessary basic services. The $200 million in direct aid the U.S. paid Iraq last year is a tiny portion of the billions flowing in from Washington via loans, military assistance, training funds, etc. That all would be missed. Iraq needs a relative state of peace and stability to hold on. It will make ceremonial anti-American actions to appease its Shia majority and make it appear it is not being ordered around by the Americans it loves to hate, but the U.S. is not be driven out of Iraq.

    America itself has no reason to escalate any of this into a real war. Iran is strategically more or less where it has been for some time and there is no U.S.-side driver to change that now. Chaos in Tehran serves no purpose, and war would spiral the nation into a series of internal struggles spiced with fissionable material that has no place in a foreign policy calculus in an election year at home. Trump gets the political credit (84 percent of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents approve of the strike) from his base for a tough-guy move with none of the sticky problems a wider conflict would create. His post-missile attack remarks position him as open to new talks of some kind.

    To accept the U.S. will start a major war assumes a fully irrational actor unfettered. Many people want to believe that for political purposes, but the hard facts of the last three years say that when it gets to this strategic level, Trump has not acted irrationally. Same this time: he did not act irrationally, or even provocatively, in the aftermath of the Iranian missile launches.

    It’s hard to point to any irrational act, a decision made that is wholly without logic or reason, a choice Trump knew would have dire consequences yet went with anyway. Forget the tweets; they have never added up to much more than fodder for pop psychologists, impulsive remarks not followed by impulsive acts. Absolutely none of the apocalyptic predictions have come to pass. See North Korea, where Trump was supposed to start World War III two years ago, or the trade wars that were to destroy the global economy, or any of the other pseudo-crises. In sum, no new wars. Economy chugging along. Trump manipulating Democrats into practically putting Che-style Soleimani T-shirts up on Etsy. 

    The current commander-in-chief is likely to start a war? He’s the only recent president who hasn’t.


    Tyler Durden

    Sat, 01/11/2020 – 20:30

  • Home Prices Stall In Bay Area After Seven Year Tech Party
    Home Prices Stall In Bay Area After Seven Year Tech Party

    Despite all the new wealth created by tech IPOs in 2019, home prices in the Bay Area are stagnating at potentially dangerous peaks. 

    According to real estate firm Compass, the median price of a home in San Francisco rose 1.3% Y/Y to $1.6 million, the smallest growth since 2012. 

    Compass said the median price for homes in Santa Clara County, which includes San Jose, Santa Clara, Cupertino, Palo Alto, Sunnyvale, Stanford, and Santa Clara, collectively saw 6% declines to $1.26 million.

    Last spring, CNBC was drumming up the narrative that tech IPOs, including Uber, Slack, Pinterest, and Zoom Video Communications, would boost the housing market with new buyers. However, many of the IPOs went bust last year and didn’t create a new buyer pool as home prices are at danger of reversing from record-high levels. 

    The S&P CoreLogic Case-Shiller San Francisco Home Price NSA Index shows that the average change in the value of the residential real estate in the region has been slipping since July 2018. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    After a seven-year tech party and the Federal Reserve injecting obscene amounts of liquidity into the market to fuel bubbles — it seems that Bay Area home prices could have hit a structural high. This means a correction could be nearing. 

     


    Tyler Durden

    Sat, 01/11/2020 – 20:00

  • Bitcoin Can Gain 100% In 2020 – Halving Not Priced In, Says Fundstrat
    Bitcoin Can Gain 100% In 2020 – Halving Not Priced In, Says Fundstrat

    Authored by William Suberg via CoinTelegraph.com,

    Bitcoin can deliver 100% returns to investors in 2020 and may rise significantly in the five months until May’s block reward halving, a new report claims. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    image courtesy of CoinTelegraph

    In its forthcoming 2020 Crypto Outlook, market research firm Fundstrat Global Advisors said it believed that the halving was not yet “priced into” the Bitcoin price.

    Fundstrat expects over 100% BTC gains

    The report is currently only available to the firm’s clients, with key findings uploaded to Twitter by co-founder Tom Lee on Jan 10.

    “For 2020, we see several positive convergences that enhance the use case and also the economic model for crypto and Bitcoin — thus, we believe Bitcoin and crypto total return should exceed that of 2019,” an excerpt states.

    Fundstrat continued:

    “In other words, we see strong probability that Bitcoin gains >100% in 2020.”

    The factors Lee and others identified focus on geopolitical tensions and the upcoming United States presidential elections, in addition to the halving. 

    Fundstrat took its cue from events last year, noting BTC/USD hit its high point amid tensions around Facebook’s Libra digital currency and negative comments on Bitcoin by president Donald Trump. 

    Bull catalyst or “non-event”?

    As Cointelegraph reported, geopolitical factors form the basis for other commentators’ bullish Bitcoin price scenarios for this year. 

    As regards the impact of the halving, however, pundits are less united. Last month, Jason Williams, co-founder at digital asset fund Morgan Creek Digital, said May would prove to be a “non-event” for Bitcoin.

    Williams appeared to contradict fellow co-founder Anthony Pompliano, who a month previously had claimed that even at $8,750, Bitcoin was yet to have the halving priced in.


    Tyler Durden

    Sat, 01/11/2020 – 19:30

  • Elon Musk Tweets That "Bitcoin" Is Not His Safe Word
    Elon Musk Tweets That “Bitcoin” Is Not His Safe Word

    By now, you probably know that Elon Musk appears to have knocked up his girlfriend, Grimes.

    And just when you thought that was more than enough information on the billionaire’s personal life, you fire up the Bloomberg terminal and wind up staring at this:

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The headline comes from an Elon Musk tweet where the CEO, who is probably delirious with joy after watching his stock hit all time highs while facing zero accountability from the NHTSA, tweeted “Bitcoin is *not* my safe word”.

    A “safe word” is, of course, a word used by sexual partners during rough sex. It’s a proverbial “tap out” when things make the transition from playful to harmful. You know, like the Fed with monetary policy over the last 20 years.

    And regardless of whether Musk is serious or not remains to be seen, but that didn’t stop CCN from running an article with the title “Elon Musk Likes Shouting ‘Bitcoin’ While Having Sex”. 

    And just like that, the voices of millions of Bloomberg terminal users cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    We can’t tell if it’s a commentary from Musk on cryptocurrency. CCN notes “in the past, Musk has described bitcoin as quite brilliant.He’s even had his Twitter account suspended for half-jokingly urging one of his followers to buy the cryptocurrency.” In April he tweeted, “Cryptocurrency is my safe word.” 

    Regardless, it seems like more time well spent on Twitter for the world’s favorite boy genius. We wonder how those 100 hour work weeks are still coming along.

    And for us, this Tweet and the pregnancy news amount to far more Elon Musk sex-related news than we would ever want. 

    But hey – if we had gotten away with all of the lies and deceit that Musk has over the last decade while the market rewards our cash incinerating company with a nearly $100 billion enterprise value, we’d be horny too. 


    Tyler Durden

    Sat, 01/11/2020 – 19:00

  • Mrs. Clinton & The Amazing Amnesia Of Delusional Democrats
    Mrs. Clinton & The Amazing Amnesia Of Delusional Democrats

    Authored by James Fite via LibertyNation.com,

    Back in 2014, Charles Barkley told James Harden during a Foot Locker commercial obviously inspired by Democrats in the Swamp that “all the greats have short memories.” He didn’t know anything about any of the unfortunate events Harden mentioned, just that all the greats have short memories, and even passed to Scottie Pippen for confirmation. “I sure do,” Pippen assured Harden. “And I’m the greatest Chicago Bull of all time.” “And that’s how it’s done,” Barkley replied.

    That’s how it’s done in the Swamp, too. But in politics, it isn’t only “the greats” who suffer this amazing case of mass amnesia.

    Iran: What Would Hillary Do?

    As tensions rise between the United States and Iran, the delusional Democrats who were “with her” back in 2016 are coming out of the social media woodwork to say, “I told you so.” Trump’s starting a war with Iran – never mind the fact that his aggressive moves against the Middle Eastern nation have all come after attacks by Iran or Iran-backed groups. If a country attacks the United States, what is the president supposed to do, just sit back and let Americans die like Obama and Clinton did in Libya?

    But never mind for a moment whether Trump should take action. Let’s focus on the Cult of Clinton and their claims that Madam President would have done better. Short memories: All the greats have them. In 2008, back when then-Senator Clinton wanted to be president the first time, she made it clear that, if she won, any Iranian attacks on Israel meant war with the U.S.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    To be fair to Mrs. Clinton, she was talking about Iran attacking Israel, not the United States. So, perhaps she wouldn’t have cared as much had the lives lost been American. She certainly didn’t balk as secretary of state when Obama allowed Iranian aggression to go unpunished. And while we’re on the subject of short memories, how about that love for Israel back in ’08?

    The Majority Wants A Wall – Every Majority

    Iran and war aren’t the only issues on which Democrats appear to be suffering from amnesia. In 2016, Donald Trump said we need a wall between the United States and Mexico. Why? Well, obviously Trump the Terrible hates anyone who isn’t white. What an evil, sick man. But what about just ten years earlier, when Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and Chuck Schumer – all senators at the time – voted for the Secure Fence Act. Schumer defended this – and condemned such verbal trickery as calling illegal immigrants “undocumented workers” – as recently as 2009. It seems every majority wants a wall – or at least a really good fence. It’s only politically expedient for Democrats to oppose border security when their guy isn’t in the White House.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Intellectual Dishonesty And Dredging Up The Past

    But all that happened more than a decade ago, you might say. It’s old news. And you would be right; it is. But that doesn’t mean it’s no longer relevant. Sure, some people do change their perspectives over time. But it’s a little suspicious that Democrats only changed their minds regarding the issues on which Donald Trump decided to agree with them.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Hillary Clinton

    A phrase that pops up in the conversation from time to time when conservatives bring up these old videos is “intellectually dishonest.”  As if anyone were trying to pass off videos of a 2009 Chuck Schumer calling for tougher border security or a 2008 Hillary Clinton threatening war with Iran as recent. The intellectual dishonesty is in flip-flopping on the issues to back whatever stance seems most likely to win an election.

    It’s the delusional Democrats who are being intellectually dishonest this time – or just suffering from the short memories of the greats – when they tweet #IVotedForHillary. War with Iran would have been just as likely with President Clinton in 2016 as it is now that we have President Trump – and it would have likely happened even sooner had we elected President Clinton in 2008.


    Tyler Durden

    Sat, 01/11/2020 – 18:30

    Tags

  • Ghosn's Fortune Has Shrunk By Almost Half Since His Arrest
    Ghosn’s Fortune Has Shrunk By Almost Half Since His Arrest

    Since Carlos Ghosn’s ‘Great Escape’ from house arrest in Tokyo over the new year holiday, reporters from around the world have been scrambling to dig up any details they can about the planning, execution and consequences of the now-legendary extraction operation, which was reportedly masterminded by an ex-Green Beret with a checkered past (and a reputation for rescuing kidnapping victims around the world).

    Ghosn has refused to offer any more details about the planning and execution of the escape, other than saying that he numbed himself during the journey.  In the days since that press conference, some signs of strain have surfaced between Ghosn and his new host country, Lebanon, which yesterday announced a travel ban preventing Ghosn from leaving Lebanon while an INTERPOL red notice is still active.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Carlos Ghosn

    While we might not learn any more details about Ghosn’s escape – at least not any time soon – a team of Bloomberg reporters have produced what seems to us like a realistic tally of the former auto titan’s expenses.

    They determined that in addition to the $14 million in bail he forfeited by fleeing Japan, the operation to win his freedom might have cost another $15 million.

    This includes $350,000 for the chartered jet that flew Ghosn from Osaka to Istanbul. The rest likely went to pay expenses and fees for a team of up to 25 people, who may have taken as long as six months to plan the operation. The enormous cost has seen Ghosn’s fortune shrink by roughly 40% since his arrest more than a year ago at Tokyo’s Haneda Airport.

    Still, Ghosn’s net worth is still believed to be roughly $70 million – down from roughly $120 million at the time of his first court appearance in Japan. And looking ahead, Ghosn will likely rack up millions of dollars in legal fees pretty quickly as France investigates possible misuse of funds by Ghosn to host a lavish party at Versailles. Nissan is also trying to evict him from the pink villa in Beirut where he is staying. That villa was purchased and maintained by the company for the benefit of the CEO.

    Ghosn’s downfall had already prompted Nissan and Renault, the two members of the Nissan-Renault-Mitsubishi alliance where Ghosn exercised the most control, to cancel some $140 million in retirement benefits that would have gone to the former CEO.

    Though the general public wasn’t well-acquainted with Ghosn before his escape from Japan, the former CEO’s high-stakes antics has captured the public’s interest. Many have speculated that Netflix & HBO will rush to develop series about Ghosn’s escape from Japan, and a side-scrolling videogame entitled “Ghone is gone” has been uploaded to popular video-gaming service Steam.

    Meanwhile, Ghosn is said to be planning a tell-all book, according to Japanese public broadcaster NHK.


    Tyler Durden

    Sat, 01/11/2020 – 18:00

  • SoftBank Is Beginning The New Decade How It Ended The Last
    SoftBank Is Beginning The New Decade How It Ended The Last

    Via MarketCrumbs.com,

    Japanese conglomerate SoftBank Group is the the 36th-largest public company in the world and second-largest in Japan. SoftBank founder and CEO, Masayoshi Son, was even briefly the wealthiest person in the world in 2000 before losing 90% of his wealth when the dot-com bubble popped.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    SoftBank is mostly known in the U.S. for its investments in startups through its SoftBank Vision Fund. The Vision Fund, which was founded in 2017, is the largest technology-focused venture capital fund in the world with more than $100 billion in capital.

    Son revealed last year that LPs in the fund were already up 45%, after fees, two years after the fund’s inception. The Vision Fund booked successful investments in Flipkart, which sold to Walmart for $16 billion, and Nvidia. The Vision Fund’s notable investments in Uber, WeWork and Slack were performing well on paper until they came crashing down.

    Last year saw the valuations of the Vision Fund’s largest investments take losses reminiscent of the days when Son was the world’s wealthiest person.

    Early last year, Uber, which had hoped to achieve an IPO valuation of $120 billion, went public at a valuation of around $75 billion. This was a disappointment to SoftBank, which invested in Uber at valuations of $48 billion and $70 billion. Uber’s current market capitalization values the ride-hailing company at approximately $58 billion.

    Most notably, SoftBank dumped more than $10 billion into WeWork, driving its valuation all the way up to $47 billion before the company’s epic collapse. The IPO never happened and SoftBank ended up throwing another $10 billion at WeWork to acquire over 70% of the company in a deal valuing it at about $8 billion.

    The investments pushed SoftBank to its first quarterly loss in 14 years as the Vision Fund booked an $8.9 billion loss. “My investment judgment was poor in many ways and I am reflecting deeply on that,” Son said following the earnings release.

    Late last year SoftBank racked up another loss. The Vision Fund took a loss on the $300 million it invested in dog-walking app Wag at a $650 million valuation. The company simultaneously laid off 80% of its workforce. Son hinted at another loss looming at Wag during SoftBank’s earnings release. “Is there any other similar concern? In fact, yes, there is,” Son said. “Like a dog-walking company and other portfolio companies, we may see similar problems surfacing.”

    The new decade finds SoftBank back where it closed out the last one.

    Zume, which landed a $375 million investment from SoftBank, is laying off 50% of its workforce as it pivots from making pizza with robots to food packaging. SoftBank invested in Zume at a $1 billion valuation, which was nearly five times the startup’s previous valuation of just $218 million.

    SoftBank’s reputation is now taking a hit in the startup community as the Vision Fund has walked away from a few startups that it had previously offered term sheets to. Some speculate SoftBank walked from the deals because the Vision Fund 2 hasn’t raised outside capital yet. Others believe SoftBank may still be “shell shocked” by the WeWork collapse.

    As the Vision Fund closed out the decade by pushing SoftBank to its first quarterly loss in 14 years, the last thing Son wants to see is the Vision Fund’s struggles carry over into the new decade. 


    Tyler Durden

    Sat, 01/11/2020 – 17:30

  • Putin & Merkel Urge All Parties Back To Iran Deal – Vow To Preserve "By All Means"
    Putin & Merkel Urge All Parties Back To Iran Deal – Vow To Preserve “By All Means”

    Amid the ongoing US-Iran crisis German Chancellor Angela Merkel met Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow on Saturday in her first visit since May 2018. Crucially it also comes the same day Iran’s leadership admitted to shooting down a Ukrainian passenger plane amid launching ballistic missiles on US bases in Iraq, killing all 176 passengers and crew.

    Also topping the agenda for the Saturday afternoon working meeting was Syria and Libya. But the Iran nuclear deal was front and center, with both leaders agreeing they must seek to preserve the 2015 JCPOA “by all means”

    Merkel stressed to reporters soon after coming out of talks with Putin that “everything must be done to keep the JCPOA going” and committed to using “all the diplomatic tools to help this agreement.” She explained further, “It is not perfect but it is still an agreement and it involves responsibilities for all the parties involved. And we want to keep it.”

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Angela Merkel met Vladimir Putin Saturday afternoon, via the AP.

    “We agreed that we should do anything to preserve the deal, the JCPOA. Germany is convinced that Iran should not acquire or have nuclear weapons,” Merkel said during a joint press conference with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

    This after within the past two weeks as Washington and Tehran essentially enter open war, Iran’s leaders have declared they consider “no limits” are currently in place on their nuclear energy program, which they’ve said remains for peaceful purposes. 

    Putin also said the “tremendously important” deal must be preserved and that all parties must “come back to the deal” in statements chiefly aimed at the United States. Putin said to reporters, according to the early Russian media translation:

    “After the US refused to abide by the agreement, Iran announced suspension of its obligations as well. I would like to underscore that these obligations were voluntarily embraced by Iran. Iran is ready to come back to full compliance with the JPCOA.”

    And addressing the European initiative to set up a “SWIFT alternative” special payment vehicle for Iran, Putin expressed optimism that INSTEX would seen be “be up and running” and the European nations “would deliver on their promise to create an independent mechanism free of the dollar influence.”

    Though the Ukraine crisis has remained a point of tension and damaged relations between Moscow and Berlin, both have lately been critical of the January 2nd US drone strike on Iran’s Gen. Soleimani. 

    The Russian Foreign Ministry previously condemned it as “reckless” while German Foreign Ministry spokesperson Rainer Breul somewhat more ambiguously agreed, saying that “information that would allow us to see that the US attack was based on international law.”

    On Friday the Trump administration imposed new economic sanctions on Iran, however, most analysts are now in agreement that the end result of the past two chaotic weeks of soaring tensions, most especially the Soleimani assassination, will only push Iran further away from the 2015 agreement brokered under Obama.


    Tyler Durden

    Sat, 01/11/2020 – 17:00

    Tags

  • "Death To Liars!" Iran Swept By Wave Of Protests Demanding Ayatollah Quit Over Airplane Downing
    “Death To Liars!” Iran Swept By Wave Of Protests Demanding Ayatollah Quit Over Airplane Downing

    Mass protests have again broken out in Iran at the end of a chaotic week for the country, capped by the early Saturday admission and apology for the military accidentally shooting down a Ukrainian passenger plane, killing all 176 people on board. 

    Additionally, it appears that the British ambassador in Tehran, Rob Macaire, was arrested shortly after photographing the protests. Iranian state sources are alleging he was helping to “organize” and incite the protests.

    The UK ambassador to Iran Rob Macaire has been arrested during the protests in Tehran on Saturday, Iran’s semi-official Tasnim news agency reported.

    Macaire was present during the Saturday protests in front of Tehran’s Amir Kabir University and was arrested then, Tasnim’s report said.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Though he’s reportedly already been released, the incident is likely to spark a major diplomatic row between the UK and Iran, given it’s almost unheard of to arrest a country’s highest diplomatic official. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Mourning turns to protests in Tehran. Image via AFP. 

    In the first major protests since the Jan.2 US assassination of IRGC Quds Force chief Qasem Soleimani, angry student-led demonstrations broke out in front of Tehran’s Amir Kabir university demanding that Iran’s leaders, including Ayatollah Khamenei step down over their initially concealing the truth about the airline downing

    “Commander-in-chief [Khamenei] resign, resign!” videos posted to Twitter showed Saturday. 

    However, their size in the hundreds paled in comparison with prior anti-government protests in the tens of thousands last November across multiple cities, which actually saw possibly hundreds killed in clashes with police which often involved live gunfire to put down the crowds by security forces. 

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    In a rarity, Iranian state media also acknowledged the new anti-government unrest fueled by news that it was Iran’s Revolutionary Guards which shot down the passenger jet, and not “mechanical failure” as was initially claimed.

    As Reuters describes of the semi-official Fars report

    The report said the demonstrators on the street also ripped up pictures of Qassem Soleimani, the prominent commander of the Guard’s Quds Force who was killed in a U.S. drone strike.

    The agency, widely seen as close to the Guards, carried pictures of the gathering and a torn banner of Soleimani. It said the protesters numbered about 700 to 1,000 people.

    Video also showed moments where police rushed in to attempt to quash the growing protests, which could turn into bigger demonstrations Sunday.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    One regional report cited an Iranian protester’s grievances as follows:

    “They were so careful not to kill any American in their revenge for Soleimani. But they did not close the airport? This shows how much this regime cares for Iranians,” said Iranian citizen Mira Sedaghati after the Iranian military admitted mistakenly shooting down the jet.

    It also appears Iran’s significant political opposition in exile is seizing on the dramatic events of this week, with exiled Persian Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi issuing a statement on Saturday saying, “This is not human error. This is a crime against humanity.”

    He added in the Twitter statement: “He who has irresponsibly empowered his thugs to fire at will at innocents bears full responsibility. Enough is Enough. Khamenei and his regime must go.”

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    “Vigils that were held near Amir Kabir University quickly turned into anti-government protests with people calling for the IRGC to leave the country,” an Al Jazeera correspondent reported from the scene. 

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Meanwhile, following Iran’s rare apology which included Iranian Foreign Affairs Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif saying on Twitter that “human error at time of crisis caused by US adventurism led to disaster,” Ukraine’s President Zelenksy issued a stern rebuke of Iran’s handling of the crisis.

    “The morning was not good today but it brought along the truth,” Zelensky said in a written statement early Saturday morning.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    But we insist on the full acceptance of guilt. We expect Iran to pledge readiness to carry out a full and open investigation, to prosecute those responsible, to return the bodies of the dead, to pay compensations, to extend official apologies via diplomatic channels,” the Ukrainian president wrote.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Among the many Iranians killed were also 11 Ukrainians as well as 63 people from Canada.

    US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has already seized on the protests, tweeting they were a sign that the Iranian people “are fed up with the regime’s lies, corruption, ineptitude and brutality”.


    Tyler Durden

    Sat, 01/11/2020 – 16:30

    Tags

  • Institutions, Retail And Algos Are Now All-In, Just As Buybacks Tumble
    Institutions, Retail And Algos Are Now All-In, Just As Buybacks Tumble

    When it comes to gauging market euphoria, one place to find the current state of retail investor (super) sentiment, is the CNN Fear and Greed Index, which over the past three weeks, has printed at all time series highs.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    What about institutional sentiment? Well, contrary to several goalseeked indicators which erroneously repeat week after week that whales and other prominent institutional traders remain “on the fence” despite the now daily record highs in the S&P, the truth is that virtually everyone is now all in: from simple human-driven discretionary, to macro funds, all the way to algo and CTAs. In fact, as Deutsche Bank’s Parag Thatte writes in his weekly flow report, “positioning in equities has been rising and is now in the 96th percentile on our consolidated measure, with a wide variety of metrics very stretched.” And, as we have noted previously, equity flows as well as “equity positioning, like the market itself, has run far ahead of current growth as investors price in a global growth rebound.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    But while it has been known for a while that most humans have thrown in the towel amid a mauling of bears and shorts, it now appears that systematic strategies – i.e., algos, quants, risk parity, etc – have also raised equity exposure to the top of its range. According to Thatte, the equity allocations for Vol Control, CTAs, and Risk Parity are all near a historical maximum, which means that algos are now effectively all in.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Some more details:

    • Vol Control: Vol Control funds are near their maximum equity allocations for more than 2 months now. 1M SPX  realized volatility has been sub-10% since November without >1% daily moves in more than 2 months. VIX was also seasonally low this past December. Sustained low volatility environment helped VC funds maintain their high equity exposure through the recent flare-up in geopolitical risk.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Selling pressure from VC on a 3% pullback in SPX now stands at ~ $7bn-$8bn, while DB’s aggregate volatility metric targeted by VC funds is close to 10% and stands near the bottom end of its past 10Y range. And here a warning from Thatte: with barely any upside bid left, the downside risk from VCs is higher at this stage of the market rally.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    • Risk Parity funds: Risk parity have scaled their SPX exposure back up to near record levels. A near uniform uptrend in equities, coupled with low equity volatility and bonds moving sideways, have boosted RP exposure to equities. Extended period of low RV likely prompted relatively slow moving RP funds to steadily increase their equity allocation over the past month. In addition, moderating negative returns correlation between bonds and equities have seen this equity exposure increase occur at the expense of exposure to bonds. Bond volatility remains relatively elevated despite trending lower over the past month. Indicative RP bond exposure is now back near March 2019, leaving limited upside for further higher equity exposure and lower bond exposure.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    • CTAs: CTA equity exposure increased with the upward trending markets to near peak levels. Recent momentum in US equities have been uniformly strong across short and medium term signals, translating to a higher level of confidence in the latest uptrend. CTA exposure to EM equities also shows up as heavy with spot reaching back to 1Q18 levels. Bond positioning by CTAs have steadily moved lower and reached their 1Y lows. The cuts in bond exposure have been across most regions, especially in Japan where 10Y JGB yields have almost turned positive.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    In this context, it is hardly surprisingly that the Deutsche strategist observes that the only other time that systematic strategy positioning was higher was in January 2018… just before the large February selloff.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    And yet, unlike Feb 2018, a vol spike like the one observed in Feb 2018 may not be enough to trigger a market crash. The reason: vol control funds are usually the first to sell equities when vol rises, but with volatility having been subdued for an extended period of time, they would need to see a large and sustained spike in vol for their selling thresholds to be hit.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Still, while algos are only now rush to go balls to the wall, they are only now catching up to discretionary investors who have steadily raised their bullish positioning since August and are now clearly overweight in DB’s reading, and exposure is at the highest levels since October 2018. Discretionary positioning typically follows growth indicators closely but since September, it has diverged and has moved sharply higher even as growth is yet to rebound (instead, it appears that positioning is merely chasing the broader market which has soared on the back of the Fed’s QE4 which was launched to “fix” the repo market after JPMorgan broke it). Active mutual funds as well as retail investors have raised exposure following the strong market rally.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    However, there is one place where the euphoria has yet to go off the chart: the popularly followed beta positioning for long-short hedge funds still remains very low, and in line with subdued growth indicators.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Finally, several indicators point to stretched positioning across other metrics. For example, equity futures long positioning for asset managers and leveraged funds combined is at record highs, driven by a broad-based rise in longs across the S&P 500 and Nasdaq as well as the small-cap Russell 2000 futures. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Longs in EM futures have risen to record highs.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Call/put volume ratios are at the top of their historical range;

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    And short interest in single stocks is near record lows; and that in ETFs has also fallen to a new low.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    One last confirmation of what appears to be a bullish capitulation into the QE4-inspired melt up is that equity fund flows have also turned up strongly over the last 3 months. Almost $50bn came in over this period, compared with over -$300bn in outflows in the prior 10 months.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Oh, one more thing we almost forget: with institutions, retail investors and algos all in stocks, the biggest source of equity demand, corporations themselves, appear to be easing off the stock buyback pedal. Indeed, awhile there has been a flurry of recent buyback announcements…

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    … with tech names leading by the runner up, healthcare, by nearly 3 to 1 in buyback announcements…

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    … in the grand scheme of things, and on a rolling 3 month basis, stock buybacks are a far cry from where there were just two years ago, and fading fast to levels not seen since before the Trump tax reform which unleashed a $1.5 trillion buyback bonanza.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    It is this sudden reversal in buyback appetite that may be the biggest danger for a market where 77% of CFOs now think the market is significantly overvalued.


    Tyler Durden

    Sat, 01/11/2020 – 16:04

  • In Stunning Reversal, Iran Admits Accidentally Shooting Down Ukrainian Passenger Jet
    In Stunning Reversal, Iran Admits Accidentally Shooting Down Ukrainian Passenger Jet

    After multiple denials, and demands for proof from foreign entities – accusing them of spreading “psychological warfare” lies, President Hassan Rouhani has admitted Iran accidentally shot down the Ukrainian jetliner that took off from Tehran’s international airport amid this week’s tensions.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    In a pair of tweets, Rouhani admitted that “Armed Forces’ internal investigation has concluded that regrettably missiles fired due to human error caused the horrific crash of the Ukrainian plane & death of 176 innocent people,” adding that “The Islamic Republic of Iran deeply regrets this disastrous mistake.”

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The army said Ukraine International Airlines Flight 752 was flying close to a sensitive Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps military site when it was downed because of “human error,” adding that the “culprits” would be identified and referred to judicial authorities.

    “Iran’s armed forces went on high alert following U.S. threats to target Iranian sites,” the army said in the statement.

    “Under such highly sensitive and critical circumstances, the Boeing Flight 752 flew close to a sensitive IRGC military site at an altitude and angle that made it appear as a hostile target. The plane was hit due to human error and unintentionally.”

    In the aftermath of the incident, Rouhani arranged for “compensation” payments to the victims’ families, and ordered reforms of the country’s air defense system to prevent similar disasters in the future.

    Iran will reportedly send the black boxes of the crashed jet to France as it lacks the technology to decode them, the state-run Islamic Republic News Agency reported.

    Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif blamed “human error at time of crisis caused by US adventurism” for the disaster.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Military officials will elaborate on the crash on state media on Saturday. There has been no response from The White House yet.


    Tyler Durden

    Sat, 01/11/2020 – 15:41

  • Everything You Need To Know About Recessions (But Were Afraid To Ask)
    Everything You Need To Know About Recessions (But Were Afraid To Ask)

    Authored by Nicholas LePan via VisualCapitalist.com,

    Just like in life, markets go through peaks and valleys. The good news for investors is that often the peaks ascend to far greater heights than the depths of the valleys.

    Today’s post helps to put recessions into perspective. It draws information from Capital Group to break down the frequency of economic expansions and recessions in modern U.S. history, while also showing their typical impact.

    What is a Recession?

    Not all recessions are the same. Some can last long while others are short. Some create lasting effects, while others are quickly forgotten. Some cripple entire economies, while others are much more targeted, impacting specific sectors within the economy.

    Recession is when your neighbor loses their job. Depression is when you lose yours.

    – Harry Truman

    According to the National Bureau of Economic Research, a recession can be described as a significant decline in economic activity over an extended period of time, typically several months.

    In the average recession, gross domestic product (GDP) is not the only thing shrinking—incomes, employment, industrial production, and retail sales tend to shrink as well. Economists generally consider two consecutive quarters of declining GDP as a recession.

    The general economic model of a recession is that when unemployment rises, consumers are more likely to save than spend. This places pressure on businesses that rely on consumers’ income. As a result, company earnings and stock prices decline, which can fuel a negative cycle of economic decline and negative expectations of returns.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    During economic recoveries and expansions, the opposite occurs. Rising employment encourages consumer spending, which bolsters corporate profits and stock market returns.

    How Long Do Recessions Last?

    Recessions generally do not last very long. According to Capital Group’s analysis of 10 cycles since 1950, the average length of a recession is 11 months, although they have ranged from eight to 18 months over the period of analysis.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Jobs losses and business closures are dramatic in the short term, though equity investments in the stock market have generally fared better. Throughout the history of economics, recessions have been relatively small blips.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Over the last 65 years, the U.S. has been in an official recession for less than 15% of all months. In addition, the overall economic impact of most recessions is relatively small. The average expansion increased GDP by 24%, whereas the average recession decreased GDP by less than 2%.

    In fact, equity returns can be positive throughout a contraction, since some of the strongest stock rallies have occurred in the later stages of a recession.

    Buying the Dip: Recession Indicators

    Whether you are an investor or not, it would be wise to pay attention to potential recessions and prepare accordingly.

    There are several indicators that people can watch to anticipate a potential recession, which might give them an edge in preparing their portfolios:

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    This is not a magic rubric for anticipating every economic downturn, but it helps individuals see the weather patterns on the horizon. Whether and where the storm hits is another question.


    Tyler Durden

    Sat, 01/11/2020 – 15:30

  • Trump Admin Looking To Significantly Expand Travel Ban: Report
    Trump Admin Looking To Significantly Expand Travel Ban: Report

    The Trump administration is considering a dramatic expansion of its highly-controversial travel ban to add several countries to the list, according to the Associated Press, citing ‘six people familiar with the deliberations’ and a ‘document outlining the plans’ which has been circulating within the White House.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    According to two of AP‘s sources, seven new countries are under consideration. Of note, the most recent iteration of the travel ban includes Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria, Yemen, Venezuela and North Korea.

    A different person said the expansion could include several countries that were covered in the first iteration of Trump’s ban, but later removed amid rounds of contentious litigation. Iraq, Sudan and Chad, for instance, had originally been affected by the order, which the Supreme Court upheld in a 5-4 vote after the administration released a watered-down version intended to withstand legal scrutiny.

    The countries on the proposed expansion list include allies that fall short on certain security measures. The additional restrictions were proposed by Department of Homeland Security officials following a review of security protocols and “identity management” for about 200 countries, according to the person. –AP

    While Trump’s critics have framed this as a ‘Muslim ban’ due to the fact that affected countries are Muslim majority, many have noted that the travel ban in its original form would have affected fewer than 15% of Muslims worldwide.

    “I have trouble understanding why we’re supposed to infer religious animus when in fact the vast majority of Muslims would not be affected,” noted appeals court Judge Richard Clifton in 2017, who also pointed out that the seven countries included in the original travel ban came from a list created by the Obama administration.

    While the White House wouldn’t confirm the plan, spokesman Hogan Gidley praised the travel ban for making America safer.

    The Travel Ban has been very successful in protecting our Country and raising the security baseline around the world,” he said in a statement. “While there are no new announcements at this time, common-sense and national security both dictate that if a country wants to fully participate in U.S. immigration programs, they should also comply with all security and counter-terrorism measures — because we do not want to import terrorism or any other national security threat into the United States.”

    According to AP, some of their sources said they expect the announcement to coincide with the third anniversary of Trump’s initial January, 2017 travel ban – which former adviser Steve Bannon is largely credited with conceiving. The order resulted in widespread protests across the country, while activist judges struck down the Executive Order shortly thereafter.

    The current ban suspends immigrant and non-immigrant visas to applicants from the affected countries, but it allows exceptions, including for students and those who have established “significant contacts” in the U.S.. And it represents a significant softening from Trump’s initial order, which had suspended travel from Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen for 90 days, blocked refugee admissions for 120 days and suspended travel from Syria.

    That order was immediately blocked by the courts, prompting a months-long effort by the administration to develop clear standards and federal review processes to try to withstand legal muster. Under the current system, restrictions are targeted at countries the Department of Homeland Security says fail to share sufficient information with the U.S. or haven’t taken necessary security precautions, such as issuing electronic passports with biometric information and sharing information about travelers’ terror-related and criminal histories. –AP

    Under the current travel ban, Cabinet secretaries are required to update the presidennt whether countries are adhering to new immigration security benchmarks – with those who fail to comply risking new restrictions, while countries who become compliant can have their restrictions lifted.


    Tyler Durden

    Sat, 01/11/2020 – 15:00

    Tags

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Today’s News 11th January 2020

  • The War Pigs Are Finally Revealing Themselves – And This Is Just The Beginning…
    The War Pigs Are Finally Revealing Themselves – And This Is Just The Beginning…

    Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.com,

    In 2016 during the election campaign of Donald Trump one of the primary factors of his popularity among conservatives was that he was one of the first candidates since Ron Paul to argue for bringing US troops home and ending American involvement in the various elitist fabricated wars in the Middle East. From Iraq, to Afghanistan, to Syria and Yemen and beyond, the Neo-Cons and Neo-Libs at the behest of their globalist masters had been waging war oversees unabated for over 15 years. The time was ripe for a change and people felt certain that if Hillary Clinton entered the White House, another 4-8 years of war were guaranteed.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    There was nothing to be gained from these wars. They were only dragging the US down socially and economically, and even the idea of “getting the oil” had turned into a farce as the majority of Iraqi oil has been going to China, not the US. General estimates on the costs of the wars stand at $5 trillion US tax dollars and over 4500 American dead along with around 40,000 wounded. The only people that were benefiting from the situation were globalists and banking elites, who had been clamoring to destabilize the Middle East since the day they launched their “Project For A New American Century” (PNAC). Truly, all wars are banker wars.

    The Obama Administration’s attempts to lure Americans into supporting open war with the Assad regime in Syria had failed. Consistent attempts by George W. Bush and Obama to increase tensions with Iran had fizzled. Americans were showing signs of fatigue, FINALLY fed up with the lies being constructed to trick them into being complicit in the banker wars. Trump was a breath of fresh air…but of course, like all other puppets of the globalists, his promises were empty.

    In my article ‘Clinton vs. Trump And The Co-Option Of The Liberty Movement’, published before the 2016 election, I warned that Trump’s rhetoric might be a grand show, and that it could be scripted by the establishment to bring conservatives back into the Republican/Neo-Con fold. At the time, leftist media outlet Bloomberg openly reveled in the idea that Trump might absorb and destroy the “Tea Party” and liberty movement and turn them into something far more manageable. The question was whether or not the liberty movement would buy into Trump completely, or remain skeptical.

    Initially, I do not think the movement held onto its objectivity at all. Far too many people bought into Trump blindly and immediately based on misguided hopes and a desire to “win” against the leftists. The insane cultism of the political left didn’t help matters much, either.

    When Trump started saturating his cabinet with banking elites and globalists from the CFR the moment he entered office, I knew without any doubt that he was a fraud. Close associations with establishment swamp creatures was something he had consistently criticized Clinton and other politicians for during the campaign, but Trump was no better or different than Clinton; he was just an errand boy for the elites. The singular difference was that his rhetoric was designed to appeal directly to liberty minded conservatives.

    This meant that it was only a matter of time before Trump broke most of his campaign promises, including his assertions that he would bring US troops home. Eventually, the mask had to come off if Trump was going to continue carrying out the agenda of his masters.

    Today, the mask has indeed come off. For the past three years Trump has made announcements of an imminent pull back of troops in the Middle East, including the recent claim that troops would be leaving Syria. All of the announcements were followed by an INCREASE in US troop presence in the region. Consistent attempts have been made to foment renewed strife with Iran. The build-up to war has been obvious, but some people on the Trump train still didn’t get it.

    The most common argument I heard when pointing out all the inconsistencies in Trump’s claims as well as his direct links to globalists was that “He hadn’t started any wars, so how could he be a globalist puppet…?” My response has always been “Give it a little time, and he will.”

    One of my readers noted recently that “Trump Derangement Syndrome” (TDS) actually goes both ways. Leftists double down on their hatred of Trump at every opportunity, but Trump cultists double down on their support for Trump regardless of how many promises he breaks. This has always been my biggest concern – That conservatives in the liberty movement would ultimately abandon their principles of limited government, the end to banking elites in the White House and ending illegal wars because they had invested themselves so completely in the Trump farce that they would be too embarrassed to admit they had been conned.

    Another concern is that the liberty movement would be infected by an influx of people who are neo-conservative statists at their core. These people pretend to be liberty minded conservatives, but when the veil is lifted they show their true colors as the War Pigs they really are. A distinction has to be made between Bush era Neo-Con control freaks and constitutional conservatives; there are few if any similarities between the two groups, but the establishment hopes that the former will devour the latter.

    I’ve noticed that the War Pigs are out in force this past week, beating their chests a calling for more blood. The US government has assassinated Iranian military commander Qasem Soleimani, retaliations against US targets have begun, and now the Iraqi government has demanded that US troops be removed from the region, to which Trump has said “no” and demanded payment instead. A new troop surge has been initiated and this WILL end in all out war. The tit-for-tat has just begun.

    How do Trump cultists respond? “Kill those terrorists!”

    Yes, many of the same people that applauded Trump’s supposed opposition to the wars three years ago are now fanatically cheering for the beginning of perhaps the most destructive war of all. The rationalizations for this abound. Soleimani was planning attacks on US targets in Iraq, they say. And, this might be true, though no hard proof has yet been presented.

    I’m reminded of the Bush era claims of Iraqi “Weapons of Mass Destruction”, the weapons that were never found and no proof was found that they ever existed. The only weapons Iraq had were the weapons the US sold to them decades ago. Any government can fabricate an excuse for assassination or war for public consumption; the Trump Administration is no different.

    That said, I think the most important factor in this debate has fallen by the wayside. The bottom line is, US troops and US bases should NOT be in Iraq in the first place. Trump himself stated this time and time again. Even if Soleimani was behind the attacks and riots in Iraq, US assets cannot be attacked in the region if they are REMOVED from the region as Trump said he would do.

    There is only one reason to keep US assets in Iraq, Afghanistan or Syria at this time, and that is to create ongoing tensions in the area which can be used by the establishment to trigger a new war, specifically with Iran.

    The War Pigs always have reasons and rationales, though.

    They say the Muslim world is a threat to our way of life, and I agree that their ideology is completely incompatible with Western values. That said, the solution is not sending young Americans to die overseas in wars based on lies. Again, these wars only benefit the bankers and globalists; they do not make us safer as a people. The only moral solution is to make sure the fascist elements of Muslim extremism are not imported to our shores.

    The War Pigs say that we deserve payment for our “services rendered” in the region before we leave, echoing the sentiments of Donald Trump. I ask, what services? Payment for what? The invasion the Iraqi’s didn’t want, based on fallacies that have been publicly exposed? The US bases that should not be there in the first place? The hundreds of thousands dead from a war that had no purpose except to deliberately destabilize the region?

    We will never get “payment” from the Iraqis as compensation for these mad endeavors, and the War Pigs know this. They want war. They want it to go on forever. They want to attach their egos to the event. They want to claim glory for themselves vicariously when we win, and they want to claim victimhood for themselves vicariously when our soldiers or citizens get killed. They are losers that can only be winners through the sacrifices of others.

    The War Pigs defend the notion that the president should be allowed to make war unilaterally without support from congress. They say that this type of action is legal, and technically they are right. It is “legal” because the checks and balances of war were removed under the Bush and Obama Administrations. The passage of the AUMF (Authorization For Use Of Military Force) in 2001 gave the Executive Branch dictatorial powers to initiate war on a whim without oversight. Just because it is “legal” does not mean it is constitutional, or right.

    In the end, the Trump bandwagon is meant to accomplish many things for the globalists; the main goal though is that it is designed to change liberty conservatives into rabid statists. It is designed to make anti-war pro-constitution activists into war mongers and supporters of big government, as long as it is big government under “our control”. But it’s not under our control. Trump is NOT our guy. He is an agent of the establishment and always has been.

    For now, the saber rattling is aggressive but the actions have been limited, but this will not be the case for long.  Some may ask why the establishment has not simply launched all out war now?  Why start out small?  Firstly, they need conservatives psychologically invested in the idea.  This may require a false flag event or attack on American civilians.  Secondly, they need to execute an extensive troop build-up, which could take a few months.  Declarations of a “need for peace” are always used to stall for time while the elites position for war.

    War with Iran is pointless, and frankly, unwinnable, and the elites know this. It’s not just a war with Iran, it is a war with Iran, their allies, and every other nation that reacts negatively to our actions.  And, these nations do not have to react militarily, they can react economically by dumping US treasuries and the dollar as world reserve.

    The establishment wants the US embroiled in Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, etc. until we are so hollowed out from conflict that we collapse.

    They also need a considerable distraction to hide their responsibility for the implosion of the Everything Bubble and the economic pain that will come with it. The end game for the establishment is for America to self destruct, so that it can be rebuilt into something unrecognizable and eternally monstrous. They want every vestige of our original principles to be erased, and to do that, they need us to be complicit in our own destruction.

    They need us to participate. Don’t participate, and refuse to support new banker wars. Don’t be a War Pig.

    *  *  *

    If you would like to support the work that Alt-Market does while also receiving content on advanced tactics for defeating the globalist agenda, subscribe to our exclusive newsletter The Wild Bunch Dispatch.  Learn more about it HERE.

     


    Tyler Durden

    Fri, 01/10/2020 – 23:45

  • Segway Creates Self-Balancing Stroller For 'Too-Fat-To-Walk' Americans
    Segway Creates Self-Balancing Stroller For ‘Too-Fat-To-Walk’ Americans

    Pixar’s animated film Wall-E has sent a profound message to anyone who has watched the flick that if we don’t change our lifestyles, we’re all going to be obese and wheeled around in self-driving chairs. 

    Segway-Ninebot’s new S-Pod personal transporter is making this a reality, as the company gears up to take advantage of a record number of fat Americans who are currently wheeled around in shitty Rascal scooters.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    It appears Segway took the chassis of the I2, which is a two-wheeled, self-balancing personal transporter where the operator stands straight up, and strapped a chair to it. But it seems the company added a third wheel to the S-Pod for more stability. 

    The S-Pod, unlike the I2, has a navigation panel and a manually operated control knob where one can wheel themselves to the nearest fast-food restaurant. 

    The rider can sit back while the chair can reach a top speed of 25 mph. The range of the chair is about 44 miles, and this means one can visit multiple restaurants across town. 

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    The chair will be on display at the annual Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas next week. There’s no word on pricing details at the moment. Segway said the development of the S-Pod will be finished in 3Q20 and has plans for commercial launch sometime in 2021. 

    With a staggering 75% of Americans overweight or obese – the costs in the form of deteriorating health associated with obesity will become a burden on the economy. The S-Pod could be the perfect transportation solution to wheel fat Americans to and from their homes to restaurants – without relying on others.

     


    Tyler Durden

    Fri, 01/10/2020 – 23:25

  • New Earth-Like Planet Found In Habitable Zone Of Nearby Star
    New Earth-Like Planet Found In Habitable Zone Of Nearby Star

    Authored by Ravi Kumar Kopparapu via TheConversation.com,

    A few months ago a group of NASA exoplanet astronomers, who are in the business of discovering planets around other stars, called me into a secret meeting to tell me about a planet that had captured their interest. Because my expertise lies in modeling the climate of exoplanets, they asked me to figure out whether this new planet was habitable – a place where liquid water might exist.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    These NASA colleagues, Josh Schlieder and his students Emily GilbertTom Barclay and Elisa Quintana, had been studying data from TESS (Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite) when they discovered what may be TESS’ first known Earth-sized planet in a zone where liquid water could exist on the surface of a terrestrial planet. This is very exciting news because this new planet is relatively close to Earth, and it may be possible to observe its atmosphere with either the James Webb Space Telescope or ground-based large telescopes.

    Habitable zone planets

    The host star of the planet that Gilbert’s team discovered is called TESS of Interest number 700, or TOI-700. Compared to the Sun, it is a small, dim star. It is 40% the size, only about 1/50 of the Sun’s brightness and is located about 100 light-years from Earth in the constellation Dorado, which is visible from our Southern Hemisphere. For comparison, the nearest star to us, Proxima Centauri, is 4.2 light-years away from Earth. To get a sense of these distances, if you were to travel on the fastest spacecraft (Parker Solar Probe) to reach Proxima Centauri, it would take nearly 20,000 years.

    There are three planets around TOI-700: b, c and d. Planet d is Earth-size, within the star’s habitable zone and orbits TOI-700 every 37 days. My colleagues wanted me to create a climate model for Planet d using the known properties of the star and planet. Planets b and c are Earth-size and mini-Neptune-size, respectively. However, they orbit much closer to their host star, receiving 5 times and 2.6 times the starlight that our own Earth receives from the Sun. For comparison, Venus, a dry and hellishly hot world with surface temperature of approximately 860 degrees Fahrenheit, receives twice the sunlight of Earth.

    Until about a decade ago, only two habitable zone planets of any size were known to astronomers: Earth and Mars. Within the last decade, however, thanks to discoveries made through both ground-based telescopes and the Kepler mission (which also looked for exoplanets from 2009 to 2019, but is now retired), astronomers have discovered about a dozen terrestrial-sized exoplanets. These are between half and two times larger than the Earth within the habitable zones of their host stars.

    Despite the relatively large number of small exoplanet discoveries to date, the majority of stars are between 600 to 3,000 light-years away from Earth – too far and dim for detailed follow-up observation.

    TESS has discovered its first Earth-size planet in its star’s habitable zone, the range of distances where conditions may be just right to allow the presence of liquid water on the surface.

    Why is liquid water important for habitability?

    Unlike Kepler, TESS’ mission is to search for planets around the Sun’s nearest neighbors: those bright enough for follow-up observations.

    Between April 2018 and now, TESS discovered more than 1,500 planet candidates. Most are more than twice the size of Earth with orbits of less than 10 days. Earth, of course, takes 365 days to orbit around our Sun. As a result, the planets receive significantly more heat than Earth receives from the Sun and are too hot for liquid water to exist on the surface.

    Liquid water is essential for habitability. It provides a medium for chemicals to interact with each other. While it is possible for exotic life to exist at higher pressures, or hotter temperatures – like the extremophiles found near hydro-thermal vents or the microbes found half a mile beneath the West Antarctic ice sheet – those discoveries were possible because humans were able to directly probe those extreme environments. They would not have been detectable from space.

    When it comes to finding life, or even habitable conditions, beyond our solar system, humans depend entirely upon remote observations. Surface liquid water may create habitable conditions that can potentially promote life. These life forms can then interact with the atmosphere above, creating remotely detectable bio-signatures that Earth-based telescopes can detect. These bio-signatures could be current Earth-like gas compositions (oxygen, ozone, methane, carbon dioxide and water vapor), or the composition of ancient Earth 2.7 billion years ago (mostly methane and carbon dioxide, and no oxygen).

    We know one such planet where this has already happened: Earth. Therefore, astronomers’ goal is to find those planets that are about Earth-size, orbiting at those distances from the star where water could exist in liquid form on the surface. These planets will be our primary targets to hunt for habitable worlds and signatures of life outside our solar system.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The three planets of the TOI 700 system orbit a small, cool M dwarf star. TOI 700 d is the first Earth-size habitable-zone world discovered by TESS. NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center

    Possible climates for planet TOI-700 d

    To prove that TOI-700 d is real, Gilbert’s team needed to confirm using data from a different type of telescope. TESS detects planets when they cross in front of the star, causing a dip in the starlight. However, such dips could also be created by other sources, such as spurious instrumental noise or binary stars in the background eclipsing each other, creating false positive signals. Independent observations came from Joey Rodriguez at Center for Astrophysics at Harvard University. Rodriguez and his team confirmed the TESS detection of TOI-700 d with the Spitzer telescope, and removed any remaining doubt that it is a genuine planet.

    My student Gabrielle Engelmann-Suissa and I used our modeling software to figure out what type of climate might exist on planet TOI-700 d. Because we do not yet know what kind of gases this planet may actually have in its atmosphere, we use our climate models to explore possible gas combinations that would support liquid oceans on its surface. Engelmann-Suissa, with the help of my longtime collaborator Eric Wolf, tested various scenarios including the current Earth atmosphere (77% nitrogen, 21% oxygen, remaining methane and carbon dioxide), the composition of Earth’s atmosphere 2.7 billion years ago (mostly methane and carbon dioxide) and even a Martian atmosphere (a lot of carbon dioxide) as it possibly existed 3.5 billion years ago.

    Based on our models, we found that if the atmosphere of planet TOI-700 d contains a combination of methane or carbon dioxide or water vapor, the planet could be habitable. Now our team needs to confirm these hypotheses with the James Webb Space Telescope.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Bacteria living in harsh conditions like this geothermal basin in Yellowstone National Park provide clues about habitable zones on other planets. 1tomm/Shutterstock.com

    Strange new worlds and their climates

    The climate simulations our NASA team has completed suggest that an Earth-like atmosphere and gas pressure isn’t adequate to support liquid water on its surface. If we put the same quantity of greenhouse gases as we have on Earth on TOI-700 d, the surface temperature on this planet would still be below freezing.

    Our own atmosphere supports a liquid ocean on Earth now because our star is quite big and brighter than TOI-700. One thing is for sure: All of our teams’ modeling indicates that the climates of planets around small and dim stars like TOI-700 are very unlike what we see on our Earth.

    The field of exoplanets is now in a transitional era from discovering them to characterizing their atmospheres. In the history of astronomy, new techniques enable new observations of the universe including surprises like the discovery of hot-Jupiters and mini-Neptunes, which have no equivalent in our solar system. The stage is now set to observe the atmospheres of these planets to see which ones have conditions that support life.

    *  *  *

    Journalists and researchers have one thing in common: we seek the truth. We work with academics and scientists every day to communicate knowledge, discovery, and facts to readers like you who also care about evidence over opinion. If you think this is important – and we’re confident you do – please help The Conversation grow with a gift in whatever amount you can afford. Thank you.


    Tyler Durden

    Fri, 01/10/2020 – 23:05

  • Korean CEOs Have Least Positive Economic Outlook Among Asian Execs
    Korean CEOs Have Least Positive Economic Outlook Among Asian Execs

    It turns out it’s not just the youth of South Korea that is increasingly disillusioned with the tech-topia. As Statista’s Katherina Buchholz notes, in a survey of 314 CEOs from South Korea, China and Japan, Korean business leaders had the most negative opinion of where the economy was headed – both domestically and globally.

    This is according to the cross-border CEO survey by Maeil Business Newspaper, Nikkei Asian Review and the Global Times, which found that 26 percent of Korean CEOs were assuming that their local and the global economy would deteriorate sharply or steadily in the future.

    Infographic: Korean CEOs Have Least Positive Economic Outlook | Statista

    You will find more infographics at Statista

    CEOs were most optimistic in China, where only 12 percent thought that the global economy would go downhill and only 7 percent assumed the same about their local economy.

    South Korea has been experiencing the current global economic downturn more severely than many other countries. Its exports have been down and GDP growth stayed behind expectations recently. In October, price levels in the country even slipped into deflation territory for the first time.


    Tyler Durden

    Fri, 01/10/2020 – 22:45

  • Coping With Global (& Local) Chaos: What You Can Control And What You Can't
    Coping With Global (& Local) Chaos: What You Can Control And What You Can’t

    Authored by Daisy Luther via The Organic Prepper blog,

    Have you been glued to the news lately, nervously watching what’s going on in the Middle East? Are you concerned that World War III is about to kick off at any moment? Is the state of the economy frequently on your mind? Maybe it’s Ebola that keeps you up at night or the risk of a cyberattack or an EMP or that the political party not of your choosing will take over the government.

    I’ve seen a lot of people expressing worry and fear. They’re afraid we’re about to get involved in a war. They’re worried about terror attacks and conflicts on American soil. They’re terrified that their sons and daughters will be sent off to risk their lives and limbs in another Afghanistan.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Maybe the media is manipulating you to be in a constant state of fear. When we’re scared, we don’t think clearly or act effectively.  I see a lot of fear and I don’t like it. It’s not a useful emotion. It’s not practical. Raging against the machine will not help you to survive anything from a car accident to a mass shooting to a nuclear attack. And I’m all about practicality. So let’s talk this through. You need to shake this off and get control of your thoughts.

    Whatever your main concern is, I have bad news and good news.

    First, the bad news. There’s not a darn thing you personally can do to prevent the things above from occurring. We are little fish in a big sea full of wealthy predators who are the ones that can actually cause change on those levels.

    Now the good news. What we can change are our immediate environments. If you are expending a great deal of energy and emotion, focus it on the things that you can change. These (combined with luck) are the things that will have the biggest effect on whether you live or die.

    Selco’s theory of circles

    One of the things Selco spoke about last year in the Women’s Urban Survival Course in Croatia was circles. No, it wasn’t a geometry lesson. It was a way of looking at the world that he has learned the hard way.

    Imagine different parts of the world as giant circles. You’ve got North America, Europe, the Middle East, etc., etc.

    Within those giant circles are smaller circles. To name a few, here in the US, you’ve got different states, you’ve got different movements like pro-gun and anti-gun, you’ve got different political belief systems, you’ve got different religions.

    Then you’ve got smaller circles still. You have individual towns, churches, schools, and community organizations.

    Then there are the circles that really count the most: your close friends, your family members, your immediate neighborhoods.

    The summary of Selco’s lesson was this: When you think about where you personally can make the most changes that will have the greatest effect on your survival, where does your power lie?

    That’s right. Within the smallest circles. Those are the things we can actually do something about so completely freaking out over the news is not productive at all.

    (By the way, ladies, we still have a couple of spaces open in this year’s Urban Survival Course in Croatia. Go here for more informationI’ll be there and would love to meet you.)

    Out of all the lessons we were taught in that week, I think the lesson about focusing our energy on the things we can control just might be the most important one of all.

    You should still pay attention to what is going on in the world.

    I’m not telling you that you shouldn’t be interested in or follow current events.

    On the contrary.

    It’s incredibly important to stay informed. But you can’t wallow in it and rail at it to the exclusion of taking common-sense steps.

    We need to know what the potential threats are so that we can be prepared for them. We must be aware of what’s going on in the world instead of blithely keeping up with the Kardashians or some other nonsense.

    I get my news from a wide variety of websites and generally find the truth lies somewhere in the middle if there’s any truth at all.

    So watch the news. Read the articles. But understand two things.

    #1) Your power ends at the knowledge of these events.

    When the wheels of the government are already in motion, there isn’t a whole lot we as individuals can do to stop them. We are screaming into the void when we rant on social media or website comments sections about being pro-war or anti-war or vent our fury about the mismanagement of the national budget.

    Sure, it’s important to be heard and to let the figures pulling the strings know our thoughts about what’s going on.

    But if we could really change things, do you think our food supply would be chemically tainted and that our national healthcare would be an unaffordable disgrace to which only the wealthy or the extremely poor have access? Do you think our government would be funding $22,000,000 efforts to bring Serbian cheese up to US standards or spending half a million to study the mating calls of Panamanian frogs?

    We can be outraged all we want – and trust me – I am outraged. But I personally only have the power to point out these things. I cannot fix them no matter how much I want to do so. I’m not wealthy. I’m not a powerful politician. My ability to respond is limited to sharing information.

    I don’t love it, but that’s reality. And you’ve got to live in reality.

    #2) We’re probably being lied to anyway.

    Let’s look at a couple of events. The death of Soleimeni and the Las Vegas massacre. Do you really, honestly, deep down in your soul think we got the whole story on either of these events?

    Was Soleimeni beloved or hated? It really depends on which news outlet you watch. I saw a lot of people who looked heartbroken when they turned up for his funeral on one news outlet but on others, there were people cheering in the streets. What’s the truth? We’re probably never going to know. The “reality” we’re given depends on the agenda of the news network that shows the footage.

    And allegedly, nobody knows what caused Stephen Paddock to open fire on a country music concert in Las Vegas a couple of years back. Heck, many people aren’t even convinced that Paddock was the shooter. I don’t believe for one single second that no motive was ever found for such a horrific crime on such a massive scale, but we won’t get the answers anytime soon, if ever.

    We simply cannot rely on the news to accurately inform us. The mainstream media is the modern-day Ministry of Propaganda. You can get a general idea of what’s going on, but don’t expect to learn the true motives behind these events from Fox or CNN or any of the other networks. Everyone’s got a bias. Everyone’s got an agenda.

    When Selco talked about the Balkan war, he explained how people were bombarded with propaganda to make them hate and fear their neighbors. Why? Because a war was good for a handful of powerful people. And the little guys lie us got dragged along for a brutal ride on a tidal wave of manufactured rage.

    So watch and read, but know that you’re only getting a biased fraction of the real story.

    Your power lies in smaller circles.

    So far, this article probably seems like a bummer. You are probably wondering why on earth a person who covers current events is writing such an article.

    I’m writing it because I see so many people utterly panicking over things beyond their control. We, the ordinary, everyday people, cannot prevent whoever is president, whether it’s Obama or Trump or Bush, from droning the daylights out of a country with nuclear capabilities.  We can make our opinions known because sometimes a public outcry works. But we can neither prevent nor insist upon these events.

    There’s good news, though.

    The thing is, you do have power. You have the power to cause a change in your smaller circles. You can help your community to become better prepared because on smaller levels, in smaller circles, our voices do count for a whole lot more.

    And if you aren’t interested in even going that big, you can dial it down to the smallest of circles. Your family, your friends, and your immediate neighbors. People always think that their prepping community has to be a group of self-proclaimed preppers with supplies stacked up to the rooftops.

    But that isn’t the case.

    There are all sorts of ways to build small circles.

    You can build communities in all sorts of ways. From your mail carrier to your neighbor who has laying hens to your other neighbor with the enviable 6-foot tall tomato plants, all of these folks could be valuable friends to have. You can meet with a group of ladies and knit or help a neighbor erect a shed in his backyard with an old-fashioned “barn-raising.”

    You build your community by being a decent human being, by helping when you can, and by looking out for one another.

    Obviously not all of us have neighbors we’d trust when battening down the hatches and in those situations, we could be better off to be with family members.

    But however we do it, by building our inner circles, those small intimate circles, we become stronger. We create communities that will work together to help out another member if he breaks his leg and can’t feed his livestock. Then that member shares the harvest. We build a community that has our backs because they know we will have theirs.

    I belonged to the coolest community ever when I lived in California. It was an informal group of homesteaders who got together to teach one another and have potluck dinners and share skills. We became so close-knit that when wildfires drew near, we’d open up pastures for our friends’ livestock if they needed to evacuate and we’d give the humans our spare bedrooms.

    Were they all preppers? No, definitely not. Some of them weren’t at all on board with stashing beans and rice and bullets and bandaids. But would I want to hunker down with them if the end of the world was happening? Darned right I would. These were people who gave generously of their time to teach others homesteading skills and answer questions and even pop over to help out at butchering time.

    Remember that your small circle doesn’t have to be solely made up of preppers, per se. Sure it would be nice, but in most situations, especially if you’re hunkering down, your community is made up of your closest neighbors. So build relationships with them. You don’t have to tell them you have enough pasta to feed a village in Italy for a year in your basement to build this relationship. But never underestimate the power of a neighbor who has your back.

    Be nice to people. Help when you can. Tip decently at your local cafe. Treat others with respect. Seek out those with the same values who are also helpful and respectful. Those are the folks you want around you.

    Is this foolproof? Or course not. There are selfish people in the world. There are cowardly people in the world. There are the folks who talk a good talk and are totally on board…until they’re not because a better opportunity came along.

    As many of you know, I am traveling full-time right now but I still build some community everywhere I go. I hit up the same bakery or juice bar for breakfast every day and strike up a conversation. I speak to the neighbors. I smile and I make friends. I socialize. I pick up things if someone drops them. I smile and make an effort to communicate even when my grasp of the local language is poor. Basically, I am a decent person and I make real human connections. Because of this, I’ve found that locals give me all kinds of tips, from where to buy the best produce to who produces the best rakija or which doctor I might want to visit for a medical issue.

    If I can do that in countries where I don’t even speak the language, you can do this in the town where you live.

    Try to focus on what you can control, not on what you can’t control.

    In these days when it seems like war is only a heartbeat away, or an EMP could strike at any moment, or a cyber attack could change the world as we know it, or any other epic disaster could occur, sometimes you have to take a step back.

    Sometimes, current events are incredibly overwhelming.

    When you find yourself getting overwhelmed, take a look at your circles. Are you getting overwhelmed by the big circles you can do nothing about?

    If so then it’s time to focus on the small circles. The things you can do are:

    If you’re letting the news cycles drive you into a panic, then it’s time to take a step back. Turn off the television or computer or wherever you get your news. Focus on what you can do – and there’s a lot you can do.

    Is World War III about to happen?

    We’ve been on this cusp multiple times over the past ten or twenty years. At some point, we’ll probably go over the edge. Will it be this time? I’ve written about the possibility of world war at least a dozen times over the past 7 years because tensions were incredibly high each time.

    So far, we’ve been fortunate and all-out world war has not erupted. But for how long will our luck hold out? There’s absolutely no way to know.

    All we can know for sure is that we can build strong communities. Perhaps we’re creating local civil defense teams. Maybe we’re getting ready to hunker down with our families. We can network and make friends where we are right now.

    For your own sanity and peace of mind, focus on controlling your small circles. Stop expending so much energy and emotion on the things you cannot control. Prepping should give you peace of mind, not a constant anxiety attack. Don’t let the barrage of terrifying headlines send you spiraling into fear. We don’t make good decisions when we’re fearful. Awareness and fear are two entirely different things.

    Workable survival plans aren’t big. They aren’t grandiose, national-level movements

    They’re small. They are community-oriented at the largest and family-oriented at the smallest. Definitely pay attention to the world around you because you need to be aware of important signs and signals.

    But focus your energy on your small circles. Change and enhance the things that are within your power.


    Tyler Durden

    Fri, 01/10/2020 – 22:25

  • Toyota To Develop 175-Acre A.I. "City Of The Future'"
    Toyota To Develop 175-Acre A.I. “City Of The Future'”

    Toyota announced that it will break ground next year on a 175-acre, hydrogen powered “prototype city of the future” at the base of Mt. Fuji, where 2,000 employees, retirees and others will live alongside the latest in smart home technology, hyper-efficient street design, AI-guided robotics, and new mobility products.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Announced by CEO Akio Toyoda during a Monday presentation at the 2020 Consumer Electronics Show (CES) in Las Vegas, the ambitious project built on the site of a former car factory has been referred to by Toyota as the “Woven City,” due to its integration of three types of transportation.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The community was designed by Danish architect Bjarke Ingels, whose firm designed the 2 World Trade Center building in New York, as well as Google’s Silicon Valley and London offices, according to Reuters.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Toyota CEO Akio Toyoda shakes hands with Danish architect Bjarke Ingels

    One street would be for faster vehicles, while a second street will be for lower-speed personal mobility vehicles such as scooters and bikes, along with pedestrians. A third would be a “park-like promenade for pedestrians only,” according to The Verge.

    These three street types weave together to form an organic grid pattern to help accelerate the testing of autonomy,” says Toyota.

    Employee residences would be equipped with AI-guided smart home technology and robotics.

    The residencies would be equipped with smart home technology, such as in-home robotics to assist with daily living. “The homes will use sensor-based AI to check occupants’ health, take care of basic needs and enhance daily life, creating an opportunity to deploy connected technology with integrity and trust, securely and positively,” the company said. –The Verge

    “This is my personal ‘Field of Dream’,” said Toyoda, adding “If you build it, they will come.” 

    There’s nothing new about automakers using big plots of land to build proving grounds with fake city backdrops to test out new vehicles. But what Toyota is proposing is a dramatic escalation of that concept: a real city with real people who would live within the automaker’s amped-up vision of the future.

    That vision includes a lot of autonomous vehicles. Last year, Toyota first introduced its “e-Palette” concept, which was described as a “fully-automated, next generation battery electric vehicle designed to be scalable and customizable for a range of Mobility as a Service businesses.” They looked similar to transparent cargo or shipping containers on wheels that grow and shrink in size depending on their specific task. –The Verge

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    According to Toyota, their automated mobility vehicles will allow for ride-sharing and carpooling, and will serve as ‘roach coaches’ for hungry employees.

    “You may be thinking, ‘Has this guy lost his mind?’,” asked Toyoda. “‘Is he like a Japanese version of Willy Wonka?’ Perhaps.

    Privacy concerns

    As The Verge rightly notes, “Left unsaid, of course, was anything related to access to data, privacy, or nondisclosure agreements that residents would presumably need to sign before agreeing to live in Toyota’s up-jumped company town. Toyota already owns the land where it’s proposing to build, but selecting a population while complying with local residential rules will undoubtedly be complicated and not necessarily something the company would be well-suited to do.”


    Tyler Durden

    Fri, 01/10/2020 – 22:05

  • US Destroyer Issues 'Warning Blasts' After Russian Warship's "Aggressive Approach" In Arabian Sea
    US Destroyer Issues ‘Warning Blasts’ After Russian Warship’s “Aggressive Approach” In Arabian Sea

    A major and dangerous close call between US and Russia has unfolded in the north Arabian sea near the Persian Gulf. A Russian warship “aggressively approached” a US Navy destroyer, nearly hitting it, a US Navy statement said Friday.

    The US Navy further released video of the incident, which reportedly involved repeat warnings issued from the US vessel over a risk of collision. This included five warning blast signals issued from the deck of the US destroyer, the USS Farragut.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    “On Thursday, Jan. 9, while conducting routine operations in the North Arabian Sea, USS Farragut was aggressively approached by a Russian Navy ship,” the US Navy’s Fifth Fleet, which operates in the Persian Gulf and Middle East said in a statement.

    Farragut sounded five short blasts, the international maritime signal for danger of a collision, and requested the Russian ship alter course in accordance with international rules of the road.”

    The US Navy underscored that the Russian vessel made an “aggressive approach” which very nearly resulted in collision in the open seas. Indeed video confirms the two ships came very close to one another.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    “The Russian ship initially refused but ultimately altered course,” the statement added, and noted further: “While the Russian ship took action, the initial delay in complying with international rules while it was making an aggressive approach increased the risk of collision.”

    According to a CNN report of the incident, the Russian vessel came as close as 180 feet from the US ship, close enough for each side to directly and physically communicate from the decks. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The Russian destroyer nearly struck the US ship, video released by the US 5th Fleet shows (screengrab).

    In one video a US Navy crew member can be seen running in the direction of the Russian destroyer in order to establish voice contact and wave the vessel off. 

    Importanly, the USS Farragut is part of the USS Harry S. Truman aircraft carrier group deployed to the region last year to ensure open and safe passageway for vessels traversing the vital Strait of Hormuz amid soaring tensions with Iran.


    Tyler Durden

    Fri, 01/10/2020 – 21:50

  • Corporate Media Welcome Back Iraq War Hawks To Make Case for Iran
    Corporate Media Welcome Back Iraq War Hawks To Make Case for Iran

    Authored by Eion Higgins via CommonDreams.org,

    As President Donald Trump spent the early days of 2020 instigating and then backing down from a potentially catastrophic confrontation with Iran, corporate media in the U.S. turned to the very same people who promoted the country’s worst foreign policy disaster in a generation to advocate for repeating the mistakes of two decades ago. 

    The decision of networks and cable news outlets like CNNMSNBC, and Fox News to bring on a stream of past advocates for and architects of the 2003 invasion of Iraq was panned by progressives who watched in horror and frustration as the same arguments were deployed in service of all-out war with Iran. “It’s War Inc. all over again,” tweeted The Nation‘s Dave Zirin.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Former President George W. Bush’s former press secretary Ari Fleischer appeared on Fox News January 2 to claim the assassination of Iranian military commander Qasem Soleimani would be welcomed by Iranians. It was not. (Image: Fox News/screenshot)

    Trump’s ordered assassination of Iranian military commander Qasem Soleimani on January 3 proved the catalyst for escalated tensions between the U.S. and Iran. It also opened the door for news outlets to welcome back some of the key Bush-era war cheerleaders.

    The more things change, the more they stay the same, wrote Rolling Stone‘s Tim Dickinson.

    “The Trump administration’s sudden, violent confrontation with Iran stands in contrast to the methodical march to war with Iraq under George W. Bush and his neoconservative cabinet in 2003,” Dickinson wrote. “But the rhetoric around the two conflicts has been strikingly similar — as has the reliance on ‘razor thin’ evidence of an imminent threat to establish a cause for war.”

    Soleimani’s death by drone strike was celebrated in real time by former Bush press secretary Ari Fleischer, who spent the run-up to the Iraq War selling the public on the necessity of the conflict.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    “I think it is entirely possible that this is going to be a catalyst inside Iran where the people celebrate this killing of Soleimani,” Fleischer told Fox in the hours after Soleimani’s killing, flanked by Bush administration advisor Karl Rove.

    In contrast to Fleischer’s prediction, Soleimani’s funeral and remembrance ceremonies over the weekend turned out mourners enraged at the assassination across Iran in the millions. Former Vice President Dick Cheney’s similar claim in 2002 that U.S. troops in Iraq would be “welcomed as liberators” was equally true.

    Fleischer was nonetheless welcomed back to Fox on Tuesday and Wednesday to give his thoughts on the conflict and attack Democrats for questioning the rush to war.

    “It’s concerning, to say the least, to see some of the biggest backers of the Iraq War—an abject failure that, coupled with the ongoing war in Afghanistan, has cost the United States trillions of dollars and thousands of lives—are publicly (and in some instances, gleefully) opining about the potential impact of war with Iran, in some cases even using the same rhetorical stylings to do so,” said Vox‘s Jane Coaston of the similarity in rhetoric.

    On MSNBC, which bills itself as a liberal alternative to right-wing behemoth Fox, host Ari Melber on January 7 in the wake of Iranian retaliation for the assassination spoke to former General Barry McCaffrey, who called for a devastating response against Iran. 

    “Our only good response at this point is an overwhelming dominance of air and naval power that can be employed against the Iranian homeland,” said McCaffrey.

    Unmentioned in the segment was McCaffrey’s position on the board of Raytheon, a major U.S. weapons supplier. 

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    The next day, Melber hosted former Sen. Joe Lieberman, a one-time Democrat whose embrace of the Bush administration’s push for war across the Middle East led to an unofficial expulsion from the Democratic Party in 2006, though Lieberman was re-elected as an independent.

    Not disclosed by Melber to his audience? The fact that Lieberman works for Israel Aerospace Industries, a defense company with $1 billion in sales in the U.S. 

    Melber did not respond to a request for comment at press time. 

    As Popular Information‘s Judd Legum reported Thursday morning, Lieberman and McCaffrey are hardly alone in advocating for war in the media without revealing their financial interests in the conflict. Legum lists nine former government officials with ties to the defense industry who are being presented to the American people as experts without noting their connections to the military industrial complex.

    One of the people profiled by Legum is Michael Chertoff, the former Bush-era secretary of Homeland Security. On CNN, Chertoff claimed Trump has unilateral power to attack Iran and start a war. 

    But, Legum pointed out, there was some context for those remarks conveniently left out of the coverage:

    Neither Chertoff nor CNN disclosed that Chertoff is chairman of the board of the American subsidiary of BAE Systems, the fourth largest weapons manufacturer in the world. 

    Print media was not immune to the lack of accountability shown by tv. On January 5, the Washington Post ran a piece by former Bush administration national security advisor Stephen Hadley saluting the assassination of Soleimani and calling for war if necessary. 

    That Hadley is on the board of Raytheon alongside MSNBC‘s McCaffrey did not receive a mention.

    The onus for disclosure, wrote Eyes on the Ties reporter Rob Galbraith, is on the Post‘s editor Fred Hiatt: 

    Running another hawkish column by Hadley without noting his enormous financial incentive to stoke the engines of war shows that the Post in general, and Hiatt in particular, has failed to learn anything from Syria, Iraq, or any of the other times that war profiteers have used their pages to clamor for missile strikes and invasions. This is made all the more egregious since, however dismissively, Hiatt acknowledged Hadley’s conflict of interest in 2013, and yet still went ahead and printed his op-ed today without disclosing this conflict—again.

    “It’s not 2003, but it sure feels like it,” wrote HuffPost‘s Jessica Schulberg in a piece detailing a number of the Bush administration officials and varied Iraq War boosters brought on by the corporate media to discuss the push for war.

    “In a sane and just society, the architects of the nearly 17-year-old war in Iraq—which is still ongoing and has left an estimated half-million people dead—would face war crimes charges and those who cheered them on would be thoroughly discredited,” Schulberg continued. “Instead, they are the ‘experts’ praising President Donald Trump’s decision to assassinate top Iranian military commander Gen. Qasem Soleimani and offering the public insight on the way forward with Iran.”


    Tyler Durden

    Fri, 01/10/2020 – 21:45

    Tags

  • How's This Impeachment Farce Working For You, Nancy?
    How’s This Impeachment Farce Working For You, Nancy?

    Authored by James Howard Kunstler via Kunstler.com,

    Speaker Nancy Pelosi has been clinging to her bill of impeachment for one reason: hoping that a judge will rule to release all the evidence and depositions collected by Robert Mueller’s investigation. What’s wrong with that? Mr. Mueller failed to find any prosecutable crimes. That was the sum and substance of his two-year-long exercise in bad faith. In which case, all that material is officially and legally evidence of nothing. Impeachment is a political act and sealed evidence of nothing can’t be released to one set of political actors in a political quarrel for use as a political weapon. More to the point – and to Mrs. Pelosi’s real motive here – the material is not for impeachment but rather to use the Mueller dossier as political opposition “research” for the coming election.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    There is no question that from the start of his investigation, Special Counsel Robert Mueller knew that the case was opened under false pretenses, since his very close friend, the erstwhile FBI director James Comey, also knew by early 2017 that all the predicating material was substantially false, and that it was procured by Mrs. Clinton. To carry it beyond that was a scheme by acting FBI director Rod Rosenstein to issue a series of “scoping” letters that increasingly widened Mr. Mueller’s purview to go fishing for crimes in every area and every chronological phase of the president’s life. That smacks of what’s known in Anglo-American law as attainder by process: first declaring someone an outlaw, and only afterward seeking a crime to justify it. Under our system, first crimes are established, then persons liable for them are brought to court to answer charges.

    Of course, there’s good reason to suspect that Mr. Mueller himself was a false front for the operation conducted in his name, which was really an intrigue carried out by a claque of Democratic Party Lawfare attorneys led by Andrew Weissmann, Mr. Mueller’s chief deputy. Mr. Mueller’s testimony before two House committees last July revealed a pathetic figure who was unacquainted with the most basic pieces of his own inquiry.

    The case for House members to get access to all that backstage Mueller material could go up to the Supreme Court. In the meantime, Impeachment’s second act is about to get underway whether Mrs. Pelosi likes the terms or not. It’s the Senate’s prerogative to decide. These terms appear to be exactly the same as the ones used by the Senate for Bill Clinton’s impeachment trial — which means that each side chooses a team of “managers” to present its case, and then the managers are subject to grilling by senators. The House Democrats are insisting on calling witnesses solely to maintain their court claim for testimony from the White House counsel, with which the aforesaid Mueller material is associated in the case. If the rules eschew witnesses, that case is moot, and the Democrats lose access to a trove of political oppo research obtained for them under false pretenses by their own operatives in the Department of Justice.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Secondarily, the impeachment was designed to get senators in swing states on the record voting to acquit the president in the hopes that it will somehow taint their re-election prospects and possibly flip control of the Senate to the Democrats. That outcome would above all insure that Mr. Trump could not get another Supreme Court nominee confirmed in his second term, nor continue the wholesale appointment of lesser federal district judges. Plus, of course, it would obstruct any other legislative initiative his party brought for four years.

    Personally, I would miss the chance to hear from the so-called “whistleblower” who instigated the impeachment phase of the long-running coup against Mr. Trump. Contrary to the disinformation put out by The New York Times and other coup co-conspirators, the “whistleblower” enjoys no right to anonymity. It would also be satisfying to hear how his enabler, Intel Community IG Michael Atkinson, might account for the process that steered the “whistleblower” to Rep. Adam Schiff and his staff — for instance, back-dating the official documents that green-lighted the “whistleblower’s” case. Mr. Atkinson is deeply implicated himself as a player in the earlier 2017 RussiaGate FISA court mischief, since his previous job was agency counsel to DOJ National Security chief John Carlin, who signed off on fraudulent FISA warrants. Mr. Atkinson must have counseled Mr. Carlin to do that. Testimony from Mr. Schiff about the “whistleblower” process would also be edifying. Senators would surely get to see Mr. Atkinson’s so-far-withheld deposition transcript from the House Intel Committee hearings of November. It might establish grounds for Mr. Schiff’s expulsion from the House of Representatives as a serial liar, a salutary measure to restore a sense of legitimacy in American affairs.

    If witnesses were allowed in the Senate trial phase of impeachment, the president’s team could haul in scores of former and current government officials implicated in the seditious activities against him to testify. The nation would be well-served and enlightened. The only question is whether their testimony might queer the actual criminal cases pending against them outside the impeachment circus.


    Tyler Durden

    Fri, 01/10/2020 – 21:35

  • Insurance For Oil Tankers Jumps Amid War Threat In Middle East
    Insurance For Oil Tankers Jumps Amid War Threat In Middle East

    Escalating tensions in the Middle East and threats of war between the US and Iran have sent insurance rates for petroleum tankers higher, especially for vessels transiting the Strait of Hormuz, reported Reuters, citing industry insiders. 

    War risk premiums that oil tanker owners pay each time as they transit the Persian Gulf, Strait of Hormuz, and the Gulf of Oman are surging in the last ten days following Iran militia attacking the US embassy in Baghdad and Iran launching missiles at US military bases. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    One Singapore-based LNG shipbroker told Reuters that war premiums are “adding about $150,000 to $200,000 (to overall costs) per trip.”

    About a quarter of all the world’s crude and LNG transits on chemical tankers through the Strait of Hormuz and could be susceptible to attack as Iran has vowed to retaliate against the US for the airstrike that killed top Iranian Commander Qasem Soleimani last Friday. So far, the Iranians have launched more than a dozen missiles at two military bases in Iraq.  

    The latest indications from the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) Aerospace Force Commander Amir Ali Hajizadeh on Thursday said that more missile attacks on US bases could continue across the region. 

    This was the case on Wednesday when Iran-backed militia fired three rockets at the US embassy in Baghdad. 

    Increasing tension between Iran and the US and the threats of war across the region have led to the rise in war-risk insurance for oil tankers.

    “We are obviously concerned with regard to the tension around the wider (Gulf) area,” said Svein A Ringbakken, managing director of Norwegian ship insurer Den Norske Krigsforsikring for Skib (DNK) told Reuters. “Ships’ transits in these areas have already for some time been subject to additional war risks insurance premiums, which may increase in light of the recent developments.”

    A London-based shipbroker told Reuters that ship insurers had quoted the breach rate for seven days at around 0.35% of insurance costs, up from about 0.15% in December. 

    Saul Kavonic, an analyst with Credit Suisse, said escalating tensions in the Middle East could lead to a closure of the Strait of Hormuz: “A prolonged closure of the Strait of Hormuz could see LNG spot prices skyrocket, and see a demand destruction scenario emerge turning the current soft LNG market on its head,” he warned. 

    We reported on Wednesday that Petrobras, Bahri – Saudi Arabia’s state-run tanker operator – and other tanker companies had suspended sailing through the Straits of Hormuz.  


    Tyler Durden

    Fri, 01/10/2020 – 21:25

  • "I'd Like To See Them Call Me": How Trump Used An Encrypted Swiss Fax Machine To Defuse The Iran Crisis
    “I’d Like To See Them Call Me”: How Trump Used An Encrypted Swiss Fax Machine To Defuse The Iran Crisis

    Even as Trump was rage-tweeting on Jan 4, two days after the killing of Iran’s top military leader Qassem Soleimani, that he would hit 52 targets including Iranian heritage sites for potential retaliation if America suffered losses following an Iranian attack, warning that “those targets, and Iran itself, WILL BE HIT VERY FAST AND VERY HARD”, the US president was busy, secretly using an encrypted back-channel to bring the world back from the brink of war.

    As the WSJ reports, just hours after the U.S. strike which killed Iranian Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani, the Trump administration sent an urgent back channel message to Tehran: “Don’t escalate.” The encrypted fax message was sent via the Swiss Embassy in Iran, one of the few means of direct, confidential communication between the two sides, U.S. officials told the WSJ. Then, in frantic attempts to de-escalate even as top US and Iranian leaders were stirring patriotic sentiment and nationalistic fervor, the White House and Iranian leaders exchanged further messages in the days that followed, which officials in both countries described as far more measured than the fiery rhetoric traded publicly by politicians.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The Swiss ambassador to Iran, Markus Leitner, here with Iranian President Hassan Rouhani in 2017, helped shuttle messages between the U.S. and Iran. Photo: Swiss embassy.

    It worked: a week later, and after a retaliatory, if highly theatrical, Iranian missile attack on two military bases hosting American troops that purposefully inflicted no casualties, Washington and Tehran have stepped back from the brink of open hostilities (for now).

    “We don’t communicate with the Iranians that much, but when we do the Swiss have played a critical role to convey messages and avoid miscalculation,” a senior U.S. official said.

    While a spokesman at Iran’s mission to the United Nations declined to comment on the exchanges, he said “we appreciate [the Swiss] for any efforts they make to provide an efficient channel to exchange letters when and if necessary.” Another Iranian official said the back channel provided a welcome bridge, when all others had been burned: “In the desert, even a drop of water matters.”

    In retrospect, it should hardly be a surprise that the perpetually neutral Swiss were the last recourse to prevent potential war.

    As the WSJ notes, from the Swiss Embassy, a Shah-era mansion overlooking Tehran, the country’s role as a diplomatic intermediary has stretched through four turbulent decades and seven presidencies, from the hostage crisis under Jimmy Carter to Barack Obama’s nuclear deal. But it was seldom tested like this.

    Here’s how it happened.

    The first American fax was sent immediately after Washington confirmed the death of Soleimani, the most important figure in Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, the U.S. officials said. It arrived on a special encrypted fax machine in a sealed room of the Swiss mission – the most enduring, and secret, method since the 1979 Islamic Revolution – for the White House to exchange messages with Iran’s top leadership, especially when the two nations are concurrently parading in public media in their bellicose propaganda to earn political brownie points.

    The equipment operates on a secure Swiss government network linking its Tehran embassy to the Foreign Ministry in Bern and its embassy in Washington, say Swiss diplomats. Only the most senior officials have the key cards needed to use the equipment.

    Early on Friday morning, just hours after Soleimani’s death, Swiss Ambassador Markus Leitner, a 53-year-old career diplomat, delivered the American message by hand to Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif. Predictably, Zarif responded to the U.S. missive with anger, according to a WSJ source: “[U.S. Secretary of State Mike] Pompeo is a bully,” he said, according to one U.S. official briefed on Zarif’s response. “The U.S. is the cause of all the problems.”

    The US may indeed be the cause of all the problems, but it also has all the weapons, and despite the pompous rhetoric, Iran knew full well it could not hope to escalte in tit-for-tat fashion without risking virtually everything. Which is why, Iran was quick to take advantage of Leitner’s mediation.

    The Swiss ambassador – who regularly visits Washington for closed-door sessions with Pentagon, State Department and intelligence officials eager to tap his knowledge about Iran’s opaque and fluid politics – spent the next several days after Soleimani’s killing shuttling back and forth in a low-key but high-wire diplomatic mission designed to let each side speak candidly. It was a vivid contrast to the jabs of President Trump and Mr. Zarif on Twitter.

    Shortly after Trump tweeted on Jan 4 that the US had picked 52 Iranian targets for eventual escalation, Zarif responded just as belligerently on the next day: “A reminder to those hallucinating about emulating ISIS war crimes by targeting our cultural heritage,” he wrote. “Through MILLENNIA of history, barbarians have come and ravaged our cities, razed our monuments and burnt our libraries. Where are they now? We’re still here, & standing tall.”

    However, at the same time as Zarif was seeking to emulate Trump’s twitter bluster, the Iranian foreign minister called the Swiss ambassador to take a message to the U.S. It was more restrained, and subsequent statements from both sides helped prevent miscalculations, the officials said.

    “When tensions with Iran were high, the Swiss played a useful and reliable role that both sides appreciated,” said a senior Trump administration official. “Their system is like a light that never turns off.” Unlike Twitter, that is, which has emerged a medium for spreading premeditated, fake, outrage to mass consumption and whose sole purpose is to distract from what is truly happening behind the scenes.

    It’s not the first time the Swiss have helped pull back the middle east from the brink of mushroom clouds: they have served as messengers between Washington and Tehran since 1980, in the wake of the seizure of the American Embassy—and 52 hostages —in Tehran by Iranian revolutionaries. Swiss diplomats call the role the “brieftrager” or “the postman.”

    In the years after the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003, the Swiss shepherded messages to help avoid direct clashes. When President Obama assumed office, Switzerland hosted the talks that led to a nuclear deal. When Washington lifted sanctions, Swiss businesses had an early jump on rivals.  When Trump reimposed sanctions, he gave the Swiss a phone number to pass the Iranians, saying: “I’d like to see them call me.”

    So far, Tehran has continued to speak through the Swiss.

    * * *

    Why has this archaic method of communication proven so effective at pulling the world back from the edge of crisis?

    Former Swiss ambassadors say the diplomatic channel is effective because the U.S. and Iran can trust a message will remain confidential, be delivered quickly, and will reach only its intended recipients. Statements passed on the back channel are always precisely phrased, diplomatic, and free of emotion, something which is clearly impossible on Trump’s favorite social media platform, twitter, which he uses for precisely the opposite purpose: to spark outrage and to appeal to base emotions of his core supporter group.

    Switzerland, a landlocked country of nine million with no standing army where everyone owns a gun, parlays its role as the world’s neutral “postman” (and until recently, secret banker) to lever access to the great powers.

    And speaking of Swiss bank, the WSJ notes that currently Swiss diplomats are working to get Washington’s green light for Swiss banks to finance exports to Iran that aren’t subject to sanctions—like food and medicine. “We do things for the world community, and it’s good,” said a former ambassador. “But it is also good for our interests.” Of course it is: for the privilege of funding the most basic human needs, those same Swiss banks can charge exorbitant rates of interest in a country that for years has had a negative official interest rate.

    Iran isn’t the only geopolitical hot spot where the Swiss Embassy represents U.S. or other countries’ interests after the breakdown of diplomatic relations: the Swiss now holds six mandates including representing Iran in Saudi Arabia, Georgia in Russia and Turkey in Libya and the U.S. in Cuba according to the WSJ. In April 2019, the Trump administration asked Bern to represent it in Venezuela but President Nicolás Maduro’s government has yet to approve.

    And so, if the world has any hope of avoiding an all out war between US and Iran, it will have to go through Bern, at least figuratively. As tensions between Washington and Tehran have escalated, the Swiss backchannel has remained active. In December the two countries released prisoners at the same time at a special hangar in the Zurich airport – U.S. special envoy on Iran Brian Hook and Iran’s Zarif sat in separate rooms as the Swiss directed the carefully choreographed exchange.

    “The Swiss channel has become enormously important because of what they can do in the short term to lessen tensions,” said former New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, who worked with the Swiss on the prisoner exchange. “It’s the only viable channel right now.”


    Tyler Durden

    Fri, 01/10/2020 – 21:11

    Tags

  • Sanctuary Cities: A Battle Over The Second Amendment Is Unfolding Across America
    Sanctuary Cities: A Battle Over The Second Amendment Is Unfolding Across America

    Authored by Derrick Broze via TheMindUnleashed.com,

    As Virginia’s new Democratic legislature promises gun control measures, the wives of National Guardsman are warning that impending gun legislation threatens to turn neighbor against neighbor.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    As the 2020 Virginia legislative session began, Democratic Governor Ralph Northam and fellow Democrats continued their push for new gun control bills. In the months since a May 2019 shooting left 12 people dead and four others injured at a Virginia Beach municipal building, Democratic politicians have repeatedly expressed their desire to implement new restrictions such as universal background checks, a ban on certain weapons, and controversial red flag laws.

    However, the calls for gun restrictions have not been welcomed by all Virginians. Instead, the push for more gun control has sparked a movement that has expanded across Virginia and continues to grow in other states including California, Illinois, Colorado, New Mexico, and Florida.

    The so-called Second Amendment “sanctuary city” movement takes it’s name from previous resolutions introduced by opponents of hard line immigration policies. These sanctuary cities are defined as a city (or a county, or a state) that limits its cooperation with federal immigration enforcement agents in order to protect low-priority immigrants from deportation, while still turning over those who have committed serious crimes.

    In a similar fashion, supporters of Second Amendment sanctuary cities are now asking local law enforcement to refuse to comply with orders from the state regarding gun control.

    In Virginia, home to the National Rifle Association headquarters, the sanctuary city movement came as a response to Democrats promising new gun laws after they took control of both chambers of the Virginia Legislature in the 2019 election. For example, Delegate Dan Helmer recently introduced House Bill 567, which would prohibit indoor shooting ranges in any building not owned or leased by the Commonwealth of Virginia or the federal government. To be exempt from the bill a range would need to have fewer than 50 employees working in the building or 90% of users must be law enforcement employees. The bill would also require users to present a government photo identification card, and ranges must maintain a log of each user’s name, phone number, address, and the law-enforcement agency where users are employed.

    If passed, the bill could lead to the closing of a number of indoor shooting ranges across the state, with government and law enforcement employees being the only legal users of indoor ranges.

    The Virginia Citizens Defense League has been leading the fight to introduce resolutions that declare local officials will oppose any “unconstitutional restrictions” on the Second Amendment right to bear arms. So far 86 of Virginia’s 95 counties have passed sanctuary city measures. In late December, Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring issued an opinion statement, alleging that the resolutions are “part of an effort by the gun lobby to stoke fear” and will “have no legal effect.”

    Democratic Virginia Rep. Donald McEachin told the Washington Examiner that Governor Northam could cut off state funds to local bodies that refuse to comply to new gun control laws and could call in the National Guard to enforce the laws, if necessary. Although Northam has said he has no plans to call in the National Guard, the statement by McEachin has already caused backlash.

    On December 30, Virginia Delegate Dave LaRock sent a letter to Governor Northam asking him to deescalate the situation after LaRock received a letter from Michaela Claywell, a Virginian and wife of an active-duty Virginia Guardsman. Claywell told LaRock that she has witnessed threats of violence being made against Guardsman on social media.

    I have written a letter to Governor Northam asking him to meet with the wives of the Virginia Guard officers to explain how he specifically plans to take immediate action to deescalate this situation,” LaRock stated“I have been told by Michaela that this situation is harming careers and undermining the safety and peace-of-mind of families across Virginia.”

    The social media threats come as a direct response to the notion that Guardsman would be called upon to enforce gun control laws being proposed in the 2020 session. Mrs. Claywell and a number of wives of high-level officers in the Virginia National Guard are calling on Governor Northam and other state and federal officials to calm the situation.

    “Please use your collective influence to protect our soldiers and our families,” Claywell wrote.

    While the state of Virginia grapples with how to move forward during these challenging times, the Second Amendment sanctuary city movement is only growing. The movement started to pick up pace in April 2018 after one of the first resolutions was passed in Effingham County, Illinois. David Campbell, a member of the Effingham County Board, told the Epoch Times that his county’s state attorney and sheriff have said they will not prosecute law-abiding citizens.

    It all started right there, and then it just blossomed. I think we are into 15 states now,” Campbell stated. “I get calls constantly from other states and from other counties wanting a copy of our resolution and a map of how we did it.”

    So far 70 of Illinois’s 102 counties have passed some form of Second Amendment sanctuary resolution. The movement is showing no signs of slowing down as it spreads across the states of Kansas, California, Colorado, New Mexico, Illinois, and Virginia. 


    Tyler Durden

    Fri, 01/10/2020 – 21:05

    Tags

  • Truck Manufacturing Orders Plunge To Decade Low In 2019
    Truck Manufacturing Orders Plunge To Decade Low In 2019

    The painful decline in Class 8 orders that we have been documenting on a month-by-month basis has resulted in truck manufacturing orders hitting a decade low in 2019, according to Americas Commercial Transportation (ACT) Research Co., a leading publisher of commercial vehicle industry data, market analysis, and forecasting services for the North American market.

    Full year volume for Class 8 orders was 181,000 for the year, compared to 490,100 units in 2018. 

    Sales in December followed the year’s trend, ticking lower on a year over year basis despite showing a 14% sequential rise.

    Federal tax rate cuts in 2018 encouraged carriers to expand their fleets, resulting in major backlogs and tough comparable numbers for 2019, according to the Triad Business Journal.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    In addition to the tough comps, ACT President and Senior Analyst Kenny Vieth also blamed the issues on “lower freight demand” in 2019. 

    Vieth said: “Overbuying through 2019 and insufficient freight to absorb the ensuing capacity overhang continued to weigh on the front end of the Class 8 demand cycle in December. Recalling July and August, orders were down 80% from the corresponding months in 2018.”

    As we have documented throughout the year, some truck manufacturers, like Mack Trucks and Volvo Trucks, announced layoffs. Volvo announced last year that it would lay off 700 people at its Dublin, Virginia plant. Daimler laid off 900 workers in October 2019 and Navistar will lay off 1,300 workers this month.

    Some trucking companies that we have profiled, like Terrill Transportationhave closed down entirely. 


    Tyler Durden

    Fri, 01/10/2020 – 20:45

  • "This Plane Was Designed By Clowns, Who Are Supervised By Monkeys" – Shocking Boeing Emails Reveal Contempt For Management, FAA
    “This Plane Was Designed By Clowns, Who Are Supervised By Monkeys” – Shocking Boeing Emails Reveal Contempt For Management, FAA

    We have never heard a more damning description of the relationship between a corporation and its regulators than a line that has been plucked from a batch of company emails that Boeing has just handed over to the FAA (and which the FAA has, apparently, leaked to the press).

    Per the New York Times:

    “This airplane is designed by clowns, who are in turn supervised by monkeys…”

    In recent weeks, a series of reports claiming Boeing neglected to turn over critical information to the FAA regarding the development of the 737 MAX 8, Boeing’s new “workhorse” model that has been grounded around the world for the last 10 months, after a pair of suspicious crashes raised suspicions of possible flaws in the plane’s anti-stall software.

    According to more than 100 pages of internal company communications (which were apparently withheld from the FAA during the certification process for the jet) Boeing employees could be heard mocking federal rules, openly discussing their deception of regulators, and joking about the MAX’s potential flaws.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The most shocking messages were sent by Boeing pilots and other employees who can be seen discussing software issues and problems with the flight simulator software for hte MAX, which is particularly disturbing since it was issues with the plane’s MCAS software that were found to have contributed to two avoidable crashes and the brutal deaths of 346 people.

    In one message, one Boeing employee openly admits to deceiving the FAA on behalf of the company.

    “I still haven’t been forgiven by God for the covering up I did last year,” one of the employees said in messages from 2018, apparently in reference to interactions with the Federal Aviation Administration.

    In another, a group of Boeing test pilots agreed that they wouldn’t want their families flying with pilots trained on the new Boeing 737 MAX 8 flight simulator.

    Would you put your family on a Max simulator trained aircraft? I wouldn’t,” one employee said to a colleague in another exchange from 2018, before the first crash. “No,” the colleague responded.

    As the New York Times explains, the release of these communications, both emails and instant messages, is “the latest embarrassing episode for Boeing in a crisis that has cost the company billions of dollars and wreaked havoc on the aviation industry across the globe.”

    When allegations that Boeing withheld “damning” information from the FAA first surfaced late last year, Peter DeFazio, the chairman of the House Transportation Committee, blasted the company in a letter to Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao.

    “These messages indicate that Boeing withheld damning information from the FAA, which is highly disturbing,” Peter DeFazio, Chair of the U.S. House of Representatives transportation committee, wrote in a letter to U.S. Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao on Friday.

    It should go without saying that these messages “threaten to complicate Boeing’s relationship with the FAA” at a time when it’s still unclear when the MAX might be cleared to fly again.

    Yet, as we mentioned above, this is only the latest and perhaps most jarring of a string of revelations citing internal documents and communications. Forget “regulatory capture” – a term that’s often used to criticize the revolving-door nature of Wall Street compliance officials and the regulatory agencies supposed to keep their firms in line – this is regulatory irrelevance.

    And any Boeing shareholders who experienced an escalating dread as they read this post – it’s okay, you can relax.

    Because once again, the market just doesn’t care. Plane crashes have been normalized in 2020, and so, apparently, has gross incompetence and contempt for both government regulators and the broader public.


    Tyler Durden

    Fri, 01/10/2020 – 20:44

  • Believing In Illusions – Our Five Favorite Financial Myths
    Believing In Illusions – Our Five Favorite Financial Myths

    Authored by Bruce Wilds via Advancing Time blog,

    It is far easier to believe the five favorite financial myths of our time when you are rolling in dough and flush with cash. Due to a slug of freshly printed liquidity being pumped into the global financial system stock markets are making new highs and asset bubbles continue to expand. An increase in liquidity results in people feeling comfortable to take on more risk and this tends to swell leverage. During such a time true price discovery has a way of being diminished.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Whether it is a question of people generally just being too lazy to question what they see or lacking the imagination to pull back the curtain to reveal the truth they often choose to accept what is presented to them as reality rather than go to the effort to seek the truth. A myth is often defined as any invented story, idea, or concept, an imaginary or fictitious thing, or an unproved or false collective belief that is used to justify a social institution. The entertainment industry has flourished as society seeks any diversion to pull our attention away from the sharp edges of reality and into the soft comfort of escape. This may be the result of past experiences where we have learned reality can be hard to face and we can’t handle the truth! In some ways, it could be said that our culture has become obsessed with avoiding what is real. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Central Banks Failed To Stop (click to enlarge)

    To say the system has been stoked by the actions of central banks is an understatement. In just the last few months nearly a trillion dollars of new stimulus has been poured into the markets. It comes in the form of  repo injections, new infrastructure programs, and things like slashing bank reserve requirements. A desperate attempt by central banks to keep the wheels from coming off the bus has been interpreted by many as confirmation the current trend of never-ending growth will continue. Rather than considering it is time for a reality check it is both easier and more comforting to adopt an “all is well” attitude and ignore the signs of danger lurking around the corner.

    The crux of this article is about some of our society’s favorite myths that feed directly into the economy and how we feel about our financial security. While it could be argued the myths below have more to do with how we feel about life than about money, it cannot be denied that most people make many of their financial decisions based on the assumption the below statements are true. As a society, we rapidly choose to embrace and often choose not to question them because of the discomfort it would undoubtedly create. Sure many other myths exist or you can slice and dice them in other ways but the five below are very common and should be enough to remind you and even shed a bit of light upon the fact we are vulnerable at any time to having reality raise its’ ugly head.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Believing Myths Is A Head In Sand Approach

    1. Government is for the people and by the people – Seriously? After the last few years and dog and pony show, we experienced during the last presidential primary all illusions of that should have been erased. After often being forced to choose between the least of two evils it is difficult to praise our political system. After all the talk about “we the people” the fact is the average “person” is far removed from the power to decide important issues.

    2. Financial planning means you only have to start saving a little money each year to guarantee an easy retirement.  – The fact is life is a casino where our future is tenuous at best. Much of our circumstances and lives revolve around money and the number of options it gives us when we possess it. I intentionally used the term “casino” to conjure up the image of financial fortune. Which you can lose in a blink of an eye if things go against you. This myth includes things such as the promises made by the government and others such as pension plans and financial institutions will indeed be honored.

    3. You have rights and that we are not slaves – I defer to a few lines from a blog by Gerry Spence who has spent his lifetime representing and protecting victims of the legal system from what he calls The New Slave Master: big corporations and big government. In his blog, Spence wrote; The Moneyed Master has closed its doors against the people and sits on its money like an old hen on rotten eggs. The people will not prevail. With its endless propaganda the Moneyed Master has caused its slaves to believe they are free.

    4. Your life will progress and move along pretty much as you have planned – When you think back over the years of your life if you are like most people things have not unfolded as you had planned. You may not be in the occupation you trained for or with your true love. Throughout our life watershed events occur that we have little control over, this holds true when it comes to your finances as well. Things such as having an investment or pension plan go south can be very unsettling. The thought that things could be worse does not mean they will become so, this is a reason to count your blessings.

    5. Those in charge or above you care about you and will protect you –  Well of this we can hope but more than one person has been sliced and diced by the people he or she trusted most. History shows when push comes to shove it is not uncommon for a person to look out for the person they treasure the most and that is often him or her self. Politicians and those in power tend to throw people under the bus rather than rise up and take responsibility for the problems they create.

    My apologies if this post has been a downer or seems overly negative, however, it is what it is and it was written for a reason. Best stated by a comment I read on another site, these myths add up to where “This is not a can of worms but a warehouse stacked with pallets of cans of worms.”  Because of how believing the above myths can impact our lives it is important we recognize their existence. This is not to say that we cannot by making good and reasonable choices eliminate much of the risk we encounter by just getting out of bed each morning. Developing the habit of pressing on and forward to complete solid and reasonable goals is the best medicine to combat a deck that is often stacked against us. Be careful out there!


    Tyler Durden

    Fri, 01/10/2020 – 20:25

  • Trump Now Says Soleimani Plotted Bomb Attacks On 4 US Embassies; Intel Senators Balk
    Trump Now Says Soleimani Plotted Bomb Attacks On 4 US Embassies; Intel Senators Balk

    Like many US interventions in the Middle East before, this story seems to continue changing by the day. The rationale for taking out the “imminent” threat of Qasem Soleimani has now centered on President Trump’s claim, first presented before reporters Thursday, that the IRGC Quds force chief was looking to blow up our embassy”.

    And now the president has given further details on those prior statements, saying in a new interview with Fox News there was a plot to bomb four embassies across the region. 

    “I can reveal that I believe it would’ve been four embassies,” Trump told Fox’s Ingraham in an exclusive interview set to air in full Friday night. When pressed on specific targets, the president revealed: “We will tell you that probably it was going to be the embassy in Baghdad.”

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    US Marines stand guard at the American Embassy Compound in Baghdad, DoD via AFP.

    This followed statements earlier in the day by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo over the president’s Thursday assertion Soleimani sought to “blow up” embassies. Pompeo was pressed by reporters over the nature of the “imminent threat” claims. 

    “We had specific information on an imminent threat and that threat stream included attacks on U.S. embassies. Period. Full stop,” he said. Asked about what made it imminent, Pompeo simply said: “It was going to happen.”

    See President Trump’s newest statement asserting four embassies were being targeted in the Fox interview:

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    At first it was unclear whether President Trump saw specific intelligence outlining such a threat, or perhaps was speaking generally and hyperbolic (“blow up” the embassy) of the pro-Iranian mob’s actions besieging the US embassy in Baghdad days prior to the Soleimani assassination. The demonstrators had been filmed setting the outer walls of the compound on fire during the chaotic events of early last week which resulted in a contingent of Marines rapidly deploying from Kuwait to bolster embassy security. 

    Given Trump and Pompeo’s newest statements, it appears clear they’re referencing a previously unknown plot which they are presenting as tied to specific US intelligence data

    CNN also reveals as much in the following

    A senior defense official told reporters Thursday the US had intelligence about multiple plots and threats involving Soleimani, including one that involved a plan to attack the embassy using explosives.

    The plot was separate and more sophisticated than the attempts to storm the US embassy in Baghdad by Molotov-cocktail wielding Khatib Hezbollah members and its supporters, an effort US officials have said was also orchestrated by Soleimani.

    During Trump’s prior Thursday remarks, he tied the newly revealed alleged embassy bombing plot to the specific decision-making to go after Soleimani via drone strike, alongside other reasons including the Dec.27 death of a US contractor during a rocket attack by Khatib Hezbollah on a base in Kirkuk. 

    “We caught a total monster. We took them out. And that should have happened a long time ago. We did it because they were looking to blow up our embassy,” Trump said during those initial remarks.

    “We also did it for other reasons that were very obvious. Somebody died… people were badly wounded just a week before. And we did it. We had a shot at it … that was the end of a monster,” Trump added, referring to the death of the American contractor by Khatib Hezbollah.

    Trump’s new claims have already resulted in push back from Congressional leaders briefed on the matter Wednesday. Sen. Chris Murphy was the first to slam the new statements late Friday, saying no such intelligence on planned embassy bombings was presented:

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    And yet, confusion persists within the administration itself, as CNN reported that “Earlier Thursday, administration officials had explained Trump’s comments about the plot to blow up the US embassy by saying he was referring to the public demonstrations by Khatib Hezbollah.”

    But in a separate Thursday rally in Toledo, Ohio, the president made it clear it was more than mere violent embassy protests: “Soleimani was actively planning new attacks, and he was looking very seriously at our embassies, and not just the embassy in Baghdad.” Trump added: “But we stopped him, and we stopped him quickly, and we stopped him cold.”

    The latest interview with the president will air Friday night at 10 p.m. ET on Fox’s “The Ingraham Angle.”


    Tyler Durden

    Fri, 01/10/2020 – 20:05

    Tags

  • Just A Friendly Heads-Up, Bulls: The Fed Just Slashed Its Balance Sheet
    Just A Friendly Heads-Up, Bulls: The Fed Just Slashed Its Balance Sheet

    Authored by Charles Hugh Smith via OfTwoMinds blog,

    Perhaps even PhD economists notice that manic-mania bubbles always burst–always.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Just a friendly heads-up to all the Bulls bowing and murmuring prayers to the Golden Idol of the Federal Reserve: the Fed just slashed its balance sheet–yes, reduced its assets. After panic-printing $410 billion in a few months, a $24 billion decline isn’t much, but it does suggest the Fed might finally be worrying about the reckless, insane bubble it inflated:

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Just to review the numbers, which you can ponder on this chart from the St. Louis Federal Reserve (FRED).

    • August 28, 2019: $3.760 trillion

    • December 25, 2019: $4.165 trillion

    • January 1, 2020: $4.173 trillion

    • January 9, 2020: $4.149 trillion

    There are two noteworthy items here. One is of course the panic-printing of $410 billion between September 1, 2019 and January 1, 2020 as the Fed’s assets zoomed from $3.760 trillion to $4.173 trillion in a mere 17 weeks.

    But also note that the Fed only added a paltry $8 billion in the final week of 2019. Given the hundreds of billions of expansion being promised, this works out to a monthly run-rate of around $30 billion–not quite the $60 billion promised as a baseline, or the $100 billion per month panic-printed in Q4 2019.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Bu-bu-but wait–the Fed promised us $100 billion a month forever! Buying the SPX at 3,280 and Apple at $312 only makes sense if the Fed promised us SPX 3,500, 4,000 and 5,000, and AAPL $350, $400 and $500.

    While all the faithful were busy bowing to the Fed’s mesmerizing Golden Idol, maybe the mortals in the Fed awakened from their dreams of omnipotence and realized that their “insurance against a recession” panic-printing had inflated the mother of all manic-mania bubbles.

    Perhaps even PhD economists notice that manic-mania bubbles always burst–always. And just before they burst, devastating all those worshiping the Fed’s Golden Idol, pundits always declare “this time it’s different,” “the Fed has our back,” “stocks have reached a permanently high plateau,” “stocks have plenty of room to run higher,” and other platitudes mumbled by the Fed faithful.

    Blinded by their own hubris, the Fed’s economists refuse to accept the impossibility of gently deflating the bubble they so recklessly inflated, and so their plan is to real quiet-like reduce the balance sheet, hoping nobody notices.

    Perhaps they imagine they can lock the S&P 500 in at a permanently high plateau around 3,250, and that will be enough to banish the demons of a business/credit-cycle recession.

    Maybe, maybe not. Can a Golden Idol control not just the stock market but the karmic consequences of hubris and false idolatry? The curtain just opened and the second act of the tragedy is just beginning.

    *  *  *

    My recent books:

    Will You Be Richer or Poorer? Profit, Power and A.I. in a Traumatized World (Kindle $6.95, print $11.95) Read the first section for free (PDF).

    Pathfinding our Destiny: Preventing the Final Fall of Our Democratic Republic ($6.95 (Kindle), $12 (print), $13.08 ( audiobook): Read the first section for free (PDF).

    The Adventures of the Consulting Philosopher: The Disappearance of Drake $1.29 (Kindle), $8.95 (print); read the first chapters for free (PDF)

    Money and Work Unchained $6.95 (Kindle), $15 (print) Read the first section for free (PDF).

    *  *  *

    If you found value in this content, please join me in seeking solutions by becoming a $1/month patron of my work via patreon.com.


    Tyler Durden

    Fri, 01/10/2020 – 19:45

  • Skynet Does Housework: Roomba-Maker Says Household Robots With Arms And Legs Are Coming
    Skynet Does Housework: Roomba-Maker Says Household Robots With Arms And Legs Are Coming

    Today in “Skynet pivots toward becoming a 1950’s housewife” news…

    The maker of the Roomba robotic vacuum cleaner, iRobot, is now working on a household robot that will have arms, legs and could possibly help you do the dishes or load the washing machine.

    The company, which is based out of Bedford, Mass., says it won’t start selling this type of product for another 5 years, according to Bloomberg. But prototypes of these robots already exist, according to the company’s CEO, Colin Angle. 

    Angle said during an interview at CES in Las Vegas that the company’s new hardware launch for 2020 will instead be its Terra robotic lawnmower. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    iRobot had previously developed robotic-arm technology for its military unit, but the company sold that business in 2016. It kept the “arm assets” however, despite at the time not understanding how to adapt the technology for mainstream use. Angle said that new advancements in computer vision and the ability for robots to map out homes have made these devices possible again.

    Other companies like Amazon and Samsung are following suit in developing home robots. So far, however, they are focused on devices with video conferencing and voice assistants, and not home robots with arm devices that actually conduct physical tasks. 

    Not unlike the role they will be playing in many dysfunctional households, we’re sure, iRobot’s CEO is already using the new robots as scapegoats for his problems. The robots, along with the trade war, have apparently created financial headwinds for the company. 

    “We are having to scale back R&D and profitability targets,” Angle concluded.

     


    Tyler Durden

    Fri, 01/10/2020 – 19:25

  • The End Of The "Chinese Miracle"
    The End Of The “Chinese Miracle”

    Authored by Tuomas Malinen via GnSEconomics.com,

    We have been following China closely for nearly four years. We first warned about the unsustainability of China’s growth in March 2017 and have continued to issue warnings ever since (see, e.g., thisthis and this).

    Now, China is reaching the end of its debt-driven economic model, and thus well-along in the end-game of the ‘Chinese Miracle’. This will bring drastic changes to the world economy, which will fuel the global economic collapse of 2020-2023.

    Let’s examine why.

    The stimulus of 2019

    China stimulated its economy aggressively in Q1 and Q3 2019, but we have not observed a similar emphasis on infrastructure investments as we saw in 2015/2016. In its record-breaking stimulus program in Q3, for example, China concentrated on providing loose credit to enterprises through both conventional and “shadow” banks.

    What is notable is that even with this record stimulus, China has kept its economy growing barely above the “official rate”. This tells us that the Chinese economy has reached or is very close to reaching the point of debt saturation, where households and corporations simply cannot absorb any more debt, and any new debt-issuance fails to stimulate the economy. We’ve been warning about the proximity of this point since September 2017.

    Evidence also suggests that during the fall China has been desperately forcing debt into the economy, probably to appear “strong” in trade negotiations.  The November data on aggregate financing, for its part, confirms this (see Figure 1). It rose at the second-fastest pace in November surpassed only by the year 2016, when China was engaged in “maximum stimulus”.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Figure 1. Yearly cumulative aggregate financing to the real economy (flow) in China. Source: GnS Economics, People’s Bank of China

    However, it’s clear that China cannot keep such an extreme pace of debt-growth going. The debt load is just too high while productivity growth has stagnated.  Though a massive infrastructure-spending program, for example, could revive growth, the ability of China to issue fiscal stimulus is starting to be seriously limited.

    The end of the runway

    At the end of 2018, the budget deficit of the Chinese government was close to five percent. However, if the off-balance sheet (“shadow”) financing of local governments is taken into consideration, the budget deficit rises to over 11 percent. At the end of 2014, the official government deficit was less than one percent, but an accounting which includes local “shadow” funding was around five percent.

    This effectively means that China is fiscally unable to underwrite massive infrastructure projects and so any new world-economy-saving stimulus from China, as in 2015/2016, will be practically impossible. A new infrastructure initiative could only be realized if its costs are monetized by the PBoC, and so should be regarded as a last-ditch option reserved for an existential crisis. We also suspect that Chinese authorities would like to have some ‘ammunition’ left over for an actual recession.

    We have also heard reports that smaller local lenders have become wary of expanding their loan portfolio as requested by Beijing. This is most likely due to the fact that the policy line has changed from “bailouts” to “defaults”, and the banks fear that they will be forced to bear the brunt of non-performing loans in full. It’s also clear that there are massive amounts of non-performing loans burdening the balance sheets of Chinese banks.

    This is why China, ultimately, will be unable to rescue the world economy this time around.

    The endgame

    The big question is:  what will Chinese leaders do? Will they try to force debt into the economy in a desperate effort to postpone the impending recession? If so, this would probably extend the global business cycle for few quarters.

    But, as China has already surpassed all historical examples of ‘credit bonanzas’ (see Figure 2), this would also guarantee that by 2021 the Chinese economy would be in for a ‘hard landing’ (crash) taking the global economy with it.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Figure 2. The GDP per capita, share of non-financial private sector debt to GDP and the onset of financial crises. *The Q2 GDP per capita for China is based on our calculations. Source: GnS Economics, BIS, World Bank

    The second option for Chinese leaders is to enact short-term “surgical” stimulus measures to keep the economy from collapsing. This would mean that the global economy would continue to sink and enter into a recession in 2020. While this could shelter Chinese economy from utter collapse, it could still lead to serious political instability (see Q-Review 3/2019 for more info).

    As we have insisted in our work since September 2017, the “Chinese Miracle” has been more of a “Potemkin Village” for more than a decade. Because China has been kept growing by an  incomprehensibly large increase in debt, its economy is actually a massive  and vulnerable Ponzi-scheme waiting to collapse.

    Alas, the end of the ‘Chinese Miracle’ approaches, and it’s going to painful for everyone.


    Tyler Durden

    Fri, 01/10/2020 – 19:05

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Today’s News 10th January 2020

  • China: Beijing's Arctic Power Grab
    China: Beijing’s Arctic Power Grab

    Authored by Lawrence Franklin via The Gatestone Institute,

    One important element of the $738 billion National Defense Authorization Act for the Fiscal Year 2020, which US President Donald Trump signed into law in mid-December, is the directive to examine and monitor “Chinese military activities in the Arctic, as well as Chinese foreign direct investment in the Arctic.”

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The administration in Washington is right to be concerned about China’s increasing interest in the northern polar region. Two years ago, Beijing published a White Paper outlining its Arctic policy, which includes creating a “Polar Silk Road.” If fully implemented, this policy will challenge the United States and Russia for primacy in the region, where beneath the glaciers lie vast quantities of coal and natural gas.

    Two Chinese polar icebreaking research vessels, Xuelong and Xuelong II, are presently carrying out the regime’s 36th scientific expedition in the waters off Antarctica. The crews of these vessels will help complete China’s fifth Antarctic scientific station for the gathering of data and establishment of under-the-ice submarine deployments similar to those operated by Washington and Moscow.

    China’s Dailan Naval Academy supports an aggressive strategy for both the northern and southern polar seas. China’s Ministry of Defense and State Council continue to publish papers expressing a desire to pursue a robust maritime program, including a “Freedom of Navigation” mission in the Bering Sea, slated for some time in 2020.

    Beijing’s polar strategy is linked to the prospect of finding deposits of “rare earth materials,” such as praseodymium, yttrium, and lanthanum, which are used in lasers, magnets, semiconductors, specialty glass, ceramics and nuclear batteries.

    China already controls the mining and extraction of most of the world’s rare earth materials — all crucial for the global economy — and may be in talks with the Taliban in Afghanistan to obtain more: Afghanistan’s mountains are among a handful of places in the world where large deposits of these materials exist.

    Unfortunately, the US is largely dependent upon China for these materials, which also lie beneath the huge ice masses of Greenland. This circumstance might well explain China’s vigorous effort to conclude major infrastructure contracts with Greenland’s government. Beijing is proposing to build several airports, harbors, roads and railways in Greenland, which would facilitate the transport of rare earth materials — once they are excavated — to China.

    Beijing-administered airports in Greenland, however, could pose a strategic threat to America’s ally, Canada. Also at risk under such a scenario would be the US military facility in Thule, Greenland, which serves as an early-warning node for a nuclear attack on the North American continent. To counter this potential threat, the Trump administration and fellow NATO member state, Denmark — which owns Greenland — have preempted China’s plans by agreeing to finance the proposed airports. But China’s drive for eventual primacy in the Arctic region also extends to the Danish-owned, self-governing network of the 18 Faroe Islands, located midway between Norway and Iceland in the North Atlantic Ocean.

    The US and China currently are competing for influence in the Faroe Islands, with Beijing offering to increase the importation of fish on condition that the islanders agree to utilize China’s wireless network system with fifth-generation technology (5G) administered by Huawei, and Washington attempting to block the use of Huawei networking equipment on the islands due to the company’s intelligence-gathering cooperation with the Chinese regime.

    Although China is a latecomer to great-power competition in the Arctic, its Arctic profile could rise quickly if Moscow pools its efforts with Beijing. The Russian Air Force has long had a separate branch for polar aviation, and Russia maintains an extensive nuclear- and diesel-powered fleet of icebreakers. China’s friendly relations with Russia could lead to a powerful polar alliance.

    In July 2017, Chinese President Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin signed a “Joint Declaration on Further Strengthening Comprehensive, Strategic and Cooperative Partnership,” which included plans to cooperate on projects along Russia’s Northern Sea Route. No other nation has invested more energy, accumulated lessons-learned or extracted more resources in the environmentally challenging polar conditions than Russia.

    If Moscow works in tandem with Beijing, China could emerge quickly as a potent competitor for influence in the Arctic. Let us hope that Washington is able to prevent this from happening.


    Tyler Durden

    Fri, 01/10/2020 – 02:00

  • Israel Unveils Breakthrough Aerial 'Laser Sword' Missile Intercept System
    Israel Unveils Breakthrough Aerial ‘Laser Sword’ Missile Intercept System

    “It’s a game-changer” — declared Gen. Yaniv Rotem, head of Israel’s Defense Ministry’s (IDF) Directorate of Research and Development, in a Jerusalem Post interview profiling the county’s newest breakthrough laser targeting technology. 

    The IDF unveiled what’s being described as an aerial ‘laser sword’ which can take out multiple types of airborne threats such as drones, rockets and anti-tank missiles. This after a decade-long program focusing on defensive measures using lasers, and amid a broader global trend which has seen the United States, Russia and China tout its own laser systems, most currently used by naval vessels. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Artistic rendering via “Israel Defense” news site.

    Defense Minister Naftali Bennett on Wednesday boasted that the breakthrough “makes the security apparatus more lethal, more powerful and more advanced,” as the IDF plans to integrate its laser technology into current systems. “This technology enables the development of highly effective operational systems that will serve as an additional layer of defense to secure the State of Israel by air, land and sea,” a ministry statement said.

    But like with other recent claims of powerful laser weapons, such as out of Chinese defense companies, the burden of ‘proof’ over whether the lasers are indeed powerful and effective enough to actually make intercepts is another thing and remains to be seen in action

    Citing a top official, The Jerusalem Post notes the program has grown successful over many painstaking years: “The ministry has been working for more than 10 years on powerful laser technology to enable the development of platforms to intercept a variety of threats, he said.”

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    And further, said the official: “It has carried out a number of successful interceptions of targets, including mortar shells, drones and antitank missiles, at a variety of ranges over the years.”

    Specifically the latest breakthrough touted by the ministry relates to the precision and concentration of the laser beam’s power.

    “According to Oster, the ministry was able to take several laser beams and, with an advanced algorithm, connect them to get one strong beam that is able to intercept and take down a variety of threats,” according to the report, citing the Defense Ministry’s Directorate of Research and Development head of the Optronics Department, Dubi Oster.

    “During a war, missile interceptors will at one point run out, but with this system, as long as you have electricity, you have a never-ending supply,” another official working on the program said“This is a weapon that you can’t see or hear,” the official said, adding that each offensive weapons intercept could conceivably only cost a few dollars in electricity. 

    Defense Minister Naftali Bennett referenced the high-tech system as a defense “laser sword. He stated to the Jerusalem Post that “we will add a laser sword when dealing with threats from the North or the South,” adding that “The enemies of Israel better not test our resolve or our abilities.”

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Illustrative file image

    Reports on the program earlier last year referenced one of the particular applications as the ‘Iron Beam’ — a mobile High-Energy Laser Weapon System (HELWS).

    Despite the high claims, the IDF has yet to offer video proof of successful field tests, which could still be years away. Laser technology employed for defensive and offensive purposes has been notoriously ‘weak’ at extended distances, given the beam’s power disperses and decreases rapidly beyond very close proximity. 


    Tyler Durden

    Fri, 01/10/2020 – 01:00

  • The Risk Of Nuclear War Is Growing
    The Risk Of Nuclear War Is Growing

    Authored by Andreas Kluth, writer & editor at Bloomberg Opinion. Previously editor-in-chief of Handelsblatt Global.

    It’s been 75 years since Hiroshima and Nagasaki were incinerated, and 50 years since the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty took effect. And yet the world is today in greater danger of nuclear war than at any time since the Cuban Missile Crisis.

    In its confrontation with the U.S., Iran appears hell-bent on getting nukes, and could do so within a year. If it does, Saudi Arabia and Turkey will almost certainly follow suit. Israel is already armed. Asia has several nuclear hotspots. And in the most frightening scenario, at any point bombs could fall into the hands of terrorists or other “non-state” groups that are hard to retaliate against and thus to deter.

    To slow this proliferation of nukes, the world still relies mostly on the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, known as NPT, which currently has 191 signatories. Every five years, diplomats gather for a review conference (RevCon), and the next one,  in New York, starts in April. Expectations are low, fears are high. If diplomats and the public read up on game theory, their dread would grow more.

    When the treaty was negotiated in the 1960s, it was meant to be a grand bargain. The five countries that already had nukes (the U.S., the Soviet Union, the U.K., France and China) would keep them but promise to work toward eliminating them. All other signatories would forswear nuclear weapons in return for help from the big five in using civilian nuclear technology as an energy source. (Israel, Pakistan, India and South Sudan never signed, and North Korea withdrew.)

    Has the treaty been a success? Its fans claim that without it even more states might have nukes today. Skeptics worry that the system requires a benevolent hegemon, i.e. the U.S., to police it, but that under President Donald Trump this credible and predictable benevolence is gone.

    If allies — Japan, South Korea or Taiwan, say — can no longer be absolutely sure that the U.S. would retaliate on their behalf against a nuclear strike on them — say, by North Korea or China — what’s to keep them from wanting to go nuclear themselves? And what’s to keep other adversaries from doing the same as a hedge against such an outcome?

    That’s where game theory comes in. It’s a branch of mathematics that’s been used since the 1960s in nuclear scenarios. The initial games included simple classics such as “chicken” and “the prisoner’s dilemma.” One disturbing insight is that, depending on the game, even rational players acting rationally can end up in situations (called Nash equilibria) that are disastrous for everybody.

    When analyzed with game theory, the NPT looks like a terrible idea. The problem is it still lets countries of all stripes gain entry-level nuclear technology for civilian use. However, once a country, like Iran, learns to build a nuclear reactor — by enriching uranium — it’s just one small step from making bombs. That in turn forces adversaries to sprint to the same point. The result is a “soft arms race” like the current one in the Middle East.

    Game theory also offers plenty of reasons to worry once soft arms races turn into hard ones. That’s because the world has become more complex since the Cold War. Back then, the U.S. and the Soviet Union used game theory to find a stable strategy for avoiding the worst: mutually assured destruction. (The acronym – MAD — says it all.) It rested on various assumptions. Both sides, for example, must be able to retaliate even after being struck, which is why the U.S., Russia  and now also China are so keen to be able to deploy from land, sea, air or even space.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    By today’s standards, those old games are laughably simple. They had two players, both assumed to be “rational,” an assumption few people make confidently about some world leaders today. Worse, the number of players keeps growing. So do the permutations of new weapons, such as small nukes for tactical uses or hyper-sonic missiles that give adversaries no time to weigh responses. This leads to a spectacular increase in the possible decisions and responses — and miscalculations. The math quickly gets complex beyond normal human capacities.

    Games include, for example, perfectly rational but slippery strategies such as brinkmanship, when actors deliberately “let the situation get somewhat out of hand” just to make it “intolerable to the other party.” The problem is that such situations — such as the skirmishes last year between India and Pakistan, both nuclear powers — can easily go from somewhat, to totally, out of hand.

    Another difficult strategy is posturing, to deceive adversaries about one’s own risk appetite (as when Trump tweets about “fire and fury”). Some games also include, quite realistically, a chaotic actor such as nature, more commonly known as “shit happens.”

    One mathematical problem is that many of these games need to be played for an unimaginable number of rounds before a Nash equilibrium becomes clear. That might seem acceptable when game theory is applied to economic problems such as how to design the best type of auction for 5G wireless spectrum. In a nuclear context, it would be game over for Homo sapiens.

    But game theory also offers a glimmer of hope. A huge problem, in games and reality, is that players either don’t know, or can easily misread, the minds of their adversaries. This can be fixed by adding a mediator, in effect a trusted adviser who selectively provides and withholds information to the enemies, while introducing strategies such as “regret minimization.”

    Let the search be on for such mediators, ideally in time for the RevCon in April. The U.S., Russia and China could also use mediation. The former two casually shrugged off one arms-control treaty last year and seem blasé about rescuing the only remaining one, called New START, which expires in a year. China, thinking more about power and destiny than survival, is boosting its arsenal to catch up with them.

    Everyone involved needs to understand that nuclear war is not a game.


    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 01/09/2020 – 23:45

  • Visualizing How Chinese Financing Is Fueling Megaprojects Around The World
    Visualizing How Chinese Financing Is Fueling Megaprojects Around The World

    On a mountaintop a few miles north of the bustling streets of Harare, Zimbabwe, a curving, modern complex is beginning to take shape. This building, once completed, will be the home of the African country’s parliament, and the centerpiece of a new section of the capital city.

    Aside from the striking design, Visual Capitalist’s Nick Routley notes that there’s another unique twist to this development – the entire $140 million project is a gift from Beijing. At first glance, gifting a country a new parliament building may seem extravagant, but the project is a tiny portion of China’s $270 billion in “diplomacy spending” since 2000.

    AidData, a research lab at the W&M Global Research Institute, has compiled a massive database of Chinese-backed projects spanning from 2000–2017. In aggregate, it creates a comprehensive look at China’s efforts to grow its influence in countries around the world, particularly in Africa and South Asia.

    Beijing has ramped up the volume and sophistication of its public diplomacy overtures, […] but infrastructure as a part of its financial diplomacy dwarfs Beijing’s other public diplomacy tools.

    – Samantha Custer, Director of Policy Analysis, AidData

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Below, we’ll look at three diplomacy spending hotspots around the world, and learn about key Chinese-funded megaprojects, from power plants to railway systems.

    1. Pakistan

    In 2015, Chinese President Xi Jingping visited Islamabad to inaugurate the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), kicking off a $46 billion investment that has transformed Pakistan’s transportation system and power grid. CPEC is designed to cement the strategic relationship between the two countries, and is a portion of China’s massive One Belt, One Road (OBOR) initiative.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    One of the largest projects financed by China was the Karachi Nuclear Power K2/K3 project. This massive power generation project is primarily bankrolled by China’s state-owned Exim Bank which has kicked in over $6.6 billion over three phases of payments.

    Billions of dollars in Chinese capital has also funded everything from highway construction to renewable energy projects across Pakistan. Pakistan’s youth unemployment rate sits as high as 40%, so jobs created by new infrastructure investments are a welcome prospect. In 2014, Pakistan had the highest public approval rating of China in the world, with nearly 80% respondents holding a favorable view of China.

    2. Ethiopia

    Ethiopia has seen a number of changes within its borders thanks to Chinese financing. This is particularly evident in its capital, Addis Ababa, where a slew of transportation projects — from new ring roads to Sub-Saharan Africa’s first metro system — transformed the city.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    One of the most striking symbols of Chinese influence in Addis Ababa is the futuristic African Union (AU) headquarters. The $200 million complex was gifted to the city by Beijing in 2012.

    Though Ethiopia is a clear example of Chinese investment transforming a country’s infrastructure, a number of other African nations have experienced a similar influx of money from Beijing. This financing pipeline has increased dramatically in recent years.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    3. Sri Lanka

    In the wake of political turmoil, Sri Lanka is increasingly looking to China for loans. From 2000 to 2017, over $12 billion in loans and grants have poured into the deeply-indebted country.

    Perhaps the most contentious symbol of the relationship between the two countries is a port on the south coast of the island nation, at a strategic point along one of the world’s busiest shipping lanes. The Hambantota Port project — which was completed in 2011 — followed a now familiar path. Eschewing an open bidding process, Beijing’s government financed the project and hired a state-owned firm to construct the port, primarily using Chinese workers.

    By 2017, Sri Lanka’s government was burdened by debt the previous administration had taken on. After months of negotiations, the port was handed over with the land around it leased to China for 99 years. This handover was a strategic victory for China, which now has a shipping foothold within close proximity of its regional rival, India.

    John Adams said infamously that a way to subjugate a country is through either the sword or debt. China has chosen the latter.

    – Brahma Chellaney

    Playing the Long Game

    Africa’s economic rise will likely be a major contributor to global growth in coming years. Already, six of the 10 fastest growing economies in the world are located in Africa. China is also the top trading partner on the continent, with the United States sitting in third place.

    OBOR spending has also earned China plenty of influence in the rest of Asia as well. If the ambitious megaproject continues along its current trajectory, China will be the central player in a more prosperous, interconnected Asia.


    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 01/09/2020 – 23:25

  • Paul Craig Roberts: The Justice Department Is Devoid Of Justice
    Paul Craig Roberts: The Justice Department Is Devoid Of Justice

    Authored by Paul Craig Roberts,

    In the United States the criminal justice (sic) system is itself not subject to law.  We see immunity to law continually as police commit felonies against citizens and even murder children and walk away free.  We see it all the time when prosecutors conduct political prosecutions and when they prosecute the innocent in order to build their conviction record.  We see it when judges fail to prevent prosecutors from withholding exculpatory evidence and bribing witnesses and when judges accept coerced plea deals that deprive the defendant of a jury trial.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    We just saw it again when federal prosecutors recommended a six month prison sentence for Lt. Gen. Flynn, the former head of the Defense Intelligence Agency accused of lying to the FBI about nothing of any importance, for being uncooperative in the Justice (sic) Department’s effort to frame President Trump with false “Russiagate” charges.  The Justice (sic) Department prosecutor said:

    “The sentence should adequately deter the defendant from violating the law, and to promote respect for the law. It is clear that the defendant has not learned his lesson. He has behaved as though the law does not apply to him, and as if there are no consequences for his actions.”

    That is precisely what the Justice (sic) Department itself did for years in their orchestration of the fake Russiagate charges against Trump.  

    The prosecutor’s hypocrisy is overwhelming. 

    The Justice (sic) Department is a criminal organization.  It has no sense of justice.  Convicting the innocent builds the conviction rate of the prosecutor as effectively as convicting the guilty. The Horowitz report of the Justice (sic) Department’s lies to the FISA court did not recommend a six-month prision sentence for those Justice (sic) Deplartment officials who lied to the government.  Horowitz covered up the crimes by converting them into “mistakes.”  Yes, they are embarrassing “mistakes,” but mistakes don’t bring prison sentences.

    Gen. Flynn, who was President Trump’s National Security Advisor for a couple of weeks before Mueller and Flynn’s attorneys manuevered him into a plea bargain, allegedly lied to the FBI about whether he met with a Russian.  Flynn and his attorneys should never have accepted the proposition that a National Security Advisor shouldn’t meet with Russians.  Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinski met with Russians all the the time.  It was part of their job.  Trump originally intended to normalize the strained relations with Russia.  Flynn should have been meeting with Russians. It was his job.

    Ninety-seven percent of felony cases are resolved with plea bargains.  In other words, there is no trial.  The defendant admits to guilt for a lighter sentence, and if he throws in “cooperation,” which generally means giving false evidence against someone else in the prosecutor’s net, no sentence at all.  Flynn was expected to help frame Trump and Flynn’s former business partner, Bijan Rafiekian, on an unrelated matter.  He didn’t, which means he is “uncooperative” and deserving of a prison sentence.

    Plea bargains have replaced trials for three main reasons.  

    • One is that the defense attorney doesn’t want the hard work of defending his client.  

    • One is that the majority of defendants cannot afford to pay the cost of defense.  

    • One is that refusing to plea guilty and demanding a trial angers both the prosecutor and judge.  

    Trials take time and provide a test of often unreliable police and prosecutorial evidence.  They mean work for the prosecutor.  Even if he secures a conviction, during the same time he could have obtained many more plea bargain convictions.  For the judge, trials back up his case docket.  Consequently, a trial means for the defendant very high risks of a much longer and more severe sentence than he would get in exchange for saving prosecutor and judge time and energy.  All of this is explained to the defendant by his attorney.  

    It was explained to Gen. Flynn.  He agreed to a plea, most likely advised that his “offense” was so minor, no sentence would be forthcoming.  Flynn later tried to revoke his plea, saying it was coerced, but the Clinton-appointed  judge refused to let him out of the trap.

    Now that we know the only Russiagate scandal was its orchestration by the CIA, Justice (sic) Department, and Democrats, failing to cooperate with the special counsel investigation of alleged Russian interference in the 2016 election is nonsensical as we  know for a definite fact that there was no such interference.

    This is how corrupt American law has become.  A man is being put in prison for 6 months for not cooperating with an investigation of an event that did not happen!

    If Trump doesn’t pardon Flynn (and Manafort and Stone), and fire the corrupt prosecutors who falsely prosecuted Flynn, Trump deserves no one’s support.  

    A president who will not defend his own people from unwarranted prosecution is not worthy of support.

    In Flynn’s case, we cannot dismiss the suspicion that revenge against Flynn was the driving factor. Gen. Flynn is the official who revealed on television that Obama made the willful decision to send ISIS or whatever we want to call them into Syria.  Of course, the Obama regime pretended that the jihadists were moderates seeking to overthrow the alleged dictator Assad and bring democracy to Syria.  Washington then pretended that it was fighting the mercenaries it had sent into Syria.  Even though the presstitutes did their best to ignore Flynn’s information, Flynn gave extreme offense by letting this information out. That bit of truth-telling was Flynn’s real offense.


    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 01/09/2020 – 23:05

    Tags

  • Libya's Haftar Rejects Russia-Turkey Ceasefire Plan After Huge Advances
    Libya’s Haftar Rejects Russia-Turkey Ceasefire Plan After Huge Advances

    When Russia’s President Putin attended the launch ceremony for the TurkStream natural gas pipeline this week, at the top of the list of difficult geopolitical crises addressed with Turkey’s Erdogan was the rapidly unfolding Libya war.

    Some analysts say that the new Libya conflict and war for control of the oil and gas rich North African country between Benghazi-based Gen. Khalifa Haftar and the UN-recognized GNA in Tripoli is set to dominate world headlines in 2020 alongside the US-Iran showdown. Pundits were surprised when on Wednesday the Turkish and Russian presidents agreed to jointly issue an urgent call for ceasefire in Libya proposed to start from Saturday (Jan.12) midnight.

    That surprise cooperative agreement (given Russia and Turkey back separate sides of the war) to come to the negotiating table was swiftly rejected Thursday by Haftar and his Libyan National Army (LNA). This as the death toll continues to climb as Haftar is vowing the ongoing siege of Tripoli is the “final offensive” to wrest control of the city. Haftar went so far as the call his offensive a war against “terrorists” that cannot cease until definitive victory. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Prior Russian defense minister meeting with Gen. Khalifa Haftar, via Mil.ru

    In a video statement, Haftar’s military spokesman said, “We welcome [Russian President Vladimir] Putin’s call for a ceasefire. However, our fight against terrorist organizations that seized Tripoli and received support of some countries will continue until the end,” according to Al Jazeera.

    At least 1,000 people have been killed since the LNA’s military offensive began months ago — though fighting has been sporadic for years  with at least 5,000 others wounded, according to United Nations estimates. 

    Meanwhile, Turkish troops are said to have touched down in the Libyan capital earlier this week after Turkey’s parliament voted through a plan for military assistance to the besieged GNA. This after reports that Ankara has actually sent Turkish-backed Syrian militants with the FSA as mercenaries to assist in the campaign. 

    Currently pro-Haftar forces are claiming to be a mere few kilometers away from the center of Tripoli. “The Libyan Army is now in Tripoli, and they are positioned only a few kilometers from the city center,” an LNA military spokesman said in an Arabic statement Thursday

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Also crucial is that days ago the LNA said it captured Sirte, held by forces loyal to the GNA since 2016, which lies some 280 miles east of the capital Tripoli, and was an important highly modernized city previously favored for development under Gaddafi before his 2011 summary execution by NATO-backed ‘rebels’. 

    The seizure of Sirte, now confirmed under Gen. Haftar’s control, is considered a major blow to the Tripoli unity government

    But a military stalemate is likely to continue, considering Turkey has vowed to prevent a Haftar takeover of the country over the objections of his backers like Egypt and the UAE. For this reason the LNA has been given orders to shoot at any Turkish plane or ship which enters Libyan space. Already Turkish drones have reportedly been downed on a couple of occasions over the past month. 


    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 01/09/2020 – 22:45

  • The Kerfuffle War – Trump's Iran De-escalation Succeeds
    The Kerfuffle War – Trump’s Iran De-escalation Succeeds

    Authored by Joaquin Flores via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

    Just like that, it was over. General Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff called it ‘a kerfuffle’. A letter was sent to their Iraqi peers that the U.S was repositioning troops out of Iraq in accordance with legislation from Iraq ending the U.S military presence in the war-torn country, and suddenly then it was retracted by higher-ups. Running interference, Mark Esper backed Milley and said it was ‘an honest mistake’. It all went down within a day of the irrational assassination of Iran’s Soleimani.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The immediate termination of Chewning and Sweeney, at the same time as the assassination of Soleimani and Iran’s response raises some big questions. In the near future it will be of critical importance to get to the bottom of any possible relationship that Esper and his subordinates Chewning and Sweeney – who both served as Defense Secretary Esper’s Chiefs of Staff – had to the assassination of Soleimani. The assassination and any number of possible Iranian responses, can push the U.S into a broad and open military conflict with Iran. Such a war would also be Trump’s undoing.

    We might otherwise be led to believe that Chewning and Sweeney’s sudden departure has something to do with Ukraine and the recent release of unredacted emails relating to L3Harris Technologies and funding in Ukraine. These of course also relate to the case against Trump and any possible impeachment. But the timing and symbolism of these as concurrent with the provocation against Iran and the blowback, as well as Esper’s backing of the ‘Kerfuffle theory’, lends strong credence to an Iran connection.

    The connection to impeachment cannot be denied, but the necessity of uncovering its potential relation to Iran is tremendously important because it directly relates to larger constitutional and practical questions of the president’s ability to have a Department of Defense that works either for or against U.S strategy as formulated and executed by its democratically elected leadership, as opposed to its permanent bureaucratic administration. This is what Trump and his supporters quite rightfully refer to as the ‘Deep State’.

    Were elements in the defense department working towards a heightened brinksmanship that the president did not really want? It would be far from the first time in history that such was the case.

    Because the proverbial excrement rolls down-hill, was Esper involved in ordering Soleimani’s assassination which Trump was not informed of until it was too late, or until after? Chewning and Sweeney’s fate may be understood here. The ‘kerfuffle’ which was the withdrawal statement would then be a simple ruse to distract from the actual reasons that Chewning and Sweeney were terminated – acting without orders, insubordination, and even treason.

    Trump’s Balancing Policy on Iran and America’s leadership crisis

    One undeniable point is that a war with Iran works entirely against Trump’s middle-east policy and his prospects for re-election.

    What the Trump administration seeks most now is a de-escalation with Iran. Given that Trump has fueled a rumor mill including the possible ending of sanctions if Iran doesn’t respond, or that there will be no further attacks if Iran’s response is ‘reasonable’, all exists in the unspoken framework that Trump inherently recognizes the ‘guilt’ of the U.S in its irrational act, while it is nevertheless politically impossible to frame it overtly as such.

    Impeachment against Trump has now been used several times to push him to act aggressively in the middle-east, contrary to his policy and self-interest. On all the ‘impeachment threat – then strike’ occasions, Trump ordered strikes on predictable targets – targets so predictable and oddly executed, that Syrian and Iranian forces barely felt them. There appears to be at the very least an ‘unspoken communication’ at play, where strikes are made to assuage political needs but not to inflict serious damage. If Trump really wanted an excuse to strike Iran, he’s had it before.

    There was precisely such an opportunity when subversives in government hatched a plan to push Trump into a war with Iran, when two planes were sent to violate Iranian airspace – one manned, the other unmanned – flying in close proximity. This created the chance that Iran’s downing of either plane could be used as a pretext for a major war-creating strike on Iran.

    Despite Trump’s acting reasonably, government actors and media attempted to create a sensation where Trump was ridiculed for ‘calling off’ a planned retaliation in the aftermath of the downed drone. The same liberal media and Democratic Party establishment that attacked Trump’s de-escalation then from a hawkish perspective, today manifest as doves who suddenly oppose Trump’s reckless hawkishness.

    Here, in the aftermath of the drone incident, a Trump policy was formulated – and it’s a policy that figures prominently in de-escalation in the aftermath of the assassination of Soleimani and Iran’s measured response.

    The policy is this – if Iran kills Americans, then the U.S escalates. If the U.S does something provocative, then Iran is actually allowed to respond militarily, so long as American personnel are not killed.

    Iran’s striking of the al-Asad airbase was predictable. That Trump has decided to officially declare that there were no U.S casualties has indicated his real stance. In all reality, the predictability of the target was such that American soldiers would have been repositioned out of that base, so that Iran could assuage its own popular-democratic needs in terms of legitimacy, without forcing the U.S. to respond again further.

    Between an AIPAC rock and an Anti-War Hard-spot

    A war with Iran would push the anti-war sentiments of independent voters away from Trump, and towards a more revitalized and mobilized Democrat Party anti-war base. Trump needs an anti-war base to be re-elected, and war with Iran pushes that base towards nearly any Democrat candidate.

    At the same time, Trump also needs the continued support from America’s Christian Zionist evangelical ‘Israel Firsters’, as well as the infamous AIPAC, not only to be re-elected, but to maintain the support in the senate against impeachment.

    That conflict between Trump’s two greatest populist strengths – between Trump’s anti-war base and his Christian Zionist base – largely defines his weakest political spot. That’s why it’s the best place to attack him.

    Trump for his part, has a frenemy relationship with AIPAC, and has worked hard to build his profile with Christian Zionist voters even to the extent that this might limit AIPAC’s influence on them. He has purchased a lot of AIPAC support along the way by tearing up the JCPOA and recognizing the Golan Heights and Jerusalem as Israel’s capital. This is capital he will have to spend to maintain support in the Senate.

    All together this means that while Trump may or may not have personally sought the assassination of Soleimani, he must take credit for it for any number of reasons. In brief, these relate again to the Zionist base and AIPAC, as well as needing to appear in control of the very country that he is nominally the president of. When Trump refused to go to war over the downing of the un-manned drone, the liberal media monopoly accused him of being soft on Iran and indecisive.

    Israel for its part is not tremendously happy with either of the two competing U.S policies. They have been pushing a ‘bomb Iran’ line for years, so that Israel’s conquest of Iraq may come to be. They are also not happy that the U.S presence in the region will come to an end. Trump may or may not have green-lit Soleimani’s assassination, but in either even its result will be the purchase of political capital that he can use towards ending the anti-ISIS campaign in Iraq. The reality is that the U.S is being pushed out either way. Soleimani’s assassination has only strengthened that resolve.

    Simultaneously, the anti-war sentiment in the U.S. is one that both led to Trump’s election and can lead to Trump’s undoing. Americans love sabre rattling and posturing. They also hate war.

    To wit, in the immediate aftermath of the Soleimani assassination, the well-known American communist group – the PSL – and its anti-war front organization ‘ANSWER’ have already received incredible donations from deep-pocketed Democrat Party sponsors at the local party level, to stage the first significant anti-war demonstration since the Bush presidency. While PSL/ANSWER members and activists have been laudable in their consistent opposition to all American wars for capital and empire, they only seem to magically receive the funds for permits, advertising, organizing, and staging anti-war marches when a Republican is president. The secondary slogan of these mobilizations was ‘Dump Trump’. ‘Dump Obama’ was never a slogan seen at the non-existent mass mobilizations against the Libyan, Ukrainian, and Syrian wars.  Trump’s refusal to take the Democrat-laid war bait, means he can pull off an end-run around the Democrat and deep-state plot.

    Democrats also don’t want war with Iran, they only want that Trump loses the anti-war vote. They can force him into these compromised positions by coordinating with the ‘permanent administrative military-intelligence bureaucracy’, by coordinating with AIPAC. The Democrat’s plan is therefore pretty simple: use impeachment to force him to strike at Iran (or get Trump to take credit for a strike that the deep-state pulled off), and then use that entanglement to tank his re-election prospects. Then Democrats ride in on an anti-war ticket, restart JCPOA, and move towards integrating Iranian elites into the EU economy. Israel could ultimately guarantee its piece of Iraq and its Greek pipeline deal in due course, with a reformed and EU friendly Iran, ready to make major compromises with Israel. Maybe this is what Biden means by ‘restorationist’ – restoring the traditional left/right political divide which has empowered the Atlanticist status quo.

    A Backroom deal? Iran’s Measured Response and Trump’s face-saving

    The successful attack on the US’s al-Asad airbase in Iraq was characterized by Iran’s Supreme Leader Khamenei has characterized as a ‘slap’.

    Interestingly, Khamenei’s language used is strategic, and uses a sleight of hand to take the steam from possible opponents. It is clear that Khamenei has said today that while the attack on the airbase is just a slap, and that Iran’s full response will come in the future, he has in fact set up that the solution will be political and diplomatic. He did so in a creative way which appeals to hardliners, saying that any solution could not simply be political and diplomatic, but rather more than this. This sort of double-speak does not reflect any moral lapsus, but is necessary for Iran’s greater geopolitical aims and serves the greater good.

    De-escalation requires that both parties save face, and can come away with tangible minor victories and agree that the real underlying dispute is resolved in the future.

    This reluctance to engage militarily is beyond the mere politics of justifying American casualties, but points to broader considerations of U.S power projection in the region in the aftermath of the failure of the Obama administration policy of overthrowing the government of Syria.

    To understand the events at play requires a multi-dimensional and realist understanding of motivations and relationships, and how relationships work at the level of statecraft. And so in a way that would be popularly understood – as in Game of Thrones – just because you’re invited to the banquet or receive a high-honored appointment, doesn’t mean that are you indispensable or even a friend. Trump’s ‘GoT’ relationship with Israel and even his own cabinet, needless to say any number of Pentagon bosses, is precisely this. Bolton and Pompeo are such frenemies, as have been any number of ‘here today, gone tomorrow’ members of the Trump administration, more or less foisted and forced upon the chief executive by Trump’s opponents in the permanent administration and his partisan opposition, and within the Republican Party itself.

    Did Trump make a backroom deal with Iran? Probably not – there was a high public dimension to Trump’s offers, and a recent history where an unspoken language was developed. Iran has demonstrated a high level of intelligence, restraint, intuition, and strategic thinking in its several thousand year-old civilization. There is no reason to think that they wouldn’t have understood and inferred everything explained in this article, and much more, without needing a direct conversation with Trump which no doubt would have led to yet another impeachment fandango.


    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 01/09/2020 – 22:25

  • NHTSA Opens Probe Into Fatal December Wreck Where Tesla Slammed Into A Fire Truck
    NHTSA Opens Probe Into Fatal December Wreck Where Tesla Slammed Into A Fire Truck

    For years we have been waiting for the slightest clue that someone – anyone – at the NHTSA had a pulse as it related to a seemingly neverending slew of recent Tesla wrecks, many of which seem to have been worsened or outright catalyzed by the use of Autopilot.

    This week, the NHTSA showed a small blip of a pulse when it was reported by Bloomberg that the agency would be investigating the December 29 crash of a Tesla that slammed into a parked fire truck on an Indiana highway. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    We reported on the crash on December 29, just moments after it happened. The 23 year old wife of the driver died of her injuries after being transported to the hospital. The 25 year old driver survived with injuries. 

    According to the Greencastle Banner-Graphic, the accident took place in Cloverdale, IN.

    The fire truck was in the eastbound lands of the interstate when a Tesla ran into the rear of the truck, causing “heavy damage” to both. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Both the driver and the passenger were unconscious and trapped after the accident. Both occupants were extricated from the vehicle.

    The truck had its emergency lights flashing while it was in the midst of responding to an earlier crash.

    There is no word yet on whether or not Autopilot played a role in the accident. The state police plans on reconstructing the crash and says that drugs and alcohol were not a factor.

    Of the 23 total accidents the NHTSA has reviewed involving driver assist technologies, 14 have involved Teslas, the agency said. 


    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 01/09/2020 – 22:05

  • Tverberg: Expect Low Oil Prices In 2020; Tendency Toward Recession
    Tverberg: Expect Low Oil Prices In 2020; Tendency Toward Recession

    Authored by Gail Tverberg via OurFiniteWorld.com,

    Energy Forecast for 2020

    Overall, I expect that oil and other commodity prices will remain low in 2020. These low oil prices will adversely affect oil production and several other parts of the economy. As a result, a strong tendency toward recession can be expected. The extent of recessionary influences will vary from country to country. Financial factors, not discussed in these forecasts, are likely also to play a role.

    The following are pieces of my energy forecast for 2020:

    [1] Oil prices can be expected to remain generally low in 2020. There may be an occasional spike to $80 or $90 per barrel, but average prices in 2020 are likely to be at or below the 2019 level. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Figure 1. Average annual inflation-adjusted Brent equivalent oil prices in 2018 US$. 2018 and prior are as shown in BP’s 2019 Statistical Review of World Energy. Value for 2019 estimated by author based on EIA Brent daily oil prices and 2% expected inflation.

    Figure 2 shows in more detail how peaks in oil prices have been falling since 2008. While it doesn’t include early January 2020 oil prices, even these prices would be below the dotted line.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Figure 2. Inflation adjusted weekly average Brent Oil price, based on EIA oil spot prices and US CPI-urban inflation.

    Oil prices can temporarily spike because of inadequate supply or fear of war. However, to keep oil prices up, there needs to be an increase in “demand” for finished goods and services made with commodities. Workers need to be able to afford to purchase more goods such as new homes, cars, and cell phones. Governments need to be able to afford to purchase new goods such as paved roads and school buildings.

    At this point, the world economy is struggling with a lack of affordability in finished goods and services. This lack of affordability is what causes oil and other commodity prices to tend to fall, rather than to rise. Lack of affordability comes when too many would-be buyers have low wages or no income at all. Wage disparity tends to rise with globalization. It also tends to rise with increased specialization. A few highly trained workers earn high wages, but many others are left with low wages or no job at all.

    It is the fact that we do not have a way of making the affordability of finished goods rise that leads me to believe that oil prices will remain low. Raising minimum wages tends to encourage more mechanization of processes and thus tends to lower total employment. Interest rates cannot be brought much lower, nor can the terms of loans be extended much longer. If such changes were available, they would enhance affordability and thus help prevent low commodity prices and recession.

    [2] World oil production seems likely to fall by 1% or more in 2020 because of low oil prices.

    Quarterly oil production data of the US Energy Information Administration shows the following pattern:

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Figure 3. Quarterly World Crude Oil and Natural Gas Liquids production, based on EIA international data through September 2019. This is a fairly broad definition of oil. It does not include biofuels because their production tends to be seasonal.

    The highest single quarter of world oil production was the fourth quarter of 2018. Oil production has been falling since this peak quarter.

    To examine what is happening, the production shown in Figure 3 can be divided into that by the United States, OPEC, and “All Other.”

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Figure 4. Quarterly world crude oil and natural gas liquids production by part of the world, based on international data of the US Energy Information Agency through September 30, 2019.

    Figure 4 shows that the production of All Other seems to be steady to slightly rising, more or less regardless of oil prices.

    OPEC’s oil production bobs up and down. In general, its production is lower when oil prices are low, and higher when oil prices are high. (This shouldn’t be a surprise.) Recently, its production has been lower in response to low prices. Effective January 1, 2020, OPEC plans to reduce its production by another 500,000 barrels per day.

    Figure 4 shows that oil production of the United States rose in response to high prices in the 2010 to 2013 period. It dipped in response to low oil prices in 2015 and 2016. When oil prices rose in 2017 and 2018, its production again rose. Production in 2019 seems to have risen less rapidly. Recent monthly and weekly EIA data confirm the flatter US oil production growth pattern in 2019.

    Putting the pieces together, I estimate that world oil production (including natural gas liquids) for 2019 will be about 0.5% lower than that of 2018. Since world population is rising by about 1.1% per year, per capita oil production is falling faster, about 1.6% per year.

    A self-organizing networked economy seems to distribute oil shortages through lack of affordability. Thus, for example, they might be expected to affect the economy through lower auto sales and through less international trade related to automobile production. International trade, of course, requires the use of oil, since ships and airplanes use oil products for fuel.

    If prices stay low in 2020, both the oil production of the United States and OPEC will likely be adversely affected, bringing 2020 oil production down even further. I would expect that even without a major recession, world oil supply might be expected to fall by 1% in 2020, relative to 2019. If a major recession occurs, oil prices could fall further (perhaps to $30 per barrel), and oil production would likely fall lower. Laid off workers don’t need to drive to work!

    [3] In theory, the 2019 and 2020 decreases in world oil production might be the beginning of “world peak oil.” 

    If oil prices cannot be brought back up again after 2020, world oil production is likely to drop precipitously. Even the “All Other” group in Figure 4 would be likely to reduce their production, if there is no chance of making a profit.

    The big question is whether the affordability of finished goods and services can be raised in the future. Such an increase would tend to raise the price of all commodities, including oil.

    [4] The implosion of the recycling business is part of what is causing today’s low oil prices. The effects of the recycling implosion can be expected to continue into 2020.

    With the rise in oil prices in the 2002-2008 period, there came the opportunity for a new growth industry: recycling. Unfortunately, as oil prices started to fall from their lofty heights, the business model behind recycling started to make less and less sense. Effective January 1, 2018, China stopped nearly all of its paper and plastic recycling. Other Asian nations, including India, have been following suit.

    When recycling efforts were reduced, many people working in the recycling industry lost their jobs. By coincidence or not, auto purchases in China began to fall at exactly the same time as recycling stopped. Of course, when fewer automobiles are sold, demand for oil to make and operate automobiles tends to fall. This has been part of what is pushing world oil prices down.

    Sending materials to Asia for recycling made economic sense when oil prices were high. Once prices dropped, China was faced with dismantling a fairly large, no longer economic, industry. Other countries have followed suit, and their automobile sales have also fallen.

    Companies operating ships that transport manufactured goods to high income countries were adversely affected by the loss of recycling. When material for recycling was available, it could be used to fill otherwise-empty containers returning from high income countries. Fees for transporting materials to be recycled indirectly made the cost of shipping goods manufactured in China and India a little lower than they otherwise would be, if containers needed to be shipped back empty. All of these effects have helped reduce demand for oil. Indirectly, these effects tend to reduce oil prices.

    The recycling industry has not yet shrunk back to the size that the economics would suggest is needed if oil prices remain low. There may be a few kinds of recycling that work (well sorted materials, recycled near where the materials have been gathered, for example), but it probably does not make sense to send separate trucks through neighborhoods to pick up poorly sorted materials. Some materials may better be burned or placed in landfills.

    We are not yet through the unwind of recycling. Even the recycling of materials such as aluminum cans is affected by oil prices. A March, 2019, WSJ article talks about a “glut of used cans” because some markets now prefer to use newly produced aluminum.

    [5] The growth of the electric car industry can be expected to slow substantially in 2020, as it becomes increasingly apparent that oil prices are likely to stay low for a long period. 

    Electric cars are expensive in two ways:

    1. In building the cars initially, and

    2. In building and maintaining all of the charging stations required if more than a few elite workers with charging facilities in their garages are to use the vehicles.

    Once it is clear that oil prices cannot rise indefinitely, the need for all of the extra costs of electric vehicles becomes very iffy. In light of the changing view of the economics of the situation, China has discontinued its electric vehicle (EV) subsidies, as of January 1, 2020. Prior to the change, China was the world’s largest seller of electric vehicles. Year over year EV sales in China dropped by 45.6% in October 2019 and 45.7% in November 2019. The big drop in China’s EV sales has had a follow-on effect of sharply lower lithium prices.

    In the US, Tesla has recently been the largest seller of EVs. The subsidy for the Tesla is disappearing in 2020 because it has sold over 200,000 vehicles. This is likely to adversely affect the growth of EV sales in the US in 2020.

    The area of the world that seems to have a significant chance of a major uptick in EV sales in 2020 is Europe. This increase is possible because governments there are still giving sizable subsidies to buyers of such cars. If, in future years, these subsidies become too great a burden for European governments, EV sales are there are likely to lag there as well.

    [5] Ocean going ships are required to use fuels that cause less pollution as of January 2020. This change will have a positive environmental impact, but it will lead to additional costs which are impossible to pass on to buyers of shipping services. The net impact will be to push the world economy in the direction of recession.

    If ocean-going ships use less polluting fuels, this will raise costs somewhere along the line. In the simplest cases, ocean-going vessels will purchase diesel fuel rather than lower, more polluting, grades of fuel. Refineries will need to charge more for the diesel fuel, if they are to cover the cost of removing sulfur and other pollutants.

    The “catch” is that the buyers of finished goods and services cannot really afford more expensive finished goods. They cut back in their demand for automobiles, homes, cell phones and paved roads if oil prices rise. This reduction in demand is what pushes commodity prices, including oil prices, down.

    Evidence that ship owners cannot really pass the higher refining costs along comes from the fact that the prices that shippers are able to charge for shipping seems to be falling, rather than rising. One January article says, “The Baltic Exchange’s main sea freight index touched its lowest level in eight months on Friday, weighed down by weak demand across all segments. . .The Index posted its biggest one day percentage drop since January 2014, in the previous session.”

    So higher costs for shippers have been greeted by lower prices for the cost of shipping. It will partly be ship owners who suffer from the lower sales margin. They will operate fewer ships and lay off workers. But part of the problem will be passed on to the rest of the economy, pushing it toward recession and lower oil prices.

    [6] Expect increasingly warlike behavior by governments in 2020, for the primary purpose of increasing oil prices.

    Oil producers around the world need higher prices than recently have been available. This is why the US seems to be tapering its growth in shale oil production. Middle Eastern countries need higher oil prices in order to be able to collect enough taxes on oil revenue to provide jobs and to subsidize food purchases for citizens.

    With the US, as well as Middle Eastern countries, wanting higher oil prices, it is no wonder that warlike behavior takes place. If, somehow, a country can get control of more oil, that is simply an added benefit.

    [7] The year 2020 is likely to bring transmission line concerns to the wind and solar industries. In some areas, this will lead to cutbacks in added wind and solar.

    A recent industry news item was titled, Renewables ‘hit a wall’ in saturated Upper Midwest Grid. Most of the material that is published regarding the cost of wind and solar omits the cost of new transmission lines to support wind and solar. In some cases, additional transmission lines are not really required for the first additions of wind and solar generation; it is only when more wind and solar are added that it becomes a problem. The linked article talks about projects being withdrawn until new transmission lines can be added in an area that includes Minnesota, Iowa, parts of the Dakotas and western Wisconsin. Adding transmission lines may take several years.

    A related issue that has come up recently is the awareness that, at least in dry areas, transmission lines cause fires. Getting permission to site new transmission lines has been a longstanding problem. When the problem of fires is added to the list of concerns, delays in getting the approval of new transmission lines are likely to be longer, and the cost of new transmission lines is likely to rise higher.

    The overlooked transmission line issue, once it is understood, is likely to reduce the interest in replacing other generation with wind and solar.

    [8] Countries that are exporters of crude oil are likely to find themselves in increasingly dire financial straits in 2020, as oil prices stay low for longer. Rebellions may arise. Governments may even be overthrown.

    Oil exporters often obtain the vast majority of their revenue from the taxation of receipts related to oil exports. If prices stay low in 2020, exporters will find their tax revenues inadequate to maintain current programs for the welfare of their people, such as programs providing jobs and food subsidies. Some of this lost revenue may be offset by increased borrowing. In many cases, programs will need to be cut back. Needless to say, cutbacks are likely to lead to unhappiness and rebellions by citizens.

    The problem of rebellions and overthrown governments also can be expected to occur when exporters of other commodities find their prices too low. An example is Chile, an exporter of copper and lithium. Both of these products have recently suffered from low export prices. These low prices no doubt play as major part in the protests taking place in Chile. If more tax revenue from the sales of exports were available, there would be no difficulty in satisfying protesters’ demands related to poverty, inequality, and an overly high cost of living.

    We can expect more of these kinds of rebellions and uprisings, the longer oil and other commodity prices stay too low for commodity producers.

    Conclusion

    I have not tried to tell the whole economic story for 2020; even the energy portion is concerning. A networked self-organizing system, such as the world economy, operates in ways that are far different from what simple “common sense” would suggest. Things that seem to be wonderful in the eyes of consumers, such as low oil prices and low commodity prices, may have dark sides that are recessionary in nature. Producers need high prices to produce commodities, but these high commodity prices lead to finished goods and services that are too expensive for many consumers to afford.

    There probably cannot be a “one-size-fits-all” forecast for the world economy. Some parts of the world will likely fare better than others. It is possible that a collapse of one or more parts of the world economy will allow other parts to continue. Such a situation occurred in 1991, when the central government of Soviet Union collapsed after an extended period of low oil prices.

    It is easy to think that the future is entirely bleak, but we cannot entirely understand the workings of a self-organizing networked economy. The economy tends to have more redundancy than we would expect. Furthermore, things that seem to be terrible often do not turn out as badly as expected. Things that seem to be wonderful often do not turn out as favorably as expected. Thus, we really don’t know what the future holds. We need to keep watching the signs and adjust our views as more information unfolds.


    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 01/09/2020 – 21:45

  • Disgraced Connecticut Hedge Fund Manager Bilked Investors Out Of $20M In "Ponzi-Like Fraud"
    Disgraced Connecticut Hedge Fund Manager Bilked Investors Out Of $20M In “Ponzi-Like Fraud”

    A Connecticut hedge fund manager has pleaded guilty to deliberately misleading his LPs and eventually bilking them out of a total of $20 million over a roughly three-year period, according to an affidavit filed Thursday.

    According to the complaint, filed in the Southern District of New York, Jason Rhodes, 47, of Rowayton, Conn., along with several co-conspirators, raised funds from about two dozen investors from 2013 to 2016, claiming their money would be invested and manged by “high-performing” portfolio managers. 

    But their money was instead diverted to a a variety of personal uses, including a $1 million payment to settle an unrelated civil lawsuit, a trip to Dubai, a luxury timeshare and an investment in a trucking company Rhodes co-owned with his wife.

    According to the affidavit, between November 2013 and December 2016, Rhodes and a bevy of accomplices-turned-state-cooperators  “willfully and knowingly” altered account statements and misled their LPs – primary members of wealthy families – out of a combined $19.6 million via a “Ponzi-like” scheme that involved using fresh money from new investor-victims to pay back older investors.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    As many readers are undoubtedly thinking, Rhodes’ scheme essentially involved taking a page out of the Bernie Madoff playbook, without the decades of fraudulently advertised market-beating returns.

    Of course, the fraud at Sentinel – the name of Rhodes’ firm – unfolded on a much smaller scale: Sentinel was a decidedly “boutique” firm with only 25 investors and a grand total of about $20 million under management. The firm raised most of its money by pitching wealthy families, and apparently had some success. And by the time the Rhodes and his partners were caught, they had squandered pretty much all of this money.

    According to the affidavit, Sentinel marketed itself as having access to “high-performing portfolio managers” who helped guide two separate funds at Sent one of which focused on M&A arbitrage, and another that was a simple long-short equity fund.

    Rhodes co-founded Sentinel with Mark Varacchi, who is named in the affidavit as an unindicted co-conspirator. In addition to leading the firm, Rhodes acted as chief risk officer, and also was the sole individual at the firm with signatory authority over Sentinel’s prime brokerage accounts. Before Sentinel, Rhodes served as the managing director for risk management at “an institutional risk management firm”, and also claimed to have worked as a “senior risk manager” at another unnamed multi-billion dollar hedge fund.

    Varacchi and another named co-conspirator, Steven Simmons, both previously pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit fraud.

    According to the section of the affidavit that detailed Rhodes’ fraudulent scheme, Rhodes created several sub-accounts at his prime broker, ostensibly to hold funds belonging to different LPs.

    Then, between 2013 and 2016, Rhodes delivered no fewer than 26 ‘wire out’ requests to his prime broker with the stated purpose that the money being withdrawn would be used to cover redemptions.

    But in each of these instances, the funds were instead transferred to private accounts that Rhodes controlled. A complete breakdown can be found below:

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Instead of being returned to clients, he money was used to pay back prior investors, and to cover the firm’s operating expenses, while some was also used for “personal” expenses by Rhodes and his co-conspirators.

    At one point in 2013, Rhodes told one co-conspirator that he needed to take $80k out of the firm’s accounts to invest in a “trucking business”. In another violation, Rhodes took a portion of a $5 million investment from an LP and improperly used it to settle a civil lawsuit filed against Rhodes & Co.

    The scheme started to unravel in 2015, when an LP asked for documentation verifying their $4 million-plus position in the fund, at a time when the accounts for both of Sentinel’s Radar-branded funds had just over $1 million left. Unwilling to risk their fraud being discovered, Rhodes altered documentation from his prime broker to try and misrepresent to the investor the amount of money available in their sub-account.

    However, the LP eventually did discover the discrepancy, and threatened to report Rhodes to the authorities if their money wasn’t returned. To accomplish this, Rhodes worked with Simmons to try and solicit more money from other LPs at the firm with the goal of using that money to pay back the other LP before they decided to report Rhodes to the SEC.

    Eventually, this pile of lies, dodges and poor investments caught up with Rhodes, who has now pleaded guilty. It’s unclear when he will be sentenced.

    Rhodes is copping to four counts, including conspiracy to commit securities and wire fraud, securities fraud, wire fraud and investment advisor fraud.

    Read the full indictment below:

    u.s. v. Jason Rhodes Complaint by Zerohedge on Scribd


    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 01/09/2020 – 21:25

  • Did Trump Just Blow Up His Goal Of Isolating Iran?
    Did Trump Just Blow Up His Goal Of Isolating Iran?

    Authored by John Bradley via The Spectator,

    A blood-red flag was raised over the Jamkaran mosque in the Iranian holy city of Qom last week, one normally reserved to commemorate the death of martyrs. This time, it was intended as a call to arms. ‘We have unfurled this flag so that all [Shia] believers in the world gather around it to avenge Qassem Soleimani’s blood unjustly shed,’ said the mosque’s leader. In Tehran, there were calls for bloody retribution for the air strike that killed Iranian general Soleimani — and everywhere, talk of all-out war. If it was also intended to strike the fear of Allah into the hearts of Iran’s Sunni Arab enemies, it certainly succeeded.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    In Riyadh, there was panic. The Saudi crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman, hastily sent an anti-war delegation to Washington and London. At home, his officials emphasised that the kingdom had not been consulted beforehand about the drone strike. ‘Please don’t blame us,’ was the message to Tehran. The Emirati foreign minister likewise called for restraint, warning of the devastating consequences for the Persian Gulf if war between the US and Iran were to break out.

    The foreign minister of the UAE’s arch rival Qatar, home to a US air base that would be a crucial launching pad for any American war against Iran, went one step further. He visited Tehran, met with President Hassan Rouhani and offered his condolences. ‘Qatar understands the deep pain and sadness that the Iranian people and government are enduring,’ he said.

    This unified Sunni Arab response to Soleimani’s murder is hardly what Washington had envisaged. After all, from the beginning of his presidency, Donald Trump’s Middle East strategy — orchestrated by his son-in-law, Jared Kushner — was aimed at fomenting an alliance between Israel and the Sunni Gulf Arab states (particularly Saudi Arabia and the Emirates) against Shia Iran.

    The goal for the hawks Trump has surrounded himself with was to isolate Iran diplomatically, then to confront the country militarily on multiple fronts. To this end, Trump gave the Saudis a free pass at every juncture, even when Bin Salman had the Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi chopped to pieces and his remains cooked in a tandoori oven.

    Israel, the Emirates and Saudi Arabia had been flaunting their new intelligence co-operation and their united front against what they saw as the growing Iranian menace. They flirted with closer diplomatic and cultural ties; at one stage, the idea of an ‘Arab Nato’ was floated. Leaked documents reveal that the Saudis — like the Israelis — had previously been pushing Washington for a direct US strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities.

    So Trump could have been forgiven for thinking the Saudis would be elated at Soleimani’s demise. Instead, they and the Emiratis waved the white flag before a single shot was fired. As per Iran’s request: its military offered a truce with Arab states that distanced themselves from America. It said Sunni cities would only be directly targeted if they assisted any US response to its air strikes against US bases in Iraq (in which case Dubai would be the first city to be ‘destroyed’). At the same time, Israel and the US were considered by Iran ‘as one’.

    General Jonathan Shaw, former commander of UK forces in Iraq, put it well: Iran’s objectives are political, not military. Their aim is not to destroy any American air base, but to drive a wedge between the US and its Arab allies — and the Soleimani assassination has achieved more to this end than anything that could have been cooked up in Tehran. The Sunnis are standing down and the US and Israel now once again face being without real friends in the region. When push came to shove, all Kushner’s efforts amounted to nothing. How elated the Iranians must be, even in the midst of such a setback.

    For those who had been paying closer attention, there were in fact plenty of reasons to believe that the Saudi royal court would respond cautiously to Soleimani’s murder. There were also reasons for them to doubt Trump as an ally. America’s supposedly state-of-the-art defence systems didn’t detect the recent drone strike on Saudi oil facilities. Adding insult to injury, Trump ordered the return of American planes that had been en route to Iran for a retaliatory strike.

    This led to a big rethink in Riyadh. Iran might have no navy or air force to write home about, but it does have more missiles than any other country in the region. The attacks on the US air bases in Iraq on Wednesday, and the earlier Saudi strikes, prove it knows how to use them. The damage to the Saudi oil industry if war breaks out, then, would be immense. Riyadh had to ask: if this were to happen, how certain could they be that Trump would come to their aid? It goes without saying that the bold Saudi drive to diversify their economy would come crashing down with the oil installations and water desalination plants. And Bin Salman could also kiss goodbye to the dream of mass tourism. No one but YouTube weirdos would want to visit a war zone.

    More to the point, after losing faith in Trump — and seeing what the Iranian military was capable of — the Saudis had decided to talk. Extensive back-channel negotiations had been taking place to ease tensions with Tehran as well as with the Houthis in Yemen. In recent months, the Saudis and Iranians had been using intermediaries in Oman, Kuwait and Pakistan, and reconciliation talks were speeding up. The Iraqi Prime Minister has said that when Soleimani was killed, the general was not planning attacks on American soldiers (as the Pentagon claims) but was on his way to a meeting in Baghdad to discuss how to speed up Saudi-Iran peace talks.

    Perhaps no one in Washington realised how quickly things were moving. Or perhaps they did, and killing Soleimani was an effort to stop that rapprochement taking place. Either way, the Saudis had every right to be angry, and after Trump met the Saudi delegation at the Oval Office this week unusually a transcript of the meeting was not released.

    The behaviour of Washington since the strike will have underlined every Saudi fear about Trump’s reliability. The US military released a letter declaring it would withdraw from Iraq (as per its parliament’s recent instruction) but the Pentagon said it had been released in error. Trump then tweeted that he could hit Iran’s cultural sites, only to be contradicted by his Defence Secretary.

    Just after Iranian missiles were fired at a US base in Iraq this week, an Iranian presidential adviser tweeted that Saudi Arabia could have ‘total peace’. It is not inconceivable that we will see closer ties being forged in the coming years between Iran and Saudi Arabia than between Saudi Arabia and Israel. Washington hawks will not be pleased, but it would be an easier — and perhaps more dependable — option for Riyadh. After all, ordinary Arabs have long considered Israel, not Iran, to be their main enemy.

    What is certain is that Iran is now far more united. Its economy shrank by about 10 per cent last year, taken in Washington as proof that sanctions were working. The mullahs were in trouble and badly needed a cause to rally the nation behind. Soleimani’s assassination has given them one. The demonstrations in Iran over fuel price hikes a few months ago already seem like a thing of the past; those who had been on the streets protesting against the government have now turned out in its support. The crowd that marched in Tehran on Monday — chanting ‘Death to America’ — was one of the largest ever seen in the capital.

    ‘All is well!’ chirped Trump after the Iranian retaliation, signalling that he now sees this episode as at an end.

    Iran’s foreign minister, Javad Zarif, offered his own verdict: that we have just witnessed the beginning of the end of the ‘malign US presence in West Asia’.

    For Trump, it will be an awkward point. He set out to weaken Iran and its control over the Middle East – but may have ended up handing the region to the mullahs on a platter.


    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 01/09/2020 – 21:05

    Tags

  • Chinese Officials Confirm Latest Health Crisis Caused By SARS-Like Coronavirus
    Chinese Officials Confirm Latest Health Crisis Caused By SARS-Like Coronavirus

    With the pace of economic growth slowing, a restive Hong Kong, a devastating pig ebola plague and a newly aggressive America looking to counter its ambitions on the world stage, Beijing is already struggling with its fair share of domestic and geopolitical issues. The last thing it needs is another quintessentially east-asian public health crisis. 

    Headlines about a new pneumonia-like illness spreading through China have appeared in the Western press over the past week. Officials in the region, including in Hong Kong and Taiwan, have been fearful of the virus’s spread since Beijing delivered a notice warning about the virus on Dec. 31, when just 27 people were infected. As of Thursday, a little more than a week later, the number had risen to 59 – with seven in critical condition.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Now, it appears public health officials worst fears have been confirmed: Preliminary tests indicate the mysterious illness may be caused by a new coronavirus, according to lead scientist Xu Jianguo, who delivered the news to China’s official Xinhua news agency, according to the BBC.

    Xu said he and his researchers found the “new type” of coronavirus by testing infected blood samples and throat swabs collected from 15 people.

    Crucially, coronaviruses can be the cause of a wide range of illnesses, from common colds, to infections like the SARS virus that originated in China in 2002 and 2003 and ended up killing 700 people around the world. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Courtesy of the BBC

    Beijing’s confirmation seems to affirm the WHO’s suspicion that a coronavirus could be to blame for the outbreak.

    While identifying the virus type is a start for authorities, “further investigations” are still necessary, said Gauden Galea, The WHO representative for China. For example, pathology investigators still need to understand how the virus spreads. 

    So far, zero cases of human to human transmission have been confirmed, while the Wuhan cases are thought to have been caused through exposure to animals linked to a live seafood and animal market. Of note, no healthcare workers have fallen ill with the mystery virus.

    Remember, the problem isn’t just that this virus is happening, it’s that it’s happening now, just before millions of Chinese travel to see family and friends during the Chinese New Year holiday. 


    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 01/09/2020 – 20:45

  • Citadel Securities Sues Quant Who Stole Its "ABC Strategy" Algo Which Made $50MM A Year
    Citadel Securities Sues Quant Who Stole Its “ABC Strategy” Algo Which Made $50MM A Year

    Three things are certain: death, taxes and quants suing other quants for stealing their secret, money-making algo sauce.

    Ever since secretive quant giant Renaissance sued Millennium in the early 2000s for “expropriating” its quant trading strategies when it poached Russian quants Pavel Volfbeyn and Alexander Belopolsky, not a year passes without one or more high profile lawsuits gets lobbed between some of the most iconic HFT or quant funds. And 2020 is no different because as Bloomberg first reported, Citadel Securities, Ken Griffin’s market making firm, has sued a British hedge fund, GSA Capital, over its attempt to hire a senior Citadel trader amid allegations that GSA obtained “a secret trading strategy while using texts and Whatsapp messages to hide all traces of the plan.”

    At the center of this lawsuit is what Bloomberg described as Citadel’s “ABC Strategy,” a closely-guarded automated trading strategy, i.e., algo, that cost Citadel “more than $100 million to develop” and which was generating more than $50 million a year trading stocks in the U.S. and Europe. And while there is little additional information, one can understand why an algo, especially one which appears to have involved “guaranteed” profits courtesy of high-frequency trading and consistently generated tens of millions in profits, would be a highly desired piece of source code for anyone to possess, especially an up and coming competitor that was seeking to “set up a new high-frequency trading business.”

    Incidentally, for those unfamiliar with why HFT “market makers” are nothing short of money printers, look no further than Virtu, which as we reported back in 2015, had lost money on just one trading day in 6 years!

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    And yes, Citadel Securities, which is separate from Citadel’s hedge fund, is also wildly profitable: it made $3.5 billion in revenue in 2018, with profit margins that Ken Griffin has previously said should exceed 30%. The Citadel securities trading arm started as a high-frequency market-maker in options before pushing into equities (for those who say it is a very blurry line between prop and flow trading in HFT, you are absolutely right). Today, the firm dominates that realm, handling more than 1 of every 5 shares traded in the U.S., and has had a very close relationship with the likes of the millennials’ favorite trading platform, Robinhood Markets, which may also explain in part its profitability (and no, there is nothing wrong with payment for order flow – it is a decades-old practice that can be traced to the early years of electronic trading. In fact, it was pioneered by Bernie Madoff). For an extended profile of Citadel Securities, read the following Bloomberg profile.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    In any case, that’s precisely the algo that GSA was going after when it set out to hire Citadel’s high-frequency trader, Vedat Cologlu, a 2007 Wharton grad and self-described “stat arb trader“, who helped operate and administer the models whose “returns were notably high given the low level of risk it took on.”

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    However, in its lawsuit, Citadel alleged that the UK fund wanted more:

    GSA asked for sensitive information on his equity-trading including his profits and the speed of the trades. And then Cologlu handed over a plan that Citadel argues was based on its own confidential model, including the way the algorithm made predictions.

    As noted above, the case which was filed last month, is the latest example of the lengths funds with proprietary trade secrets and automated strategies “where companies deploy computing power to identify trades promising the biggest mismatches or largest payoffs with the least amount of risk”, will go to protect their IP.

    And in a world in which scalping dimes, nickels and pennies has become increasingly difficult now that virtually every HFT strategy has become commoditized (and cannibalized), the NYSE was forced to launch laser-based transmission towers to give the peasants using mere microwaves a leg up, it is perhaps not surprising that this latest case involves two market giants who would otherwise be able to coexist in any market but this one.

    GSA was spun out of Deutsche Bank AG in 2005 and manages around $7.5 billion. Citadel Securities, the market making division of Citadel, of course needs no introduction (even though we provide one above). Citadel’s legal filing names GSA founder and majority owner Jonathan Hiscox as a defendant, alongside other officials including the chief technology officer. As Bloomberg notes, it has yet to file its formal defense, but said Wednesday it rejects the claims and plans to vigorously defend itself.

    According to the Citadel complaint, GSA officials must have been aware of the need for secrecy because they regularly sought to keep details of the courtship out of emails where they could be easily discovered. In May 2019, GSA’s head of recruitment Douglas Ward emailed a junior employee saying that the job interview questions be “Kept off e-mail.”

    “GSA well knew that Mr. Cologlu’s responses would contain or would be derived from Citadel’s confidential information and hoped to conceal their wrongful conduct,” Citadel’s lawyers said in the filing dated Dec. 16.

    It’s not just stealing top secret money printing golden goose “algos” – trading firms and hedge funds, who have for long used fat pay checks to lure employees, have hit a wall when it comes to the top talent – especially in a market where the vast majority of hedge funds underperformed the market – and have been engaged in an intense battle to hire and retain talent. The latest front line is to recruit technologists who are seen as key to future-proof trading strategies.

    As Bloomberg notes, Cologlu – who earned more than $700,000 in 2018 as a quant researcher – was looking for a move after 11 years at Citadel. The firm cited messages saying Cologlu was keen to build out his own business and believed there was a market to trade European stocks. GSA for its part dubbed the plan “Project High Speed Rail” and was making moves to enter the high-speed algorithmic trading business by joining the Turquoise trading facility run by the London Stock Exchange, according to the lawsuit.

    Yet while quants and math PhDs may be brilliant at spotting patterns and correlations, they seem to lack even the most rudimentary common sense, and Cologlu sent Citadel’s trading plan to his work email account, which was promptly noticed by Citadel and an investigation began. The GSA recruiter speculated Cologlu had “been called out by Citadel.” That was indeed the case, and Cologlu confirmed to the Citadel legal team that he’d provided GSA with the trading strategy plan. It was unclear what happened next: according to the lawsuit, Cologlu has been suspended, but a person familiar with the situation said he has left the company.

    At that point Citadel claims that it confronted GSA about its meetings with Cologlu, and an internal lawyer agreed to cooperate and shredded the hard copies of Cologlu’s trading plan. In addition to damages, Citadel is seeking an injunction to stop GSA from using any of its confidential information, and has also asked the judge to order GSA to destroy all paper and computer copies of the information.


    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 01/09/2020 – 20:25

  • Is Iraq About To Become A Chinese Client State?
    Is Iraq About To Become A Chinese Client State?

    Authored by Simon Watkins via OilPrice.com,

    Following the political and popular backlash in Iran over details of its plans to make the Islamic Republic effectively a client state through various multi-layered oil and gas deals, China has switched its attention for the moment to Iran’s close ally and neighbour, Iraq. Like Iran, Iraq has enormous and still relatively underdeveloped oil and gas reserves, it is an irreplaceable geographical stepping stone in China’s ‘One Belt, One Road’ programme, and it is in need of major ongoing funding. China already has leverage over Iraq as the leading oil company (Rosneft) of its close geopolitical ally, Russia, already has effective control over the oil and gas infrastructure of the north Iraq semi-autonomous region of Kurdistan, and Chinese companies operate on a number of fields in south Iraq. Last week saw key developments in China’s cornerstone project of making Iraq into a client state.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The first of these developments was the announcement from Iraq’s Finance Ministry that the country had started exporting 100,000 barrels per day (bpd) of crude oil to China in October as part of the 20-year oil-for-infrastructure deal agreed between the two countries. As highlighted by OilPrice.com, the broad framework of this arrangement was agreed last September during a visit by Iraq’s then-Prime Minister Adel Abdul Mahdi to Beijing, with the purpose of expanding China’s then US$20 billion of investment in Iraq in addition to the US$30 billion or so in annual trade between the two countries. According to last week’s statement, Chinese firms Zhenhua Oil and Sinochem were the importers of the Iraqi barrels involved, and OilPrice.com understands that all trade financing surrounding these exports – and many of those to come – have been done by the China Export and Credit Insurance Corporation.

    This arrangement neatly rolls into China’s wider plan for Iraq (and Iran) as it aims to gradually increase its presence across the country, just as it has done in many countries in Africa in what has been regarded by many as a new wave of colonisation, as analysed in depth in my new book on the global oil markets. For Iraq and Iran, China’s plans are particularly far-reaching, OilPrice.com has been told by a senior oil industry figure who works closely with Iran’s Petroleum Ministry and Iraq’s Oil Ministry. China will begin with the oil and gas sector and work outwards from that central point. In addition to being granted huge reductions on buying Iranian oil and gas, China is to be given the opportunity to build factories in both Iran and Iraq – and build-out infrastructure, such as railways – overseen by its own management staff from Chinese companies. These are to have the same operational structure and assembly lines as those in China, so that they fit seamlessly into various Chinese companies’ assembly lines’ process for whatever product a particular company is manufacturing, whilst also being able to use the still-cheap labour available in both Iraq and Iraq.

    The railway infrastructure in Iraq, such as it is, will be built out after the completion of the network in Iran by China, allowing for the transport of all manufactured products from China into, ultimately, Europe. In this context, late last year saw Iran’s Vice President, Eshaq Jahangiri announce that Iran had signed a contract with China to implement a project to electrify the main 900 kilometre railway connecting Tehran to the north-eastern city of Mashhad. Adjunct to this, Jahangiri added that there are also plans to establish a Tehran-Qom-Isfahan high-speed train line and to extend this upgraded network up to the north-west through Tabriz. Tabriz, home to a number of key sites relating to oil, gas, and petrochemicals, and the starting point for the Tabriz-Ankara gas pipeline, will be a pivot point of the 2,300 kilometre New Silk Road that links Urumqi (the capital of China’s western Xinjiang Province) to Tehran, and connecting Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan along the way, and then via Turkey into Europe. Once the plans for this are making substantial progress then China will extend the transport links into Iraq to the West.

    In the meantime, Iraq has been working on new laws that will regulate the operation of a reconstruction agency, the primary function of which, according to the source, will be ensure that China “is allowed to just get on with things, without the usual red-tape.” Only recently, for example, Iraq’s Electricity Minister Louay al-Khateeb wrote:

    “China is our primary option as a strategic partner in the long run…We started with a US$10 billion financial framework for a limited quantity of oil to finance some infrastructure projects…[but] Chinese funding tends to increase with the growing Iraqi oil production, [and is] to be used differently from the previous policies, through construction, investments and operationalization [sic] of the reconstruction council.”

    The second key announcement in this vein made last week from Iraq was that the Oil Ministry has completed the pre-qualifying process for companies interested in participating in the Iraqi-Jordanian oil pipeline project. The U$5 billion pipeline is aimed at carrying oil produced from the Rumaila oilfield in Iraq’s Basra Governorate to the Jordanian port of Aqaba, with the first phase of the project comprising the installation of a 700-kilometre-long pipeline with a capacity of 2.25 million bpd within the Iraqi territories (Rumaila-Haditha). The second phase includes installing a 900-kilometre pipeline in Jordan between Haditha and Aqaba with a capacity of 1 million bpd. Iraq’s Oil Minister – for the time being, at least – Thamir Ghadhban added that the Ministry has formed a team to prepare legal contracts, address financial issues and oversee technical standards for implementing the project, and that May will be the final month in which offers for the project from the qualified companies will be accepted and that the winners will be announced before the end of this year. Around 150,000 barrels of the oil from Iraq would be used for Jordan’s domestic needs, whilst the remainder would be exported through Aqaba to various destinations, generating about US$3 billion a year in revenues to Jordan, with the rest going to Iraq. Given that the contractors will be expected to front-load all of the financing for the projects associated with this pipeline, Baghdad expects that such tender offers will be dominated by Chinese and Russian companies, according to the Iran and Iraq source.

    “It will allow for infrastructural diversification for the China-Russia partnership that is now really gathering pace across the centre of the Middle East, to add to the plans we are seeing being put into place for Syria,” he told OilPrice.com last week.

    Specifically, the entry of the hitherto virtually unknown Russian company, Stroytransgaz, into the hitherto equally unknown Block 17 of Iraq’s barren and lawless Anbar region recently:

    “Is the absolute clear sign that the Iran-Iraq-Syria oil and gas pipelines system is now going ahead,” according to the Iran and Iraq source.

    “This whole area is right in the centre of what the U.S. military used to call ‘the spine’ of Islamic State where the Euphrates flows westwards into Syria and eastwards into the Persian Gulf, extremely close to the border with Iran,” he said.

    “Along the spine running from east to west are the historical ultra-nationalist and ultra-anti-West cities of Falluja, Ramadi, Hit and Haditha, and then we’re into Syria, and a short hop to the key strategic ports of Syria – Banias and Tartus – that also happen to be extremely important to the Russians,” he underlined. “With access to Jordan as well, China and Russia will have all of the key export and transport routes covered,” he concluded.


    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 01/09/2020 – 19:45

    Tags

  • Big(gest) Brother: US Starts Collecting DNA At Border Entry
    Big(gest) Brother: US Starts Collecting DNA At Border Entry

    The American surveillance state just turned the Orwell dial to ’11’…

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    In the latest escalation in the war on Liberty and Freedom in the land of the free, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) is beginning a pilot program this week to collect DNA at border entries.

    By way of background, in August, a top government watchdog alerted President Trump and Congress that CBP, through a “disturbing” pattern of misconduct, has endangered the public for nearly a decade by failing to comply with a federal law requiring that the agency collect DNA samples from detained migrants.

    The U.S. Office of Special Counsel (OSC) said CBP’s “noncompliance with the law has allowed subjects subsequently accused of violent crimes, including homicide and sexual assault, to elude detection even when detained multiple times by CBP or Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).”

    At the time, a DHS official told Fox News that the agency was now going to work closely with the DOJ on a “path forward” on DNA collection. 

    And now it is about to begin.

    According to a privacy document posted Monday on the DHS site, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), in partnership with the FBI, will collect DNA samples, obtained via buccal cheek swab, from some migrants and U.S. citizens, which will then be stored in FBI files for use in criminal investigations around the country.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The program, effective January 6, 2020, CBP will begin collecting DNA from any person who is subject to fingerprinting – including U.S. citizens, lawful permanent residents, and migrants (who are arrested at the border, already convicted of a crime, or facing criminal charges).

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The statement adds that obtaining the DNA samples was “previously not feasible because of operational exigencies and resource limitations.”

    The three-year pilot program will take place in the Detroit Sector and those who present at the Eagle Pass Port of Entry in southwest Texas.

    Don’t want your privacy invaded? Too bad, failure to comply will be a misdemeanor.

    As Bloomberg notes, privacy and oversight groups have expressed concern that the government has other, faster ways of verifying migrant identities that won’t create a massive database that could be used to target innocent individuals for surveillance.

    Remember, it’s for your own security; and besides, if you have done nothing wrong, what have you got to fear from providing the government with your DNA?

    As a reminder, DHS already expects to have face, fingerprint, and iris scans of at least 259 million people in its biometrics database by 2022.

    The Orwellian police state is upon us, but don’t expect it to improve at all.  In fact, as George Orwell said: “If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face – forever.”


    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 01/09/2020 – 19:25

  • 93 Of Illinois' 102 Counties Have Lost Population Since 2010
    93 Of Illinois’ 102 Counties Have Lost Population Since 2010

    Authored by Ted Dabrowski and John Klingner via Wirepoints.org,

    If you’re wondering how widespread Illinois’ problems really are, check out the below chart based on U.S. Census data. It shows that 93 of the state’s 103 counties have shrunk since 2010. Illinois’ population has dropped by 170,000 people since the turn of the decade and few of the state’s counties have been spared.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Illinois has lost more population than any other state in the country and it was one of just four states to shrink since 2010. The other three states were West Virginia, Connecticut and Vermont. By comparison, states like Indiana added 200,000 to its population, while fast growing states like Tennessee and South Carolina added more than 400,000 each. Florida, Texas and California have added millions to their populations since 2010.

    Illinois’ population loss across so many counties is a reflection of the state’s outlier status on many of the nation’s economic, demographic and financial metrics. Illinois has the nation’s most costly pension crisis, one of the highest tax burdensfalling real home prices and a general lack of economic opportunity. It’s also one of the most corrupt states in the country.

    Cook County lost the most population of any county in Illinois over the 2010-2018 period. The county lost nearly 19,000 people. Winnebago was second with a loss of 11,000. St. Clair was third with a population drop of 9,300.

    Macon, Peoria, Madison, Vermilion, LaSalle, Rock Island, and Kankakee counties rounded out the top ten biggest losers of population.

    At the other end, only nine of the state’s 102 counties managed to gain population over the period. Kane County grew by 18,000, largely offsetting Cook County’s losses. Another collar county, Will, gained 13,500. Kendall County was next with an increase of 12,500.

    The only other counties to show growth were DuPage, Champaign, McLean, Monroe, Grundy, Williamson – just nine counties in all.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The downstate problem

    Collectively, Illinois’ downstate counties have suffered the worst loss of population, by far. The whole region lost nearly 120,000 people between 2010 and 2018 – more than 2.5 percent of its total population.

    Three (DuPage, Will and Kane) of the five collar counties gained population, leaving the collar counties as the only growth area in Illinois.

    However, that increase was largely at the expense of Cook County. Previous migration data shows many new collar residents come from Cook County.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Cook County itself lost 19,000, or 0.4 percent, of its total population over the 2010-2018. That’s on top of the more than 200,000 people it lost in the decade prior to that.

    A 0.4 percent loss may not sound like much, but compared to the nation’s largest counties, Cook County is an outlier. Wirepoints analyzed the population change for the nation’s 50 most populous counties and found that Cook was one of just seven counties to lose population since 2010.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Think whatever you want about Illinois politics, but it’s being categorically rejected year after year by far too many residents. 

    Until the state’s policies are flipped on their head – until Illinoisans finally get the big pension and spending reforms the state desperately needs – expect many more to uproot their lives to find opportunities elsewhere.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Read more about Illinois’s financial and out-migration crisis:


    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 01/09/2020 – 19:05

  • Israel Bombs Weapons Depot Run By Iranian Militia
    Israel Bombs Weapons Depot Run By Iranian Militia

    Tensions continued to climb in the Middle East Thursday evening as reports of another air strike have been confirmed, but this time, it was the Israelis doing the shelling.

    According to reports by domestic and western media, the Israeli air force carried out an attack against an Iran-backed militia reportedly headquartered on the border between Syria and Iraq.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Tribal sources in Iraq apparently told reporters that the Israeli shelling targeted trucks and individuals associated with Iranian-backed militias near the Iraqi-Syria border. Artillery and shelling was also reported, though it’s unclear who fired those shots. The weapons are believed to have been destined for Hezbollah.

    Casualties have been reported, though the exact number is so far unclear.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Sources claimed that the airstrikes were targeting weapons shipments, according to the Washington Post. The Kataib Imam Ali, an Iran-backed militia, was apparently moving weapons, possibly in preparation for a strike against US interests.

    Al Mayadeen reported that the strikes targeted ballistic missile warehouses run by the group. The warehouse was situated outside of the city of Al Bukamal

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    The attack comes just hours after Iranian officials, including President Rouhani and a top IRGC commander, warned that Iran’s retaliation for the killing of IRGC General Qasem Suleimani wasn’t yet over, and Tehran publicly washed its hands of its proxies, claiming it couldn’t be held responsible for actions committed in its name.


    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 01/09/2020 – 18:45

  • House Votes to Limit Trump's Power to Strike Iran Without Congress
    House Votes to Limit Trump’s Power to Strike Iran Without Congress

    After being repeatedly ignored by presidents dating back to Ronald Reagan when it comes to the US’s ever-expanding military commitments around the globe, Congress finally decided to try and take some of that discretionary power back.

    Using President Trump’s latest attack on Iranian interests as justification, Democratic leader and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi successfully passed a resolution that would force Trump to go to Congress for authorization before taking any further actions against Iran.

    The vote in the Dem-controlled House was 224 to 194 in an almost entirely party-line vote. The vote has long been expected, and although a few Republican senators have decided to join Democrats in supporting the measure in the Senate, it’s still a few votes shy of passing, according to the latest vote totals circulating in the press.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Nancy Pelosi

    By pressing ahead with her War Powers Resolution, Pelosi ignited a debate that many thought had been settled: For years, presidents have had authority to unilaterally authorize military action. Remember that time Barack Obama ordered the killing of Osama bin Laden? He didn’t need to go to Congress for that.

    But by capitalizing on all the unfounded speculation about Trump starting WWIII, Pelosi sought to raise the issue, in an attempt to win a few Republican votes. Unfortunately for her, Republicans remained united in support of the president by equating support for Pelosi’s resolution with support for America’s enemies, according to the New York Times.

    According to CNN, the resolution states that “when the United States military force, the American people and members of the United States Armed Forces deserve a credible explanation regarding such use of military force,” and also that “Congress has not authorized the President to use military force against Iran”

    In considering it’s response, the Senate has a few options: it can move ahead with the House-passed measure or endorse a different version introduced by Sen. Tim Kaine.

    Of course, without Republican in the upper chamber, the resolution is “largely symbolic” – just another Democratic attempt to poison public opinion against the president before election day.

    Unfortunately for them, polls suggest that so far, this approach isn’t working.


    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 01/09/2020 – 18:21

  • Video From Outside Jeffrey Epstein's Cell "No Longer Exists," Government Says
    Video From Outside Jeffrey Epstein’s Cell “No Longer Exists,” Government Says

    A new Rasmussen poll shows that just 21 per cent of Americans believe Jeffrey Epstein killed himself while 52 per cent believe he was murdered.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    It should come as no surprise that so few people believe the official narrative as The Epoch Times’ Zachary Stieber reports that video footage from outside Jeffrey Epstein’s cell actually “no longer exists,” the government said in a new letter, less than a month after prosecutors initially said the footage wasn’t available, before quickly saying in an update that the footage had been found.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Writing to U.S. District Judge Kenneth Karas, prosecutors Maurene Comey and Jason Swergold said there was a mix-up when they asked the Metropolitan Correctional Center (MCC) to preserve the footage from outside the cell.

    Epstein was found unconscious with marks around his neck early July 23, 2019. Epstein’s cellmate at the time was accused murderer Nicholas Tartaglione. The defendant’s lawyer requested video footage from outside Epstein’s cell from July 22 and July 23, 2019.

    Prosecutors told the defense on Dec. 19, 2019, that it confirmed with staff at the center that the footage was preserved. On Jan. 3, the center provided the government with a copy of the video it preserved.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    “After reviewing the video, it appeared to the government that the footage contained on the preserved video was for the correct date and time, but captured a different tier” than the one where Epstein and Tartaglione’s cell was, prosecutors wrote in the letter.

    Legal counsel at MCC told prosecutors that the computer system at the center listed a different cell for Tartaglione, leading to staff preserving the wrong video.

    While the center has a backup system in place to house all video footage for its Special Housing Unit, where Epstein and Tartaglione were being held, the FBI reviewed the system as part of a separate investigation “and determined that the requested video no longer exists on the backup system and has not since at least August 2019 as a result of technical errors.”

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Jeffrey Epstein in a July 2019 mugshot. (Department of Justice)

    The update is the third change in the government’s position on the video footage.

    On Dec. 18, 2019, Swergold, the assistant U.S. attorney, told Karas in court that nobody could find the video. A day later, he and Comey wrote to Karas to tell him that the government confirmed with staff at the MCC that the video was preserved.

    Epstein, 66, died about two weeks after the July 23, 2019, incident. He was awaiting trial on child sex trafficking charges.

    The government letter also came a day after a judge in Florida denied an effort to release records from the 2006 grand jury that indicted Epstein on a felony prostitution count.

    “It sounds like a fishing expedition to me,” Chief Circuit Judge Krista Marx told Assistant State Attorney Marshall Levering Evans, the South Florida Sun-Sentinel reported. She added, “I’m not understanding how it will be helpful and to what end.”


    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 01/09/2020 – 18:11

    Tags

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Today’s News 9th January 2020

  • Gold Spikes To Record High In Euros As Geopolitical Risk Rises
    Gold Spikes To Record High In Euros As Geopolitical Risk Rises

    Gold (priced in USDollars) spiked dramatically overnight, pushing towards seven-year highs as tensions in the Middle East escalated. Then, once Trump and Zarif had tweeted de-escalations, gold (in USDollars) fell back to unchanged…

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Spot Gold surged above $1600 overnight – its highest since March 2013…

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Source: Bloomberg

    And while gold is off the overnight highs, The Economist notes that the yellow metal has already been on a long rally.

    “Nobody really understands gold prices, and I don’t pretend to understand them either,” Ben Bernanke, then chairman of the Federal Reserve, told America’s Senate Banking Committee in 2013, after a turbulent few months in the market for the metal (it hit its all-time peak in 2011, at the height of the euro-zone crisis and following a downgrade of America’s credit rating).

    Yet it is not difficult to understand why the price of gold hit its highest level since early that year – $1,610 per ounce – on January 8th.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The jump to a near-seven-year high followed the drone strike that killed Qassem Suleimani, leader of the Quds Force of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, three days earlier.

    Investors typically seek sanctuary in gold when geopolitical risk soars.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The rise of 2.85% over two trading days is similar to those after other Middle Eastern flare-ups. (The killing of General Suleimani also caused oil prices to leap: Brent crude rose by 5%, briefly topping $70 a barrel for the first time since May.)

    In fact, the price of gold (in USDollars) has been rising for a while, climbing by more than 25% since November 2018. The effect of General Suleimani’s death, at least so far, is just an additional upward tick. In fact, in Euros, the price of gold has never been higher…

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Source: Bloomberg

    John Pierpont Morgan, eponymous founder of America’s biggest investment bank, seems to have foreseen this, quipping that “gold is money, everything else is credit”.

    Gold is also at 40 year highs in Yen…

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Source: Bloomberg

    And, in case you are unable to see the difference between judging the USDollar against its ‘fiat’ friends and a hard asset, the following chart should help…

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Source: Bloomberg

    And when the return for providing credit is close to zero, it is little surprise that investors want their money in gold.


    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 01/09/2020 – 01:00

  • New Cambridge Analytica Leaks Reveal Psychological Manipulation Of Global Population
    New Cambridge Analytica Leaks Reveal Psychological Manipulation Of Global Population

    Authored by Derrick Broze via The Mind Unleashed,

    On New Year’s Day 2020, Twitter account @HindsightFiles began posting documents from data firm Cambridge Analytica (CA) which expose the extensive infrastructure used to manipulate voters on a global scale.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    More than 100,000 documents are said to be released in the coming months, revealing Cambridge Analytica’s activity in a shocking 68 countries, including elections in Malaysia, Kenya, and Brazil. The Guardian reported that the documents come from Brittany Kaiser, a former employee of Cambridge Analytica who turned whistleblower and star of the documentary The Great Hack.

    Kaiser told the Guardian:

    I’m very fearful about what is going to happen in the U.S. election later this year, and I think one of the few ways of protecting ourselves is to get as much information out there as possible.

    The latest CA whistleblower has said the dumps will contain previously unreleased emails, project plans, case studies, and negotiations. The HindsightFiles twitter account has posted data on the relationship between Cambridge Analytica and John Bolton, former National Security Adviser to the Trump administration. In 2013, the John Bolton Super PAC paid Cambridge Analytica $650,000 for voter data analysis and digital video ad targeting.

    The documents provide more details on that relationship, including using psychographics to play on voters hopes and fears. Psychographics is a methodology which focuses on consumers psychological attributes. Research firms attempt to develop a psychographic profile on various segments of the population by studying personality, opinions, interests, attitudes, values, and behaviors.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Cambridge Analytica first made headlines following the 2016 Presidential election after it was revealed the company had gained access to 87 million Facebook profiles. Whistleblower Christopher Wylie exposed how he helped set up CA and obtain the data of millions of Americans. This is when the public began to understand the scope of Cambridge Analytica’s operations.

    In 2015, the UK-based political consulting firm, worked on behalf of Ted Cruz’s campaign to help him win the 2016 Republican nomination. Cambridge Analytica was also involved in campaigns to promote Brexit, as well as promoting the 2016 Trump Presidential campaign. Donald Trump would eventually hire Steven Bannon as the chief strategist for his White House. Bannon previously served as CA’s vice president and was the executive chairman of Breitbart News.

    It was through Bannon that whistleblower Christopher Wylie and CA CEO Alexander Nix came to know billionaire Robert Mercer. Bannon arranged for Mercer to invest five million dollars into the creation of Cambridge Analytica. Mercer wanted to work with the group to influence the U.S. elections. When the public became aware of the manipulation by CA, Bannon denied having any knowledge of the scheme. Wylie, however, said Cambridge Analytica was Bannon’s psychological warfare mindfuck.”

    Cambridge Analyitca itself is a web of shadowy companies invested in behavioral researching and influencing mass behavior. Cambridge was born out of the Strategic Communications Laboratories (SCL), founded by Nigel Oakes and Alexander Nix. SCL claimed to have an expertise in Psychological Operations, and worked as part of military and political operations around the world. An article by the Register noted that SCL provided training to 15 (UK) Psychological Operations Group and had access to secret information.

    The Great Hack documentary details how SCL started out as a military contractor called SCL Defense before shifting to using their data to influence elections. According to the New Yorker, SCL was born out of another organization created by Oakes, the Behavioral Dynamics Institute (BDI). Oakes told Marketing in a 1992 interview:

    We use the same techniques as Aristotle and Hitler. We appeal to people on an emotional level to get them to agree on a functional level.”

    Although Cambridge Analytica has officially shut down, company executives set up a new company in 2017 called Emerdata Limited. It was also reported that SCL executives joined Emerdata, including Rebekah Mercer, daughter of billionaire Robert Mercer. The Mercer family have been consistent supporters of President Donald Trump.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The latest leaks from Cambridge Analytica seem poised to expose more lurid details of the inner workings of the disturbing relationship between big data and political operatives. Both the history of the company and its executives are a clear example of the growing trend of politicians seeking to use data gathered by social media companies to better understand and manipulate the minds of potential voters. Stay tuned to the Mind Unleashed for updates on this developing story.

    *  *  *

    Alt-Market’s Brandon Smith suggests that data mining through social media is more useful for identifying current and future trends than it is for manipulating large groups of people to vote a certain way. 

    When the globalists control both candidates in an election, they don’t necessarily need to manipulate the vote. 

    That said, I have long argued that the globalists NEEDED Donald Trump in particular to gain wide public support in 2016, because his job was to co-opt the conservative threat to the globalist agenda and derail it.  The Trump campaign was tailor made to appeal to the growing influence of the liberty movement among conservative groups in the US.  He used all the right key words and phrases, and composed a list of policies that would immediately strike a chord in voters.  Once in office, he pulled a 180 on almost every promise he made during his campaign.  Generally, in voting most people already have a set of principles they stand by and are unlikely to change them because of targeted ads, but the globalists could use data to CREATE a candidate that more effectively appeals to a group. 

    By exploiting individual web data, the elites might also be able to sway a certain smaller percentage of a vote one way or the other.  Even just 5%-10% of a vote could determine the outcome of an election.  The bottom line? 

    Elections are meaningless.  Changes to government are never achieved through voting.  It’s time for people to finally accept this fact and start implementing other measures.

    To learn more about Psychographics watch this report from The Corbett Report.


    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 01/09/2020 – 00:05

    Tags

  • City Begs Homeless To Use Shelters By Offering To Clear Infractions
    City Begs Homeless To Use Shelters By Offering To Clear Infractions

    Homeless people in San Diego hate the city’s shelters so much that city officials have resorted to bribing them by offering to clear outstanding infractions if they agree to stay in one of the city’s large, tented bridge shelters for 30 days, according to the San Diego Union Tribune.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    In this file photo from November, Alpha Project worker Sylvia Saliman sweeps up in the bridge shelter at 17th Street and Imperial Avenue in San Diego. (Nancee E. Lewis)

    According to San Diego police Captain Scott Wahl, the program would allow those who face ticketing or arrest to stabilize their lives and connect with vital social services, while police officers will have fewer issues to deal with.

    “I feel like we’ve started this division because we wanted to be a positive impact on ending homelessness,” said Wahl, referring to the department’s neighborhood policing division which was created in 2018, and includes homeless out reach teams and officers tasked with enforcing quality-of-life laws.

    “We’re all trying to do our part in ending homelessness, and we want to do it in a way that’s compassionate, but also has accountability,” added Wahl.

    The incentive is a revision to a similar effort that began in July. Police officers last summer began offering shelter beds in lieu of citations to homeless people who had been contacted for encroachment, illegal lodging, littering or other minor quality-of-life infractions.

    Wahl said about 300 people took the offer, but there was a problem.

    “We noticed that 67 percent of people blew out the back door on the very first day,” he said about people who took the offer to avoid citations but had no intention of staying sheltered. “They’re circumventing the criminal justice system intentionally.”

    The revised approach still offers shelter beds in lieu of citations, but the tickets aren’t torn up quite so soon. If somebody leaves the shelter before 30 days, the citation will be enforced. -San Diego Union Tribune

    “They can still go outside,” said Wahl, adding “It’s not jail. They’re still free to come and go, but they have to be in at night.”

    And while the first program that didn’t require a 30 day stay had a 67% rate of success, so far 46% of those who accepted the shelter deal are staying.


    Tyler Durden

    Wed, 01/08/2020 – 23:45

  • The Deeper Story Behind The Assassination Of Soleimani
    The Deeper Story Behind The Assassination Of Soleimani

    Authored by Federico Pieraccini via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

    Days after the assassination of General Qasem Soleimani, new and important information is coming to light from a speech given by the Iraqi prime minister. The story behind Soleimani’s assassination seems to go much deeper than what has thus far been reported, involving Saudi Arabia and China as well the US dollar’s role as the global reserve currency.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The Iraqi prime minister, Adil Abdul-Mahdi, has revealed details of his interactions with Trump in the weeks leading up to Soleimani’s assassination in a speech to the Iraqi parliament. He tried to explain several times on live television how Washington had been browbeating him and other Iraqi members of parliament to toe the American line, even threatening to engage in false-flag sniper shootings of both protesters and security personnel in order to inflame the situation, recalling similar modi operandi seen in Cairo in 2009, Libya in 2011, and Maidan in 2014. The purpose of such cynicism was to throw Iraq into chaos.

    Here is the reconstruction of the story:

    [Speaker of the Council of Representatives of Iraq] Halbousi attended the parliamentary session while almost none of the Sunni members did. This was because the Americans had learned that Abdul-Mehdi was planning to reveal sensitive secrets in the session and sent Halbousi to prevent this. Halbousi cut Abdul-Mehdi off at the commencement of his speech and then asked for the live airing of the session to be stopped. After this, Halbousi together with other members, sat next to Abdul-Mehdi, speaking openly with him but without it being recorded. This is what was discussed in that session that was not broadcast: 

    Abdul-Mehdi spoke angrily about how the Americans had ruined the country and now refused to complete infrastructure and electricity grid projects unless they were promised 50% of oil revenues, which Abdul-Mehdi refused.

    The complete (translated) words of Abdul-Mahdi’s speech to parliament:

    This is why I visited China and signed an important agreement with them to undertake the construction instead. Upon my return, Trump called me to ask me to reject this agreement. When I refused, he threatened to unleash huge demonstrations against me that would end my premiership.

    Huge demonstrations against me duly materialized and Trump called again to threaten that if I did not comply with his demands, then he would have Marine snipers on tall buildings target protesters and security personnel alike in order to pressure me.

    I refused again and handed in my resignation. To this day the Americans insist on us rescinding our deal with the Chinese.

    After this, when our Minister of Defense publicly stated that a third party was targeting both protestors and security personnel alike (just as Trump had threatened he would do), I received a new call from Trump threatening to kill both me and the Minister of Defense if we kept on talking about this “third party”.

    Nobody imagined that the threat was to be applied to General Soleimani, but it was difficult for Prime Minister Adil Abdul-Mahdi to reveal the weekslong backstory behind the terrorist attack.

    I was supposed to meet him [Soleimani] later in the morning when he was killed. He came to deliver a message from Iran in response to the message we had delivered to the Iranians from the Saudis.

    We can surmise, judging by Saudi Arabia’s reaction, that some kind of negotiation was going on between Tehran and Riyadh:

    The Kingdom’s statement regarding the events in Iraq stresses the Kingdom’s view of the importance of de-escalation to save the countries of the region and their people from the risks of any escalation.

    Above all, the Saudi Royal family wanted to let people know immediately that they had not been informed of the US operation:

    The kingdom of Saudi Arabia was not consulted regarding the US strike. In light of the rapid developments, the Kingdom stresses the importance of exercising restraint to guard against all acts that may lead to escalation, with severe consequences.

    And to emphasize his reluctance for war, Mohammad bin Salman sent a delegation to the United States. Liz Sly, the Washington Post Beirut bureau chief, tweated:

    Saudi Arabia is sending a delegation to Washington to urge restraint with Iran on behalf of [Persian] Gulf states. The message will be: ‘Please spare us the pain of going through another war’.

    What clearly emerges is that the success of the operation against Soleimani had nothing to do with the intelligence gathering of the US or Israel. It was known to all and sundry that Soleimani was heading to Baghdad in a diplomatic capacity that acknowledged Iraq’s efforts to mediate a solution to the regional crisis with Saudi Arabia.

    It would seem that the Saudis, Iranians and Iraqis were well on the way towards averting a regional conflict involving Syria, Iraq and Yemen. Riyadh’s reaction to the American strike evinced no public joy or celebration. Qatar, while not seeing eye to eye with Riyadh on many issues, also immediately expressed solidarity with Tehran, hosting a meeting at a senior government level with Mohammad Zarif Jarif, the Iranian foreign minister. Even Turkey and Egypt, when commenting on the asassination, employed moderating language.

    This could reflect a fear of being on the receiving end of Iran’s retaliation. Qatar, the country from which the drone that killed Soleimani took off, is only a stone’s throw away from Iran, situated on the other side of the Strait of Hormuz. Riyadh and Tel Aviv, Tehran’s regional enemies, both know that a military conflict with Iran would mean the end of the Saudi royal family.

    When the words of the Iraqi prime minister are linked back to the geopolitical and energy agreements in the region, then the worrying picture starts to emerge of a desperate US lashing out at a world turning its back on a unipolar world order in favor of the emerging multipolar about which I have long written.

    The US, now considering itself a net energy exporter as a result of the shale-oil revolution (on which the jury is still out), no longer needs to import oil from the Middle East. However, this does not mean that oil can now be traded in any other currency other than the US dollar.

    The petrodollar is what ensures that the US dollar retains its status as the global reserve currency, granting the US a monopolistic position from which it derives enormous benefits from playing the role of regional hegemon.

    This privileged position of holding the global reserve currency also ensures that the US can easily fund its war machine by virtue of the fact that much of the world is obliged to buy its treasury bonds that it is simply able to conjure out of thin air. To threaten this comfortable arrangement is to threaten Washington’s global power.

    Even so, the geopolitical and economic trend is inexorably towards a multipolar world order, with China increasingly playing a leading role, especially in the Middle East and South America.

    Venezuela, Russia, Iran, Iraq, Qatar and Saudi Arabia together make up the overwhelming majority of oil and gas reserves in the world. The first three have an elevated relationship with Beijing and are very much in the multipolar camp, something that China and Russia are keen to further consolidate in order to ensure the future growth for the Eurasian supercontinent without war and conflict.

    Saudi Arabia, on the other hand, is pro-US but could gravitate towards the Sino-Russian camp both militarily and in terms of energy. The same process is going on with Iraq and Qatar thanks to Washington’s numerous strategic errors in the region starting from Iraq in 2003, Libya in 2011 and Syria and Yemen in recent years.

    The agreement between Iraq and China is a prime example of how Beijing intends to use the Iraq-Iran-Syria troika to revive the Middle East and and link it to the Chinese Belt and Road Initiative.

    While Doha and Riyadh would be the first to suffer economically from such an agreement, Beijing’s economic power is such that, with its win-win approach, there is room for everyone.

    Saudi Arabia provides China with most of its oil and Qatar, together with the Russian Federation, supply China with most of its LNG needs, which lines up with Xi Jinping’s 2030 vision that aims to greatly reduce polluting emissions.

    The US is absent in this picture, with little ability to influence events or offer any appealing economic alternatives.

    Washington would like to prevent any Eurasian integration by unleashing chaos and destruction in the region, and killing Soleimani served this purpose.  The US cannot contemplate the idea of the dollar losing its status as the global reserve currency. Trump is engaging in a desperate gamble that could have disastrous consequences.

    The region, in a worst-case scenario, could be engulfed in a devastating war involving multiple countries. Oil refineries could be destroyed all across the region, a quarter of the world’s oil transit could be blocked, oil prices would skyrocket ($200-$300 a barrel) and dozens of countries would be plunged into a global financial crisis. The blame would be laid squarely at Trump’s feet, ending his chances for re-election.

    To try and keep everyone in line, Washington is left to resort to terrorism, lies and unspecified threats of visiting destruction on friends and enemies alike.

    Trump has evidently been convinced by someone that the US can do without the Middle East, that it can do without allies in the region, and that nobody would ever dare to sell oil in any other currency than the US dollar.

    Soleimani’s death is the result of a convergence of US and Israeli interests. With no other way of halting Eurasian integration, Washington can only throw the region into chaos by targeting countries like Iran, Iraq and Syria that are central to the Eurasian project. While Israel has never had the ability or audacity to carry out such an assassination itself, the importance of the Israel Lobby to Trump’s electoral success would have influenced his decision, all the more so in an election year .

    Trump believed his drone attack could solve all his problems by frightening his opponents, winning the support of his voters (by equating Soleimani’s assassination to Osama bin Laden’s), and sending a warning to Arab countries of the dangers of deepening their ties with China.

    The assassination of Soleimani is the US lashing out at its steady loss of influence in the region. The Iraqi attempt to mediate a lasting peace between Iran and Saudi Arabia has been scuppered by the US and Israel’s determination to prevent peace in the region and instead increase chaos and instability.

    Washington has not achieved its hegemonic status through a preference for diplomacy and calm dialogue, and Trump has no intention of departing from this approach.

    Washington’s friends and enemies alike must acknowledge this reality and implement the countermeasures necessary to contain the madness.


    Tyler Durden

    Wed, 01/08/2020 – 23:25

    Tags

  • Baltic Dry Plunges Most Since 2008 As Tariff-Frontrunning Ends
    Baltic Dry Plunges Most Since 2008 As Tariff-Frontrunning Ends

    The Baltic Exchange’s main sea freight index fell for the 20th consecutive session to an eight-month low (the longest streak of losses since Nov 2015) as world trade continues to slump amid signs the so-called “front-loading” effect ahead of tariff deadlines has ended.

    The Baltic Dry Index, which tracks rates for capesize, panamax and supramax vessels that ferry dry bulk commodities across the world, plunged 2.3%, or about 18 points, to 773 on Wednesday (according to Refinitiv data), the lowest level since April 2019: 

    • The capesize index .BACI fell 74 points, or 5.8%, to 1,197 – its lowest since May 8. Average daily earnings for capesizes, which typically transport 170,000-180,000 tonne cargoes including iron ore and coal, decreased $2 to $9,020. 

    • The panamax index .BPNI declined 42 points, or 5%, to 803 points, its lowest since Feb. 27. 

    • Average daily earnings for panamaxes, which usually carry coal or grain cargoes of about 60,000 tonnes to 70,000 tonnes, dipped $386 to $7,223. 

    • The supramax index .BSIS fell 18 points to 593.

    Beleggers Belangen analyst Karel Mercx tweeted that “the Baltic Dry Index is the most important indicator for the rates of bulk shipping. The rate is determined based on the rates that are paid to transport raw materials on the 25 busiest shipping routes. Prices are falling sharply due to the cooling global economy.”

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    With the index already tumbling the most since 2008, it may suggest the global economy is, in fact, continuing to decelerate.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The chart below makes clear that the spike in shipping rates was a one-off event spurred by importers front-running tariffs in 2019, now that is over, shipping rates are plunging as a manufacturing recession in the US deepens. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    And while shipping demand tends to be an economic bellwether of the global economy, it seems that semiconductors have priced in a recovery that might be fantasy. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Plunging shipping rates suggests the global economy continues to decelerate, not accelerate like everyone is hoping.

    The question is, what shocks people back into the view the macroeconomic headwinds counting to mount? Is it heighten geopolitical tensions in the Middle East? 


    Tyler Durden

    Wed, 01/08/2020 – 23:05

  • Come Home, America: Stop Policing The Globe And Put An End To Wars-Without-End
    Come Home, America: Stop Policing The Globe And Put An End To Wars-Without-End

    Authored by John Whitehead via The Rutherford Institute,

    Let us resolve that never again will we send the precious young blood of this country to die trying to prop up a corrupt military dictatorship abroad. This is also the time to turn away from excessive preoccupation overseas to the rebuilding of our own nation. America must be restored to a proper role in the world. But we can do that only through the recovery of confidence in ourselves…. together we will call America home to the ideals that nourished us from the beginning. From secrecy and deception in high places; come home, America. From military spending so wasteful that it weakens our nation; come home, America.”

    – George S. McGovern, former Senator and presidential candidate

    I agree wholeheartedly with George S. McGovern, a former Senator and presidential candidate who opposed the Vietnam War, about one thing: I’m sick of old men dreaming up wars for young men to die in.

    It’s time to bring our troops home.

    Bring them home from Somalia, Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria. Bring them home from Germany, South Korea and Japan. Bring them home from Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Oman. Bring them home from Niger, Chad and Mali. Bring them home from Turkey, the Philippines, and northern Australia.

    That’s not what’s going to happen, of course.

    The U.S. military reportedly has more than 1.3 million men and women on active duty, with more than 200,000 of them stationed overseas in nearly every country in the world. Those numbers are likely significantly higher in keeping with the Pentagon’s policy of not fully disclosing where and how many troops are deployed for the sake of “operational security and denying the enemy any advantage.” As investigative journalist David Vine explains, “Although few Americans realize it, the United States likely has more bases in foreign lands than any other people, nation, or empire in history.”

    Don’t fall for the propaganda, though: America’s military forces aren’t being deployed abroad to protect our freedoms here at home. Rather, they’re being used to guard oil fields, build foreign infrastructure and protect the financial interests of the corporate elite. In fact, the United States military spends about $81 billion a year just to protect oil supplies around the world.

    The reach of America’s military empire includes close to 800 bases in as many as 160 countries, operated at a cost of more than $156 billion annually. As Vine reports, “Even US military resorts and recreation areas in places like the Bavarian Alps and Seoul, South Korea, are bases of a kind. Worldwide, the military runs more than 170 golf courses.”

    This is how a military empire occupies the globe.

    Already, American military servicepeople are being deployed to far-flung places in the Middle East and elsewhere in anticipation of the war drums being sounded over Iran.

    This Iran crisis, salivated over by the neocons since prior to the Iraq War and manufactured by war hawks who want to jumpstart the next world war, has been a long time coming.

    Donald Trump, Barack Obama, George W. Bush, Bill Clinton: they all have done their part to ensure that the military industrial complex can continue to get rich at taxpayer expense.

    Take President Trump, for instance.

    Despite numerous campaign promises to stop America’s “endless wars,” once elected, Trump has done a complete about-face, deploying greater numbers of troops to the Middle East, ramping up the war rhetoric, and padding the pockets of defense contractors. Indeed, Trump is even refusing to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq in the face of a request from the Iraqi government for us to leave.

    Obama was no different: he also pledged—if elected—to bring the troops home from Iraq and Afghanistan and reduce America’s oversized, and overly costly, military footprint in the world. Of course, that didn’t happen.

    Yet while the rationale may keep changing for why American military forces are policing the globe, these wars abroad (in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Syria, Yemen and now Iran) aren’t making America—or the rest of the world—any safer, are certainly not making America great again, and are undeniably digging the U.S. deeper into debt.

    War spending is bankrupting America.

    Although the U.S. constitutes only 5% of the world’s population, America boasts almost 50% of the world’s total military expenditure, spending more on the military than the next 19 biggest spending nations combined.

    In fact, the Pentagon spends more on war than all 50 states combined spend on health, education, welfare, and safety.

    The American military-industrial complex has erected an empire unsurpassed in history in its breadth and scope, one dedicated to conducting perpetual warfare throughout the earth.

    Since 2001, the U.S. government has spent more than $4.7 trillion waging its endless wars.

    Having been co-opted by greedy defense contractors, corrupt politicians and incompetent government officials, America’s expanding military empire is bleeding the country dry at a rate of more than $32 million per hour.

    In fact, the U.S. government has spent more money every five seconds in Iraq than the average American earns in a year.

    Future wars and military exercises waged around the globe are expected to push the total bill upwards of $12 trillion by 2053.

    Talk about fiscally irresponsible: the U.S. government is spending money it doesn’t have on a military empire it can’t afford.

    As investigative journalist Uri Friedman puts it, for more than 15 years now, the United States has been fighting terrorism with a credit card, “essentially bankrolling the wars with debt, in the form of purchases of U.S. Treasury bonds by U.S.-based entities like pension funds and state and local governments, and by countries like China and Japan.”

    War is not cheap, but it becomes outrageously costly when you factor in government incompetence, fraud, and greedy contractors. Indeed, a leading accounting firm concluded that one of the Pentagon’s largest agencies “can’t account for hundreds of millions of dollars’ worth of spending.”

    Unfortunately, the outlook isn’t much better for the spending that can be tracked.

    A government audit found that defense contractor Boeing has been massively overcharging taxpayers for mundane parts, resulting in tens of millions of dollars in overspending. As the report noted, the American taxpayer paid:

    $71 for a metal pin that should cost just 4 cents; $644.75 for a small gear smaller than a dime that sells for $12.51: more than a 5,100 percent increase in price. $1,678.61 for another tiny part, also smaller than a dime, that could have been bought within DoD for $7.71: a 21,000 percent increase. $71.01 for a straight, thin metal pin that DoD had on hand, unused by the tens of thousands, for 4 cents: an increase of over 177,000 percent.

    That price gouging has become an accepted form of corruption within the American military empire is a sad statement on how little control “we the people” have over our runaway government.

    Mind you, this isn’t just corrupt behavior. It’s deadly, downright immoral behavior.

    Americans have thus far allowed themselves to be spoon-fed a steady diet of pro-war propaganda that keeps them content to wave flags with patriotic fervor and less inclined to look too closely at the mounting body counts, the ruined lives, the ravaged countries, the blowback arising from ill-advised targeted-drone killings and bombing campaigns in foreign lands, or the transformation of our own homeland into a warzone.

    That needs to change.

    The U.S. government is not making the world any safer. It’s making the world more dangerous. It is estimated that the U.S. military drops a bomb somewhere in the world every 12 minutes. Since 9/11, the United States government has directly contributed to the deaths of around 500,000 human beings. Every one of those deaths was paid for with taxpayer funds.

    The U.S. government is not making America any safer. It’s exposing American citizens to alarming levels of blowback, a CIA term referring to the unintended consequences of the U.S. government’s international activities. Chalmers Johnson, a former CIA consultant, repeatedly warned that America’s use of its military to gain power over the global economy would result in devastating blowback.

    The 9/11 attacks were blowback. The Boston Marathon Bombing was blowback. The attempted Times Square bomber was blowback. The Fort Hood shooter, a major in the U.S. Army, was blowback.

    The assassination of Iranian General Qasem Soleimani by a U.S. military drone strike will, I fear, spur yet more blowback against the American people.

    The war hawks’ militarization of America—bringing home the spoils of war (the military tanks, grenade launchers, Kevlar helmets, assault rifles, gas masks, ammunition, battering rams, night vision binoculars, etc.) and handing them over to local police, thereby turning America into a battlefield—is also blowback.

    James Madison was right:

    “No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.” As Madison explained, “Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes… known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few.”

    We are seeing this play out before our eyes.

    The government is destabilizing the economy, destroying the national infrastructure through neglect and a lack of resources, and turning taxpayer dollars into blood money with its endless wars, drone strikes and mounting death tolls.

    Clearly, our national priorities are in desperate need of an overhauling.

    At the height of its power, even the mighty Roman Empire could not stare down a collapsing economy and a burgeoning military. Prolonged periods of war and false economic prosperity largely led to its demise. As historian Chalmers Johnson predicts:

    The fate of previous democratic empires suggests that such a conflict is unsustainable and will be resolved in one of two ways. Rome attempted to keep its empire and lost its democracy. Britain chose to remain democratic and in the process let go its empire. Intentionally or not, the people of the United States already are well embarked upon the course of non-democratic empire.

    This is the “unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex” that President Dwight Eisenhower warned us more than 50 years ago not to let endanger our liberties or democratic processes.

    Eisenhower, who served as Supreme Commander of the Allied forces in Europe during World War II, was alarmed by the rise of the profit-driven war machine that emerged following the war—one that, in order to perpetuate itself, would have to keep waging war.

    We failed to heed his warning.

    As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, there’s not much time left before we reach the zero hour.

    It’s time to stop policing the globe, end these wars-without-end, and bring the troops home before it’s too late.


    Tyler Durden

    Wed, 01/08/2020 – 22:45

  • Top Repo Expert Warns Fed Is Now Trapped: "It Will Take Pain To Wean The Repo Market Off Easy Cash"
    Top Repo Expert Warns Fed Is Now Trapped: “It Will Take Pain To Wean The Repo Market Off Easy Cash”

    Yesterday we reported that with the Fed’s first oversubscribed term repo in three weeks…

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    … coupled with a surge in amount of overnight repo submission, indicated that the funding situation in the repo market had again deteriorated sharply, which was odd since we are now two weeks into the new year and further away from the time when the repo market was supposedly in distress due to the year-end funding constraints.

    Indeed, something appears amiss, because as Curvature Securities’ Scott Skyrm writes in his daily Repo Market Commentary note, the total overnight and term Fed RP operations on Friday were greater than on year end! On year-end, the Fed had pumped a total of $255.95 billion into the market verses $258.9 billion on Friday.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The problem with the broken repo market and the Fed’s respective Repo operations, similar to the problem observed with QE and the Fed’s balance sheet in general over the past decade, is that the market had gotten addicted to the easy Fed liquidity unleashed in September (via temporary repo ops), and then again in October (via permanent T-Bill purchases).

    As Skyrm writes, “it’s easy to see how the Repo market can get addicted to easy cash from the Fed when the stop-out rates for the RP operations are 1.55% – behind the offered side of the market.”

    But, as the repo strategist adds, as the Fed keeps injecting cash, the market gets used to it.

    Which is great in the short-term as it sends risk assets soaring, but become a major issue over the long-term: The long-term problem is that the some investor cash (real money cash) that was once going into the Repo market is now going elsewhere”, Skyrm explains.

    Indeed, the problem is that repo rates are trading in the lower end of the fed funds target range. When GC rates were higher in the range, Repo general collateral, as an investment, was more competitive than other overnight rates. But now that cash has gone to other markets.

    In short, just as the market got addicted to QE and the result was a 20% drop in the S&P in late 2018 when markets freaked out about Quantitative Tightening, the Fed’s shrinking balance sheet, and declining liquidity, Skyrm cautions that “it will take pain to wean the Repo market off of cheap Fed cash” since “it‘s a circle” which can be described as follows:

    For the Fed to end daily RP ops, they need outside cash to come back into the Repo market. For the Repo market to attract cash, Repo rates need to move higher. For rates to move higher, the Fed needs to stop RP ops.

    The problem is that stopping RP ops could spark another repo market crisis, especially with $259BN in liquidity pumped currently – more than at year end – via Repo. It also means that the Fed is now unilaterally blowing a market bubble with its repo and “NOT QE” injections, and yet the longer it does so the more impossible it becomes for the Fed to extricate itself from the liquidity pathway without causing a crash.

    Or stated simply, the longer the Fed avoids pulling the repo liquidity band-aid, the bigger the market fall when (if) it finally does. The question then becomes whether Powell can keep pushing on the repo string until the November election, because a market crash in the months preceding it, especially since it will be of the Fed’s own doing, will result in a very angry president.


    Tyler Durden

    Wed, 01/08/2020 – 22:25

  • Surveillance Capitalism: Weaponizing The Web To Manipulate Behavior
    Surveillance Capitalism: Weaponizing The Web To Manipulate Behavior

    Authored by Shoshanna Zuboff via Project Syndicate,

    Over the past two decades, an entirely new economic model has taken hold, seemingly right under our noses.

    Whereas the Internet and digital technologies once promised to liberate humanity through disintermediation and shared connections, now they have been turned into tools for behavioral manipulation and exploitation.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    As we enter a new decade, we are also entering a new era of political economy. Over the centuries, capitalism has evolved through a number of stages, from industrial to managerial to financial capitalism. Now we are entering the age of “surveillance capitalism.”

    Under surveillance capitalism, people’s lived experiences are unilaterally claimed by private companies and translated into proprietary data flows. Some of these data are used to improve products and services. The rest are considered a “behavioral surplus” and valued for their rich predictive signals. 

    These predictive data are shipped to new-age factories of machine intelligence where they are computed into highly profitable prediction products that anticipate your current and future choices. Prediction products are then traded in what I call “behavioral futures markets,” where surveillance capitalists sell certainty to their business customers. 

    Google’s “clickthrough rate” was the first globally successful prediction product, and its ad markets were the first to trade in human futures. Already, surveillance capitalists have grown immensely wealthy from these trading operations, and ever more companies across nearly every economic sector have shown an eagerness to lay bets on our future behavior.

    The competitive dynamics of these new markets reveal surveillance capitalism’s economic imperatives.

    First, machine intelligence demands a lot of data: economies of scale.

    Second, the best predictions also require varieties of data: economies of scope. This drove the extension of surplus capture beyond likes and clicks into the offline world: your jogging gait and pace; your breakfast conversation; your hunt for a parking space; your face, voice, personality, and emotions.

    In a third phase of competitive intensity, surveillance capitalists discovered that the most predictive data come from intervening in human action to coax, tune, herd, and modify behavior in the direction of guaranteed outcomes.

    This shift from knowledge to power transforms technology from a means of production to a global means of behavioral modification in order to achieve “economies of action.”

    …read more here.


    Tyler Durden

    Wed, 01/08/2020 – 22:05

  • California Judge Denies 'Gig Worker' Exemption To Freelance Journalists
    California Judge Denies ‘Gig Worker’ Exemption To Freelance Journalists

    A federal judge in California has refused to temporarily exempt freelance journalists from a new state labor law which cripples their income by limiting them to just 35 articles per year, according to CBS affiliate KPIX5.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez who introduced the measure. (Rich Pedroncelli / AP)

    US District Judge Philip Guiterrez in Los Angeles denied a request for a temporary halt to the law, AB5, by two freelancers’ organizations – ruling that they waited too long to file their opposition while he takes more time to consider their objections ahead of a March hearing.

    The judge said the groups waited three months to sue after the bill was signed into law, and just two weeks before it took effect. They sought the temporary restraining order just a day before it became effective.

    “Plaintiffs’ delay belies their claim that there is an emergency,” Gutierrez said in his ruling Friday. There would have been time for a full hearing had they “promptly filed” their objections, he wrote. –KPIX5

    AB5, went into effect January 1st, and has already resulted in outlets like Vox Media cutting ties with hundreds of freelance writers in California. An attorney for one of the groups said on Monday that the harm to California freelance journalists has been immediate.

    “Freelance journalists in California are losing work each day AB 5 remains in effect,” said Jim Manley, an attorney for the nonprofit libertarian Pacific Legal Foundation, although the judge’s decision to wait until March for a full hearing “is understandable given the gravity of the issues.”

    The American Society of Journalists and Authors and the National Press Photographers Association contend that the law would unconstitutionally affect free speech and the media by imposing what their lawsuit calls an “irrational and arbitrary” limit of 35 submissions annually to each media outlet. –KPIX5

    I know many people who would hit that cap for an outlet in a single week, let alone in a year,” freelance journalist Alisha Grauso of Santa Monica, California told The Bold Italic. “The 35 submission cap might work for a writer at a traditional outlet or magazine who is writing a 5,000-word piece for a dollar a word, but the vast majority of writers have gigs that are far more versatile”

    The law, designed to ‘protect’ Uber and Lyft drivers, along with those who deliver food for companies such as DoorDash and Postmates, does not apply to over 700,000 independent truckers after a different judge temporarily blocked AB5 from impacting them.

    Uber and Postmates, meanwhile, have filed a separate lawsuit, arguing that it violates federal and state constitutional guarantees of due process and equal protection. They have filed to attach their objections to the freelancers’ lawsuit in front of the same judge.


    Tyler Durden

    Wed, 01/08/2020 – 21:45

    Tags

  • Rickards: Here's Where Gold Will Be In 2026
    Rickards: Here’s Where Gold Will Be In 2026

    Authored by James Rickards via The Daily Reckoning,

    Gold spiked after last Friday’s drone strike that took out a top Iranian military official and is trading at seven-year highs.

    Yes, the news was dramatic and made a major impact. But geopolitics is just one factor driving gold. Even without the latest geopolitical tensions, gold is poised for a historic run.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The first two major gold bull markets were 1971–80 and 1999–2011. Today, gold is in the early stages of its third bull market in 50 years.

    If we simply average the performance of the past two bull markets and extend the new bull market on that basis, we would expect to see prices peak at $14,000 per ounce by 2026.

    What’s driving the new gold bull market?

    From both long-term and short-term perspectives, there are three principal drivers:

    1. geopolitics,

    2. supply and demand and,

    3. Fed interest rate policy

    (the dollar price of gold is just the inverse of dollar strength. A strong dollar = a lower dollar price of gold, and a weak dollar = a higher dollar price of gold. Fed rate policy determines if the dollar is strong or weak).

    The first two factors have been driving the price of gold higher since 2015 and will continue to do so. Geopolitical hot spots like Iran, Korea, Crimea, Venezuela, China and Syria remain unresolved. Some are getting worse.

    Each flare-up drives a flight to safety that boosts gold along with Treasury notes, as the latest incident shows.

    The supply/demand situation remains favorable with Russia and China buying over 50 tons per month to build up their reserves while global mining output has been flat for at least five years.

    The third factor, Fed policy, is the hardest to forecast and the most powerful on a day-to-day basis.

    But there’s little chance that the Fed will be raising rates anytime soon. It’s much more likely to cut rates as the U.S. economy faces strong headwinds, especially from rising debt levels. Debt is growing faster than the economy.

    Debt is now at the highest levels since World War II. We’re nearly in the same position on a relative basis as we were in 1945.

    Because of the natural deflationary state of the world and the high debt-to-GDP ratio, growth has been snuffed out.

    And based on Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projections — which I think are conservative — the debt-to-GDP ratio is going to keep going up.

    There is no way out except inflation.

    Add it all up and the environment is highly favorable for gold. But if you want evidence that owning gold is probably the best way to guard your wealth, just look at the “smart money.”

    I’m sure you’ve seen plenty of billionaire hedge fund managers on business TV or streaming live from Davos. They like to discuss their investments in Apple, Amazon, Treasury notes and other stocks and bonds.

    They love to “talk their book” in the hope that other investors will piggyback on their trades, run up the price and produce more profits for them.

    What they almost never discuss in public is gold. After all, why have gold when stocks and bonds are so wonderful?

    Well, I worked on Wall Street and in the hedge fund industry for decades. I also lived among the players in New York and Greenwich, Connecticut, at the same time. I’ve met the top hedge fund gurus in private settings. And here’s the thing:

    I’ve never met one of them who does not have a large hoard of physical gold stored safely in a nonbank vault. Not one.

    Of course, they won’t say so on TV because they don’t want to spook retail investors into dumping stocks and bonds. But watch what they do, not what they say.

    If gold bullion is the go-to asset for billionaires, why don’t small investors have at least a 10% allocation to gold and silver bullion just in case?

    Some do, but most don’t. They’ll find out the hard way what individuals have learned over centuries and millennia. Gold preserves wealth; paper assets do not.

    A global monetary reset is coming, with gold at its center. It can either be an orderly process – or a chaotic one…


    Tyler Durden

    Wed, 01/08/2020 – 21:25

  • The USA Has Been Bombing Iraq For 29 Years
    The USA Has Been Bombing Iraq For 29 Years

    Over the past days while little real debate over the Iran crisis has happened in Washington or Congress (instead it’s merely the default drones and “bombs away” as usual), the American public has been busy online and in living rooms debating the merits or lack thereof of escalation and potential war with Iran. 

    However, like with many other instances of US foreign policy adventurism, this is typically a “debate” lacking in necessary recent historical context or appreciation for how the domino effect of disasters now facing American security were often brought on by prior US action in the first place. As a case in point, it’s not recognized often enough in public discourse that it was the United States under the neocon Bush administration which handed Iraq over to “Iranian influence” and the Shia clerics in the first place.

    It must be remembered that Saddam Hussein was a secular Sunni dictator presiding over a Shia majority population, and he was enemy #1 of Iran. Team USA’s short-sighted and criminal 2003 invasion and overthrow of Saddam based on WMD lies had the immediate benefit to Tehran of handing the Ayatollah the greatest gift that Iran waged a nearly decade-long war to accomplish, but couldn’t (the 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq War).

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    U.S. bombing of Baghdad in 2003. 

    And the neocons within the bowels of the national security state have ever since been attempting to salvage their failed legacy in Iraq by the futile effort of trying to contain Iran and roll back Shia dominance in Baghdad, as Seymour Hersh detailed in his famous 2006 New Yorker piece The Redirection, which accurately predicted the ‘long war’ against the Hezbollah-Damascus-Baghdad-Tehran axis which would unfold, and did indeed unfold, especially in Syria of the past eight years. 

    To “situate” the past week’s dramatic events, it’s also crucial to understand, as The Libertarian Institute’s Scott Horton has pointed out, that “The U.S.A. has been bombing Iraq for 29 years. And it looks like it’s not over yet.”

    Below is an essential timeline compiled by Horton of that nearly three decade long history where Iraq has been consistently subject to American bombs and intervention — yet ironically (and some might say predictably) the situation is still getting worse, more unstable, and more dangerous.

    * * *

    The U.S.A. has been bombing Iraq for 29 years. And it looks like it’s not over yet:

    Iraq War I: January—February 1991 (aka The Gulf War, Operation Desert Storm, liberation of Kuwait)

    Iraq War I 1/2: February 1991—March 2003 (The rest of Bush I, Bill Clinton years, economic blockade and no-fly zone bombings)

    Iraq War II: March 2003—December 2011 (aka Operation Iraqi Freedom, W. Bush’s invasion and war for the Shi’ite side)

    Iraq War III: August 2014—December 2017 (aka Operation Inherent Resolve, the war against the Islamic State, which America had helped to build up in Syria but then launched this war to destroy, on behalf of the Shi’ite government in Baghdad, after ISIS had seized the predominately Sunni west of the country in the early summer of 2014 and declared the Islamic State “Caliphate”)

    Iraq War III 1/2: December 2017—January 2020 (The “mopping-up” war against the remnants of ISIS which has had the U.S. still allied with the very same Shi’ite militias they fought Iraq War II and III for, but are now attacking)

    Iraq War IV: Now—?

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    As Scott Horton suggests, the roots of the current crisis lie all the way back in the mid-20th century

    In 1953, the American CIA overthrew the elected prime minister of Iran in favor of the Shah Reza Pahlavi who ruled a dictatorship there for 26 years until in 1979 a popular revolution overthrew his government and installed the Shi’ite Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in power.

    So in 1980, President Jimmy Carter’s government gave Iraq’s Saddam Hussein the green light to invade Iran, a war which the U.S. continued to support throughout the Ronald Reagan years, though they also sold weapons to the Iranian side at times.

    But then in 1990, Iraq invaded Kuwait in a dispute over debts from the recent war with Iran, with some encouragement by the U.S. government, leading to America’s Iraq War I, aka the first Gulf War or Operation Desert Storm at the beginning of 1991.

    And that was merely the very beginning. 

    Read the rest of the story and the excellent brief history of how we got here over at The Libertarian Institute


    Tyler Durden

    Wed, 01/08/2020 – 21:05

  • Virginia Wants To Close Non-Govt Gun Ranges And Create Ammo-Free Zones
    Virginia Wants To Close Non-Govt Gun Ranges And Create Ammo-Free Zones

    Authored by Daisy Luther via The Organic Prepper blog,

    If you thought the law that would effectively ban semi-automatic weapons in Virginia was draconian, just wait. The General Assembly isn’t done trampling the Second Amendment yet. They have lots more potential felonies in store for gun owners.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Let’s take a look at HB567 and HB318.

    HB567 wants to ensure gun ranges are government-owned.

    In a blow not only to gun owners but also to small business owners, HB567 would outlaw many indoor gun ranges that are not owned by the state government. What’s more, the private ranges allowed would have to cater to law enforcement as their primary clientele. And they’re not done yet – the gun ranges would serve as data-collection points.

    Here’s the text of the summary. (Emphasis mine)

    As used in this section, “indoor shooting range” means any fully enclosed or indoor area or facility designed for the use of rifles, shotguns, pistols, silhouettes, skeet, trap, or black powder or any other similar sport shooting.

    B. It is unlawful to operate an indoor shooting range in any building not owned or leased by the Commonwealth or the federal government unless (i) fewer than 50 employees work in the building or (ii) (a) at least 90 percent of the users of the indoor shooting range are law-enforcement officers, as defined in § 9.1-101, or federal law-enforcement officers, (b) the indoor shooting range maintains a log of each user’s name, phone number, address, and the law-enforcement agency where such user is employed, and (c) the indoor shooting range verifies each user’s identity and address by requiring all users to present a government-issued photo-identification card(source)

    So very small indoor gun ranges might be able to continue to operate (for now) but the large, high-quality ranges that also serve as instruction facilities or have attached gun stores could have too many employees to continue to operate if the new bill becomes a law.

    It’s interesting that the state government claims to want to make the state safer, but at the same time, they want to close facilities where gun-owners hone their skills, accuracy, education, and safe usage of firearms.

    The penalties for breaking this law would be civil, with a fine of up to $100,000 on the first infraction and an additional $5000 per day if the defiance continues.

    HB318 would create ammunition-free zones.

    Making about as much sense as the law that caused the original hullaballoo – the one that would ban weapons that “could” possess extended magazines, even if the owner has no such magazines – HB318 would send anyone in the possession of ammunition to prison for a currently-undetermined amount of time.

    I suppose they’re concerned that someone might have ammo in a gun-free zone and throw it really hard, causing a mass casualty incident? This would-be law encompasses more than ammunition. It also includes the possession of stun weapons and knives with metal blades.

    Here’s the text of the bill, again, emphasis mine.

    A. If any person knowingly possesses any (i) stun weapon as defined in this section; (ii) knife, except a pocket knife having a folding metal blade of less than three inches; or (iii) weapon, including a weapon of like kind, designated in subsection A of § 18.2-308, other than a firearm; or (iv) ammunition for a firearm, as defined in § 18.2-308.2, upon (a) the property of any public, private, or religious elementary, middle, or high school, including buildings and grounds; (b) that portion of any property open to the public and then exclusively used for school-sponsored functions or extracurricular activities while such functions or activities are taking place; or (c) any school bus owned or operated by any such school, he is guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor.

    B. If any person knowingly possesses any firearm designed or intended to expel a projectile by action of an explosion of a combustible material while such person is upon (i) any public, private or religious elementary, middle or high school, including buildings and grounds; (ii) that portion of any property open to the public and then exclusively used for school-sponsored functions or extracurricular activities while such functions or activities are taking place; or (iii) any school bus owned or operated by any such school, he is guilty of a Class 6 felony. (source)

    There are a few exemptions that would allow law enforcement officers, former law enforcement officers, and concealed carry permit holders or those who use knives with metal blades in their trades, to have their unloaded weapons locked securely in their trunk while they are in traffic circles and parking lots. However, a regular person who happens to have an extra cartridge floating around the bottom of her purse (who doesn’t?) could potentially become a felon if tried by some over-zealous, anti-2A prosecutor.

    Those exceptions would exist initially but at the rate new laws are being proposed, I wouldn’t count on the exceptions on a long-term basis.

    Coincidentally, Governor Northam has increased his detention budget.

    You probably recall a member of the state congress’s threats about dispatching the National Guard to confiscate weapons and the Virginia Attorney General’s opinion that sanctuary municipalities have no legal weight.

    But that’s not all. Governor Northam is going to be specifically funding gun control efforts with an additional quarter of a million dollars in the newly proposed state budget.

    Included in the appropriation for this Item is $250,000 the first year from the general fund for the estimated net increase in the operating cost of adult correctional facilities resulting from the enactment of sentencing legislation as listed below. This amount shall be paid into the Corrections Special Reserve Fund, established pursuant to § 30-19.1:4, Code of Virginia.

    1. Allow the removal of firearms from persons who pose substantial risk to themselves or others — $50,000

    2. Prohibit the sale, possession, and transport of assault firearms, trigger activators, and silencers — $50,000

    3. Increase the penalty for allowing a child to access unsecured firearms — $50,000

    4. Prohibit possession of firearms for persons subject to final orders of protection — $50,000

    5. Require background checks for all firearms sales — $50,000. (source)

    So for those who say, “Nobody is trying to take your guns” the evidence in these proposals clearly disputes this opinion.

    91% of the state is staunchly defiant.

    Virginians have been defiant in the face of these attacks on the Second Amendment, with Tazewell County going as far as creating an official militia and the sheriff of Culpeper County vowing to deputize thousands of citizens to protect their rights.

    Practically the entire state has vowed to protect the rights of gun owners and the movement is still growing, as shown by the map below.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    A recent job listing for disarmament officers at the United Nations New York office has many concerned that confiscation efforts could go beyond calling up a National Guard that may be less than enthusiastic about taking away the rights of their friends, family members, and neighbors.

    The votes on these gun control bills and budget appropriations will be held in the first couple of months of 2020.

    “This is going to be an exciting couple of months,” Gov. Ralph Northam (D) said Monday. (source)

    It certainly is, Governor Northam.


    Tyler Durden

    Wed, 01/08/2020 – 20:45

    Tags

  • Antifa Critic Barred From Speaking By University Of British Columbia
    Antifa Critic Barred From Speaking By University Of British Columbia

    Authored by Jonathan Turley,

    I have previously written about my criticism to Antifa and its anti-free speech agenda, including academics legitimizing efforts to violently curtail free speech on our campuses. It is tragically ironic therefore that the University of British Columbia has cancelled an event by a critic of Antifa, a decision that carries out precisely the goals of this vehemently anti-free speech organization.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Portland journalist Andy Ngo was scheduled to speak on campus when the school, reportedly without notice, canceled the event due to an unspecified “concern about the safety and security of our campus community.”

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The reference to security is an all-too-familiar excuse of universities to shutdown speakers, particularly conservative speakers, while insisting that the move is not content-based discrimination. Berkeley and other schools like DePaul University have used the mob to justify cancelling speakers. That institutionalizes the “Heckler’s Veto” so that a mob need only threaten violence and the school then cancels the speech…which is what the mob was demanding.

    Even an event with former Attorney General Jeff Sessions was disrupted by the protesters. The cancellation of the Sessions event was another disgrace for Northwestern which has yielded to such tactics by students. It was a triumph for those who want to deny free speech to those with whom they disagree. Censoring speech has become a badge of honor for some. It has not stopped at simply stopping speeches and classes.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    We have been discussing the rising intolerance and violence on college campuses, particularly against conservative speakers. (here and here and here and here). Berkeley has been the focus of much concern over mob rule on our campuses as violent protesters have succeeded in silencing speakers, even including a few speakers like an ACLU official.  Both students and some faculty have maintained the position that they have a right to silence those with whom they disagree and even student newspapers have declared opposing speech to be outside of the protections of free speech.  At another University of California campus, professors actually rallied around a professor who physically assaulted pro-life advocates and tore down their display.  In the meantime, academics and deans have said that there is no free speech protection for offensive or “disingenuous” speech.  CUNY Law Dean Mary Lu Bilek showed how far this trend has gone. When conservative law professor Josh Blackman was stopped from speaking about “the importance of free speech,”  Bilek insisted that disrupting the speech on free speech was free speech

    Ngo was invited to speak at a January 29th event on “Understanding ANTIFA violence.” Ngo was assaulted  while covering a protest in Portland.

    I remain highly skeptical of these claims of security concerns that seem to consistently be applied to critics of Antifa or conservative speakers. Universities cannot fulfill our core mission if we are going to yield to such mob threats and harassment. This is doing the work of the mob — a triumph of the heckler’s veto.


    Tyler Durden

    Wed, 01/08/2020 – 20:05

  • 75% Of Registered Voters Can't Identify Iran On A Map
    75% Of Registered Voters Can’t Identify Iran On A Map

    As thousands of American service members prepare for the worst in the Middle East following an American drone strike that killed Iran’s second-most powerful man, just 23% of registered voters can identify the Islamic republic on an unlabeled map of the globe, according to a Morning Consult/Politico survey.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    When shown an unlabeled map of just the Middle East, the number rose to a still-abysmal 28%. Eight percent of those thought Iran was Iraq on the second map – just like Joe Biden.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Of those surveyed, men were around twice as likely as women to identify Iran on both maps – roughly in line with a 2017 Morning Consult experiment involving North Korea. Wealthier and more educated voters were also more likely to get it right.

    Political affiliation and age were not significant factors.

    News of Soleimani’s death — which 49 percent of voters reported hearing “a lot” about —  brought new attention to U.S. policy in the Middle East, with high-profile Democrats questioning whether there was a strategy behind the attack at Baghdad International Airport ordered by President Donald Trump. 

    Voters were more likely to support (47 percent) the airstrike that killed Soleimani than oppose it (40 percent). Attitudes on Trump’s call fell neatly along partisan lines: 70 percent of Democrats disapproved of the strike while 85 percent of Republicans approved of it, including 61 percent of Republicans who strongly approved. –Morning Consult

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Meanwhile, despite a majority of respondents backing the strike, 69% said they thought the Soleimani assassination made war with Iran more likely, and half said they think it made America less safe.

    The survey, conducted Jan. 4-5 before Iran shelled two Iraq air bases housing US troops, was asked of 1,995 registered voters and has a margin of error of two percentage points.


    Tyler Durden

    Wed, 01/08/2020 – 19:45

    Tags

  • Housing Data Consistent With A Recession In 2020
    Housing Data Consistent With A Recession In 2020

    Authored by Mike Shedlock via MishTalk,

    Over the past year, 4 housing indicators have moved in ways consistent with patterns seen in 3 previous recessions.

    Housing is Signaling a Recession

    Despite optimistic talk from Fed regional presidents, a St. Louis Fed study concludes Housing Indicators Remain Consistent With a Broader Slowdown in 2020.

    Key Takeaways

    • Over the past year, four housing indicators have moved in ways consistent with patterns seen before three previous recessions.

    • These indicators are mortgage rates, existing home sales, real house prices and the momentum of residential investment.

    • More recent housing data still point to a slowdown, albeit a less severe one.

    1: 30-Year Fixed Mortgage Rates

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    NOTES: The figure shows the average quarterly 30-year fixed mortgage rate minus the average of the previous three years (12 quarters). Each line shows three years of data before and after a recession; time zero is the quarter in which a recession began. The first quarter of the recession is indicated in the line label (key): the fourth quarter of 1990, second quarter of 2001 and first quarter of 2008.

    Consistent with earlier cycles, the average 30-year fixed mortgage rate has declined significantly even though a recession has not begun. Figure 1 updates the path of this long-term mortgage rate through the third quarter of 2019.2 The last observation of about one-half of one percentage point below the most recent three-year moving average is identical to the level one quarter before the onset of the 2001 recession and is just below the level one quarter before the 1990-91 recession. Hence, this indicator remains consistent with—though still does not guarantee—an imminent recession.

    2: Existing Home Sales

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    NOTES: The figure shows the percent difference between the current rate of existing single-family home sales (four-quarter average) and the average annualized sales rate during the previous three years (12 quarters).

    The pace of existing home sales relative to their recent trend rate continued to slow during 2019. (See Figure 2.) Despite a modest upturn in the third quarter of 2019, this indicator remains firmly in the range observed prior to the 1990-91 and 2001 recessions. In contrast to the Great Recession, the decline in home sales since dipping below zero has been much more moderate.

    3: Real House Prices

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    NOTES: The figure shows the four-quarter percent change in the CoreLogic Home Price Index, deflated by the Personal Consumption Expenditures (PCE) Chain-Weighted Price Index, minus the annualized percent change during the previous three years (12 quarters).

    Qualitatively, the recent behavior of inflation-adjusted home-price growth relative to its recent trend rate (shown in Figure 3) is very similar to the patterns of the two previous indicators—that is, it mirrors the run-up to the relatively mild 1990-91 and 2001 recessions and is unlike the pattern just before the Great Recession.

    4: Contribution of Residential Investment to GDP Growth

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    NOTES: The figure shows the four-quarter average contribution to real GDP growth minus the annualized contribution during the previous three years (12 quarters).

    If any of the highlighted housing indicators hints at a departure from the typical recessionary pattern it is the contribution of residential investment to GDP growth. (See Figure 4.) Despite some improvement over the course of 2019, residential investment continued to be a drag on economic growth through the third quarter, albeit a slightly smaller one than before. Of all four indicators, this one most closely resembles the patterns seen before the two relatively mild recessions of 1990-91 and 2001 versus the more severe Great Recession.

    Conclusion: Housing Indicators Still Signal Recession, Albeit a Less Severe One

    The value of leading indicators – from housing variables to the slope of the yield curve – is that they offer an opportunity to prepare for a possible economic slowdown or outright downturn. A recent example is the Federal Reserve’s dramatic turn from a program of monetary tightening in 2018 to an easing of policy in 2019.

    One hazard of leading indicators is that they can lead to misinterpretation and complacency. If the economic slowdown signaled by weakening housing indicators and some portions of the U.S. Treasury yield curve inverting in 2019 does not begin immediately, some observers may think the precautions undertaken in response to the signals, such as the Fed’s recent easing of monetary policy, can void the signals themselves and pre-empt a recession.

    This would run counter to the historical patterns documented in this article: The Fed eased monetary policy and mortgage rates plunged in advance of each of the three previous recessions, yet the economy still went into a downturn. Thus, the value of leading indicators may lie more in their role as early warning signals that help us better prepare for, rather than outright prevent, a recession.

    This time could be different, however, if the Fed’s timely interest rate cuts and other factors in fact help to prevent a recession in late 2019 or 2020. If that happens, we should re-examine the indicators that have been successful in signaling recessions in the past. In the meantime, we should not dismiss their salience.

    Why Are Interest Rates Down?

    This is certainly an interesting study and runs in sharp contrast to recent Fed statements that the economy is sound.

    It also in contrast to those who suggest lower interest rate will revive housing.

    Rather, rates are down precisely because the economy is weakening.

    Service Sector Expansion

    Earlier today I reported ISM Service Index Up, 11 Sectors Expanding, 6 Contracting.

    But Guess What: Real Estate and Rental & Leasing are two of the sectors in contraction.

    New Home Sales Badly Miss Expectations

    On December 23, I reported New Home Sales Badly Miss Expectations

    New home sales rose 1.3% in November but only because of huge downward revisions.

    And here’s another Guess What: The St Louis Fed Study came out a week before that massive downward revision in new home sales.

    Manufacturing

    Also on December 23, I reported Economists Wrong on Durable Goods By an Amazing 3.9 Percentage Points.

    Nine States in or Near Contraction

    And please note that a Philadelphia Fed study projects Nine States Projected to Contract in 2020

    Mideast tensions cannot possibly help.

    So why would it stop at nine?

    Other than that, everything is just dandy except of course leverage, hedge fund record long bets on S&P 500 futures, valuations through the roof, a huge slowdown in Germany, capital controls in China, and a big signal from gold that something is very wrong.


    Tyler Durden

    Wed, 01/08/2020 – 19:25

  • As Victoria's Secret Models Got Thinner, American Women Got Angrier
    As Victoria’s Secret Models Got Thinner, American Women Got Angrier

    A recent study suggests that Victoria’s Secret’s SJW critics, who last year helped kill the lingerie purveyors’ annual fashion show (much to the consternation of red-blooded straight men (and maybe some gay women), might be on to something.

    Offering some insight into L Brands’ recent troubles (we’re not talking about Epstein) – something that we’ve explored in-depth in the past – one recent study purportedly quantified the trend of VS angels’ shrinking waists over the years. It found that the company’s models’ midsections have shrunk by about an inch since the company launched the show, from an average of 24.7 inches in 1995, to about 23.6 in 2018, the last year that it was held. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    As one doctor who spoke to the New York Post explained, shaving an inch off one’s waist is extremely hard to do, especially when you’re already model thin. To achieve something like that, models reportedly undergo grueling prep routines that include workouts that would befit an Olympian, and crash diets that sometimes amount to just bone broth and water.

    “To slim an inch off one’s waist – that’s very hard to do,” Dr. Neelam Vashi, the lead author of the research paper, told WBUR.

    The company’s merchandise has been criticized for not reflecting the true physical proportions of most American women. And as analysts have pointed out time and time again, VS’s sizing has often deliberately excluded millions of American women, often to the detriment of sales growth.

    Because how can a company sell more bras if the underwear they’re making are getting smaller, while the people who are supposed to be wearing it are getting bigger.

    To underscore this point, the New York Post approached some shoppers at the VS flagship store near Herald Square on Sunday to ask about their experience.

    Several shoppers coming out of the Victoria’s Secret near Herald Square on Sunday said their trip to the store was a bust – because everything was too small.

    “I only got one bra because most of the stuff doesn’t fit women like us,” said 37-year-old Amy De La Cruz of herself and her daughters.

    Another shopper said she only sometimes stops by VS for “perfume and lipgloss” because none of the clothes fit her.

    A 47-year-old woman who would only give her first name, Andrea, said: “I mostly go for lipgloss and fragrances because I know they don’t have anything that fits me there.”

    Many interpreted VS’s decision to cancel the fashion show as a harbinger of a more “woke” VS. Sales have apparently gotten to such a crisis point, that some of salespeople at VS retail locations have embraced the hard sell: encouraging customers to go lose some weight, then come back.

    And 27-year-old Manhattanite Amy Issa called the study’s results “disappointing” and “devastating.”

    “Even the people that work here they push you to lose weight they would say things like, ‘oh you can’t fit in this maybe next month if you lose a few pounds it’ll fit you,'” Issa said.

    The clothing brand has already taken its first tentative steps toward embracing the body-positive movement by hiring its first size 14 model. We expect its next collection will move even further toward selling women “reality” instead of “fantasy.”


    Tyler Durden

    Wed, 01/08/2020 – 19:05

  • Was Marx Right About Capitalism Destroying Itself From Within?
    Was Marx Right About Capitalism Destroying Itself From Within?

    Authored by Charles Hugh Smith via OfTwoMinds blog,

    What are the internal contradictions that could unravel capitalism from within?

    One of the core tenets of Marx’s work is that capitalism will be undone by internal contradictions that would manifest as ever-greater crises that would eventually destroy the system from within.

    As the global economy continues to unravel beneath the surface, it’s a good time to re-examine Marx’s claim. If if turns out the current version of global capitalism is indeed unraveling due to its internal contradictions, it would be valuable to understand this now rather than later.

    Sartre once observed that students are only taught enough about Marx’s work to refute it. Despite the difficulty of Marx’s writings (only German philosophers can be so convoluted), its elevation to scripture by various academic tribes, and his failure to describe his “scientific socialism” alternative to capitalism in the same detail he devoted to his critique of capitalism, Marx’s work remains relevant and insightful.

    Thus we continue to see articles such as Capitalism is unfolding exactly as Karl Marx predicted.

    I’m not in either of the two camps, those trained to dismiss Marx’s critiques or those who devote their careers to jousting over Marxist minutiae. It’s been decades since I studied Marx in a college classroom, but I’ve continued to apply his core insights to our era.

    To understand Marx’s critique of capitalism, we have to understand that he came to economics via philosophy, specifically the writings of Hegel. In other words, Marx did not approach the study of capitalism from the abstractions of classical 19th century economics (Marx was born in 1818) but from a profound interest in history, social and spiritual development and human alienation. Marx ended up devoting his life to an understanding of capitalism because it is a world-system that drives history and society.

    Hegel believed human history wasn’t just “one damn thing after another;” he saw it as teleological, i.e. on a trajectory leading to higher social and spiritual development. Given this context, it’s little wonder that Marx viewed capitalism as a necessary stage of history creating the conditions for the next advancement.

    Prior to Marx, classical economic theories focused on the dynamics of supply and demand, trade, credit and money. Adam Smith was also a philosopher (and a close friend of David Hume), and he devoted an entire book to the moral foundations of capitalism, The Theory of Moral Sentiments, before he wrote The Wealth of Nations, which focused on what he termed “commercial society,” what we now call political economy.

    While Smith focused on the moral foundation of decentralized self-organizing markets that automatically benefit all participants (via “the invisible hand”), Marx focused on the conflicting interests of capital and labor, and on capitalism’s unending disruption of the social and economic orders, a dynamic captured in Marx’s famous observation that “everything melts into air.”

    What are the internal contradictions that could unravel capitalism from within? I don’t claim this is an exhaustive list, or that it would gain the approval of academic overlords of Marxist scripture, but “in the spirit of Marxist thought,” these are potentially fatal dynamics that are unfolding in real time in the current version of global/monopoly/finance capitalism.

    Each of these deserves a serious essay but for now, let’s just review the list in broad-brush.

    1. Traditional social structures “melt into air” but have no replacement. The owners of Big tech would have us believe social media, search and endless entertainment are enough to to replace all that’s being dismantled, but that claim is both self-serving and absurd. Society is unraveling before our eyes and an addiction to small screens is not a replacement for what’s being lost.

    2. Marx described the inevitability of overcapacity and overproduction as capital seeks to establish dominant market share (as one path to monopoly and pricing power), and we see this in industry after industry. As overcapacity expands, profits plummet, pushing capital into speculative gambles that inevitably blow up.

    3. Capital gains, labor loses ground–to automation, over-supply of conventional labor and to consolidation as entire layers of management and distribution are wiped out. Thomas Piketty described how the rate of growth of capital far exceeds that of the real economy and labor’s share of that economy. As a result, we are reaching extreme concentrations of wealth and political power that are unleashing destructive disorder as elites struggle to maintain their control of the downwardly mobile masses.

    4. Monopolies and cartels push prices higher, but not wages. As many of us have noted, costs of big-ticket essentials have been soaring for two decades while wages have been stagnant (when measured by purchasing power) for the bottom 95%. The stop-gap “solution” is to borrow money from future earnings to pay for life today, but this is a self-liquidating dynamic: eventually incomes are too overcommitted to support more debt, and defaults take down the entire system of debt and consumption.

    5. Finance capital, i.e. financialization, has reached diminishing returns: there’s literally nothing left to monetize, leverage and securitize. Much of the “wealth” created in the 21st century is phantom wealth generated by financialization. There is no substitute sources for trillions of dollars in income and capital gains as the financialization sputters and then blows up as bets go bad, counterparties fail to pay and defaults overwhelm a system that must expand or die.

    6. The unholy alliance of Capital and the State: we call it pay-to-play, but the unholy alliance of State and Capital goes much deeper. The State legalizes the looting and power of Capital, and Capital returns the favor.

    7. Energy and waste. Marx did not foresee the depletion of irreplaceable energy sources, but the stupendous waste of resources built into our consumption-based, credit-based industrial economy falls within his critique of commodity fetishism.

    That there is no substitute for high-density hydrocarbon fuels is a reality that elicits the most passionate forms of denial and magical thinking, and as we consume the cheapest-to-access energy to squander in global traffic jams, military misadventures, planned obsolescence, etc., the energy growth demanded by the system will fail to appear at a cost affordable to the bottom 80%. At that point the entire system implodes.

    8. Marketing is the savior of capitalism. The most profitable and valuable enterprises globally are engaged in collecting and selling data–marketing. This is the savior of capitalism, which as noted above, has reached the end-game of financialization, globalization, etc.–what Immanuel Wallerstein characterized as “capitalism no longer works for capitalists.”

    The assumption that marketing will save the system by generating new trillions in income and wealth assumes consumers have abundant disposable income (or credit) to spend. If incomes decline, and/or rising costs strip disposable income to the bone, then how valuable is all the data that’s being collected and sold as the key to profits and wealth? The unraveling of the credit-based consumer economy will also reveal the limits of marketing as the “industry” that will save capitalism from the decline of profits, capital and credit.

    The power of this data-collection-as-unpaid-work is described in this article: You Are Literally Working for Silicon Valley and Don’t Know It The digital economy has been called ‘surveillance capitalism,’ but that doesn’t capture how insidious it really is.

    A chart of the relentless concentration of wealth at the very apex of the wealth-power pyramid:

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    A chart of the relentless decline of wages’ share of the economy’s total income:

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    How many of these dynamics have to play out to collapse the current version of global/monopoly/finance capitalism? We have a ringside seat to the spectacle, and we’ll likely know within the next decade.

    *  *  *

    My recent books:

    Will You Be Richer or Poorer? Profit, Power and A.I. in a Traumatized World (Kindle $6.95, print $11.95) Read the first section for free (PDF).

    Pathfinding our Destiny: Preventing the Final Fall of Our Democratic Republic ($6.95 (Kindle), $12 (print), $13.08 ( audiobook): Read the first section for free (PDF).

    The Adventures of the Consulting Philosopher: The Disappearance of Drake $1.29 (Kindle), $8.95 (print); read the first chapters for free (PDF)

    Money and Work Unchained $6.95 (Kindle), $15 (print) Read the first section for free (PDF).

    *  *  *

    If you found value in this content, please join me in seeking solutions by becoming a $1/month patron of my work via patreon.com.


    Tyler Durden

    Wed, 01/08/2020 – 18:45

  • Satellite Images Reveal Damage Of Iranian Strike On Iraqi Air Base
    Satellite Images Reveal Damage Of Iranian Strike On Iraqi Air Base

    National Public Radio (NPR) has published one of the first satellite images showing the damage from the Iranian missile strike at the Ain Assad Air Base located in Al Anbar Governorate of western Iraq, which hosts US and British troops.

    The images, taken by Planet Labs and shared with NPR via the Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey, show at least five sites on the base heavily damaged from the Iranian missile strike on Tuesday night.

    David Schmerler, an analyst with the Middlebury Institute, told NPR that the high high-resolution satellite images of the base taken after the attack showed at least five damaged structures. “Some of the locations struck look like the missiles hit dead center,” Schmerler said.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Jeffery Lewis, a professor at Middlebury Institute, tweeted a before and after snapshot of one of the impact areas of the base. It appears two Iranian missiles hit a group of tents next to three helicopters.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Twitter handle Yuri Lyamin shared a Plant Labs satellite image of the base that appears to be dated Jan. 8, 2020, but doesn’t have the markings from Middlebury Institute and is a much broader view. 

    It appears Lyamin circled nine points of interest where possible damage was sustained from the Iranian missile strike.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    President Trump tweeted Tuesday night after the attacks and said: “All is well! Missiles launched from Iran at two military bases located in Iraq. Assessment of casualties & damages taking place now. So far, so good! We have the most powerful and well-equipped military anywhere in the world, by far! I will be making a statement tomorrow morning.”

    Schmerler said the Iranians might have targeted structures on the base that would minimize the loss of human life to thwart a retaliation strike by the US. “The buildings we’re tallying now seem to be used for storing aircraft,” he said. “There are other structures at the airbase that would be exclusively for people, so maybe they intended to strike sites with equipment over people.”

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    As we noted on Wednesday, Iran has taken President Trump’s playbook in Syria: launch missiles and purposely miss their intended targets.

    Iran has superior missile technology that can hit whatever they want – this could be in an attempt to save face as a public relations event for its citizens while attempting to de-escalate the situation and avoid war.

    “The live situation was optically quite dramatic, but the important thing to focus on is the no-human-casualty dimension, which gives ample space to de-escalate the situation,” said Salman Ahmed, chief investment strategist at Lombard Odier Investment Managers.

    “The Trump factor is the random factor, but what’s visible is that no one wants war, and that’s what markets are focusing on.”


    Tyler Durden

    Wed, 01/08/2020 – 18:25

    Tags

  • "Past Due": Court Declares Hunter Biden The Father Of Child In Arkansas
    “Past Due”: Court Declares Hunter Biden The Father Of Child In Arkansas

    Authored by Jonathan Turley,

    In a long expected order, Arkansas Circuit Judge Holly Meyer has declared Hunter Biden, son of presidential candidate Joe Biden, to be the “biological and legal father” of a child he fathered with former GW student, 29-year-old Lunden Alexis Roberts.

    Biden has long denied being the father and has refused to support the child. He has also refused to turn over information on his assets, part of discovery that Meyer referred to as “past due.” It was obviously not the only element past due for Biden with regard to this child.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Roberts, reportedly was a stripper at a Washington, D.C., club that Biden liked to party at while in Washington.

    In the order, Meyer ordered the Arkansas Department of Health to issue a birth certificate listing Biden as the father.

    Biden has children by at least three different women. Roberts filed papers that portrayed him as a deadbeat father, stating that Biden “had no involvement in the child’s life since the child’s birth, never interacted with the child, never parented the child,” and “could not identify the child out of a photo lineup.”

    The next hearing is set for January 29th on child support. That could create some fireworks as Biden has resisted disclosures of his wealth — information that could reveal how much he received from dubious Ukrainian and Chinese contracts.

    Ironically, Joe Biden has been attacked for a 1981 op-ed entitled “Congress is Subsidizing Deterioration of Family.”

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    In the column, Biden suggested that families with more income should not receive tax credits for child care because one parent should stay at home while the other works. Biden bemoaned the loss of “individual responsibility and said that day-care centers were “monuments to our growing unwillingness to accept personal responsibility.” Of course, that is particularly difficult when one of the parents not only does not support his child but denies that he ever had an intimate relationship with the mother.

    When asked about the court previously ordering DNA tests confirming Biden’s status as the father, Joe Biden snapped at a reporter and said “No, that’s a private matter and I have no comment.”

    He then told the Fox reporter “Only you would ask that. You’re a good man. You’re a good man. Classy.”

    Joe Biden, like many presidential candidates, has long identified deadbeat dads as a major national problem.

    He even used the issue to defend a controversial bankruptcy bill in 2001 when he was a senator. In a 2001 Senate floor speech, Biden defended the law by arguing that the bankruptcy bill would actually improve the situation for women and children.

    By including a requirement that “deadbeat dads” who file for bankruptcy must make child support payments above nearly all other creditors, Biden insisted “this bill empowers women. It gives them a say in the bankruptcy proceedings relating to her absent spouse.”

    Hunter Biden is also reportedly expecting a child with his new wife, Melissa Cohen Biden, whom he married this past May.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>


    Tyler Durden

    Wed, 01/08/2020 – 18:05

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Today’s News 8th January 2020

  • FBI, FAA, Air Force Investigate Armies Of Unidentified Drones Appearing Over 3 States At Night
    FBI, FAA, Air Force Investigate Armies Of Unidentified Drones Appearing Over 3 States At Night

    Authored by Michael Snyder via The End of The American Dream blog,

    Since just before Christmas, armies of unidentified drones have been appearing each night in the skies above Colorado, Nebraska and Kansas.  The drones are approximately 6 feet wide and they have red and white lights, but nobody knows where they are from or who owns them. 

    This is a story that is now receiving national attention, and the FBI, the FAA and the U.S. Air Force are all investigating this mystery.  According to eyewitnesses, these drones can move “much faster than a regular aircraft”, and that would seem to indicate that they are highly sophisticated. 

    So far, the U.S. military, every government agency that has been asked, and many of the major companies in the area have all denied operating the drones.  Federal, state and local law enforcement officials have been doing all that they can to solve this mystery, but so far they have come up completely empty.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    And even though these drones are now receiving so much attention, they just keep coming back night after night.  According to one northern Colorado resident, when the drones come out it looks like “something from a movie”

    For the last week, Michelle Eckert has spotted a high-flying, night-time mystery above her rural northern Colorado home. She has seen drones, sometimes a dozen or more with wingspans 6 feet wide.

    “The sky is lit up with Christmas lights basically,” she told CBS News. “There’s lights and things flying all over. It reminded me of something from a movie.”

    Sometimes eyewitnesses just see one drone.  In other cases, the drones are working in pairs.  And in other instances, there are large groups of up to 30 drones working in very close coordination.

    On Thursday night, a Denver Post reporter went out in search of these drones, and it wasn’t long before some of them were spotted

    As light turned to dark Thursday, stars appeared in the night sky. And soon after, so did drones. Around 6:10 p.m., a Denver Post reporter and photographer spotted two unmanned aircraft whizzing west above I-70, 8 miles outside Limon.

    More drones could be seen outside Last Chance, a slight whir audible as they passed overhead. The aircraft flashed one red light and one white. Two other yellowish lights remained on throughout the flight. In 20 minutes, a half-dozen flying objects could be seen traversing over the barren wind farms.

    The fact that there are so many of them and that they are operating over such a large area would seem to indicate that this is not the work of some rogue individual.

    But at this point we don’t have any answers.

    Lincoln County Sheriff Tom Nestor has been working on this case for quite a few days, and his county map is now “dotted with blue and yellow thumbtacks” because so many people have been reporting sightings…

    Inside the Lincoln County Sheriff’s Office in Hugo on Thursday afternoon, Sheriff Tom Nestor and Capt. Yowell stared at a county map hanging in a narrow hallway.

    It’s dotted with blue and yellow thumbtacks, depicting sightings from across the county of just under 5,500 people. There’s a series of tacks clustered around Interstate 70 in Limon, with a few scattered north and south of the interstate. Some people reported the drones flying in packs. Others saw solo flights.

    Nestor immediately suspected that a local company may be doing some mapping, but that theory didn’t turn up anything.  And other law enforcement officials in the region have come up empty as well

    Nestor said he has spoken to local oil companies and drone experts, learning information but getting no answers. Neighboring sheriffs have spoken to the military, which has denied involvement, he said. The Air Force, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, the Department of Defense, the Environmental Protection Agency, the North American Aerospace Defense Command and the University of Colorado Boulder have told The Denver Post that they’re not flying the drones.

    The FAA has gotten involved, and you would think that they should be able to get to the bottom of this, but they are just as puzzled as everyone else

    Already, the FAA has contacted test sites, drone companies and companies that have received authorization to operate drones in the affected areas. But the agency has not been able to determine who is flying the aircraft, spokesman Ian Gregor said in a statement Monday.

    The FAA also asked area airports and pilots to report sightings or people they see operating the drones from the ground.

    So far there is no evidence that these drones are malicious, but just a few days ago we received a reminder of how deadly they can potentially be.  Iranian military commander Qassem Soleimani was killed by a drone, and he probably never even knew that the attack was coming.

    On Monday, dozens of federal, state and local law enforcement officials gathered in the town of Brush to talk about these drones.  At the conclusion of the meeting, reporters were told that there is still “no explanation” for this mystery…

    Mysterious drone sightings remains a mystery on Colorado’s Eastern Plains. Monday, more than 70 local, state and federal officials met in Brush to talk about findings and reports from the last couple of weeks.

    Multiple law enforcement agencies, the FBI, United States Air Force and the FAA ended the meeting with no explanation of what the objects hovering over vast properties really are.

    People living in Colorado, Nebraska and Kansas desperately want some answers, and now a similar sighting has been reported in Minnesota

    Drones were reported flying over Juniata and Hastings Sunday night. An operator has not been identified at this time.

    Minneapolis Air Traffic Control contacted the Hastings Police Department with a report from an airplane pilot about the drones.

    Air traffic control reported the drones were flying in a grid pattern around 9-10 p.m. Sunday, Police Capt. Mike Doremus said.

    This sounds very similar to many of the other sightings, but nobody has been able to examine one of these drones up close yet, and so we still don’t know precisely what we are dealing with.

    But what we do know is that our world is a very strange place, and it is getting stranger by the day.

    Hopefully this is just some relatively harmless top secret U.S. military program that the Pentagon doesn’t want to talk about.

    Because if these drones do not have a U.S. origin, then that opens up a completely different can of worms.


    Tyler Durden

    Tue, 01/07/2020 – 23:30

  • Nine States Headed For Recession In Six-Months, Most Since Financial Crisis 
    Nine States Headed For Recession In Six-Months, Most Since Financial Crisis 

    President Trump’s core campaign promise was to “Make America Great Again,” through a revival of the manufacturing complex via launching a trade war against China and debt-fueled tax cuts for corporations. Most of the recovery, well, it was a sugar high, that by the time late 2018 rolled around, economic growth rates started to reverse. 

    Manufacturing data on Friday was more confirmation that an industrial recession continues to persist and could be broadening into early 2020. Now the slowdown appears to be spreading to nine states that are teetering on the edge of a recession. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia published new leading index data for 50 states for November 2019 last week. The leading indexes are a six-month forecast of the coincident state indexes that show nine US states are expected to plunge into a recession within six-months – this is the most significant number of states to slide into a contraction since the financial crisis.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    State leading indexes for November show that West Virginia’s economy is headed for a significant downturn. The coal industry is in tatters, manufacturing is busting, and an opioid crisis continues to ravage local communities across the state. 

    Delaware, Vermont, Oklahoma, Montana, Iowa, Kentucky, and Connecticut are other states where leading indexes are indicating an economic contraction could occur in the next six months.  

    Leading indicators suggest Midwest and Rust Belt states will record marginal growth in the next six months, but we should note that growth rates have quickly faded in these states where farming and manufacturing have gone bust. 

    Bloomberg data shows nine states are headed for an economic contraction; this is the highest amount since July 2009. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    An industrial recession is broad-based at the moment, spreading to nine states, with the risk of infecting another 14 states in the Midwest and Rust Belt by 2021. 

    President Trump will be hitting the campaign trail momentarily and visiting many of these states where he promised an economic revival. 


    Tyler Durden

    Tue, 01/07/2020 – 23:05

  • No Survivors After Ukraine-Bound 737 Crashes Two Minutes Into Flight From Tehran
    No Survivors After Ukraine-Bound 737 Crashes Two Minutes Into Flight From Tehran

    Update: There were no survivors in the Ukraine International 737-800 which crashed shortly after takeoff from Iran, according to the head of the Iranian Red Crescent’s Relief and Rescue Organization in an appearance on state television. The New York Times, meanwhile, reports that the plane was carrying “at least 170 people,” while Bloomberg puts the number between 167 and 180. The cause of the crash has thus far been reported as a ‘technical problem.’

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    A Boeing 737-800 of the Ukraine International airline in Duesseldorf, Germany, in September.Credit…Ina Fassbender/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

    Four helicopters and 22 ambulances were sent to the crash site, according to Bloomberg.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Rescue crews said they could not save anyone Pic: Iranian Red Crescent

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.jshttps://platform.twitter.com/widgets.jshttps://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    The flight, Ukraine International Airlines Flight 752, departed Imam Khomenei International Airport at 6:12 a.m. on Wednesday bound for Kiev, Ukraine. It lost contact at 6:14 a.m. according to a flight tracker.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    ***

    Raising chilling memories of the downing of MH-17 (false-flag) in Ukraine, the devastating news that a Ukrainian Airlines Boeing 737 passenger jet has crashed following takeoff from Iran is fascinatingly coincidental with tonight’s massive escalation (and rapid de-escalation) in Iraq.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Iranian state TV has confirmed the Ukrainian airplane, carrying 180 passengers and crew, has crashed near Tehran Imam Khomeini International Airport in Iran, after suffering technical problems minutes after take-off. 

    An investigation team was at the site of the crash in southwestern outskirts of Tehran, civil aviation spokesman Reza Jafarzadeh said.

    The following clip is circulating social media claiming to be the last few seconds of the flight. Judging by the fireball, “technical” problems would be an understatement…

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    There is something odd about this though, as FlightRadar24 shows, the plane was gaining altitude at around 8,000 feet when it suddenly disappears…

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    This terrible accident comes after Iranian President Rouhani appeared to threaten a western airliner,

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    290 is a reference to the death toll from downed Iran Air Flight 655: in 1988, the U.S. warship Vincennes mistakenly shot  down an Iranian passenger plane over the Gulf, killing all 290 aboard.

    The attack was the deadliest aviation disaster involving an Airbus A300, as well as the deadliest to occur in Iran.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

     


    Tyler Durden

    Tue, 01/07/2020 – 22:46

  • Kassam: Democrats Supported Obama Killing Americans With Drones, But Take Issue With Trump Killing Terrorists
    Kassam: Democrats Supported Obama Killing Americans With Drones, But Take Issue With Trump Killing Terrorists

    Op-Ed By Raheem Kassam Via The Daily Caller

    War with Iran is unavoidable… at least according to the media.

    Democrats have been wringing their hands over Iranian Gen. Qasem Soleimani’s death, with some calling it a “war crime” and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi seeking to restrict the president’s powers.

    But what did Democrats say when President Obama used his executive powers to strike (and kill) U.S. citizens in Yemen in 2011, including a 16-year-old boy?

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Democratic Sens. Ron Wyden of Oregon, Mark Udall of Colorado, and Martin Heinrich of New Mexico said in a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder that the use of force was “legitimate use of the authority granted to the president.”

    They said Obama had met the legal standard.

    These three senators were part of the Senate Select Intelligence Committee. They went on to describe the killing of terror leader Anwar al-Awlaki:

    Mr. al-Aulaqi [sic] clearly made a conscious decision to join an organized fighting force that was (and is) engaged in planning and carrying out attacks against the United States,” the senators wrote. “By taking on a leadership role in this organization, involving himself in ongoing operational planning against the United States, and demonstrating the capacity and intent to carry out these operations, he made himself a legitimate target for military action.

    Does the same rationale apply to Soleimani? Or has it suddenly changed?

    After all, Soleimani was the head of the Quds Force, recently designated a terrorist organization by the United States government.

    Additionally, a Justice Department memo released in 2014 led to this report from the New York Times:

    Intelligence officials had concluded that  Awlaki was an operational terrorist leader who had gone overseas, become part of Al Qaeda or an associated force, and was “engaged in continual planning and direction of attacks” on Americans. His capture was not feasible, the memo said. Working from that premise, David Barron, then the acting head of the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, concluded that it would be lawful for the government to kill Awlaki, notwithstanding federal statutes against murdering Americans overseas and protections in the Constitution against unreasonable seizures and depriving someone of life without due process of law.

    “We do not believe al-Awlaki’s citizenship provides a basis for concluding that he is immune from a use of force abroad” as otherwise congressionally authorized to use against Al Qaeda, Barron wrote, addressing the memo to Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr.

    Asked about the killing of Awlaki’s son a few weeks after the initial strike, Obama White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs glibly replied about the drone strike on another U.S. citizen deemed to be a threat:

    “I would suggest that you should have a far more responsible father if they are truly concerned about the well being of their children. I don’t think becoming an al Qaeda jihadist terrorist is the best way to go about doing your business.”

    Politico also explained how the Democrats used the killing of Bin Laden and Awlaki as part of their reelection strategy, with the headline of one story reading, “Al-Awlaki’s killing bolsters Obama.”

    The story asserted:

    The killing of Al Qaeda leader Anwar al-Awlaki — just months after the killing of Al Qaeda founder Osama bin Laden — appears to eliminate the war on terror as a campaign issue for Republicans in the 2012 election and could even give President Barack Obama an unlikely advantage on national security, Democrats said Friday.

    It’s remarkable that the president has, in many ways, taken national security off the table as an issue altogether,” Democratic operative and former White House spokesman Bill Burton said on MSNBC. “I don’t think a lot of folks would have thought three years ago that, at this point of the presidential race, President Obama would be sort of untouchable when it comes to national security.”

    “His main platform should be, ‘I protected America from terrorists,’ and he should cite the death of the two terrorists and that he was brave and determined to make it happen, and he did,” said Bill Richardson, a former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations who, like Obama, ran for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2008. “He should run on foreign policy, easing tensions around the world, America regaining its respect abroad, and homeland security and terrorism. That’s what should be his main campaign address.”

    It’s clear the media and Democrats have different standards for Obama than they do for Trump.

    That’s been clear for a while.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The Trump administration should seize on the words of Democrats, diplomats, and the media to provide the rationale for the killing of a man who ISN’T a U.S. citizen (Soleimani) and has been on the terror list for some time.

    Soleimani’s long history of pulling together attacks such as Benghazi, hundreds of deaths of Americans and others in the region, as well as the most recent attack on the U.S. embassy in Baghdad is all the rationale President Trump needed.

    End of story.


    Tyler Durden

    Tue, 01/07/2020 – 22:40

  • Facebook To Ban 'Deepfakes' And Other Misleading Videos
    Facebook To Ban 'Deepfakes' And Other Misleading Videos

    Facebook announced in a Monday blog post that deepfakes – computer generated imitations of people – will no longer be allowed on the platform, along with footage which has been otherwise edited in ways that aren’t obvious to the average person.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Manipulations can be made through simple technology like Photoshop or through sophisticated tools that use artificial intelligence or “deep learning” techniques to create videos that distort reality – usually called “deepfakes.” While these videos are still rare on the internet, they present a significant challenge for our industry and society as their use increases. -Facebook

    “There are people who engage in media manipulation in order to mislead,” writes VP of global policy management, Monika Bickert.

    Going forward, the company will remove ‘misleading and manipulated media’ if it meets the following criteria:

    • It has been edited or synthesized – beyond adjustments for clarity or quality – in ways that aren’t apparent to an average person and would likely mislead someone into thinking that a subject of the video said words that they did not actually say. And:
    • It is the product of artificial intelligence or machine learning that merges, replaces or superimposes content onto a video, making it appear to be authentic.

    The company says the policy does not apply to parody or satire, or a video which has been “edited solely to omit or change the order of words.”

    But the policy — first reported by The Washington Post, and confirmed by Facebook late Monday — does not prohibit all doctored videos. The tech giant’s new guidelines do not appear to address a deceptively edited clip of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi that went viral on the social network last year, prompting criticism from Democratic leaders and digital experts.

    “While these videos are still rare on the internet, they present a significant challenge for our industry and society as their use increases,” Monika Bickert, the company’s vice president for global policy management, wrote in a blog post. –Washington Post

    According to the BBC, Facebook announced last September that it would allocate $10 million to improve deepfake detection technology.

    Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook’s chief executive, has himself featured in a deepfake video. The clip featured a computer-generated version of Zuckerberg crediting a secretive organisation for the success of the social network.

    William Tunstall-Pedoe, a computer scientist who sold his AI company to Amazon, told BBC News that Facebook deserved credit for trying to tackle the “difficult area”.

    The fact the video is fake and intended to be misleading is the key thing for me,” he said. “Whether sophisticated AI techniques are used or less sophisticated techniques isn’t relevant.”

    Other companies like Google and Microsoft are also trying to combat deepfakes. –BBC

    Facebook will work with academia, government and businesses to combat deepfakes, according to the report.


    Tyler Durden

    Tue, 01/07/2020 – 22:15

  • "Closing The Gender Gap" At Any Cost Threatens The Academic Integrity Of STEM Education
    "Closing The Gender Gap" At Any Cost Threatens The Academic Integrity Of STEM Education

    Authored by Atilla Sulker via The Mises Institute,

    The National Bureau of Economic Research recently published a study which concluded that the grading policies for STEM classes contribute to the gender gap in the STEM field.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The study finds that STEM classes, on average, assign lower grades compared to non-STEM classes and that this tends to deter women enrolling. Women — who value higher grades more than men — are apparently put off by the lower average grades in STEM subjects. This is despite the fact that “women have higher grades in both STEM and non-STEM classes,” according to the study.

    The study also shows that women are more likely to switch out of STEM than men. To increase female participation, the authors propose curving all courses to around a B. They estimate that this would increase female enrollment by 11.3 percent.

    This may seem like a noble endeavor, but it is based on a faulty premise, and it will have adverse effects.

    The authors aim to solve the problem of the gender gap in STEM, but they never explain why this should be a goal. Individuals have distinct abilities, and efforts to “equalize” their abilities and interests based on gender goes against this.

    That men have lower attrition rates in STEM should not necessarily be seen as an advantage. For example, another study by Karen Clark, a doctoral candidate at Liberty University, shows that women are, on average, more persistent than men in staying in college. This may be, in part, because they are more likely to avoid high-attrition courses of study like STEM.

    The effort to “close the gender gap” in STEM represents a preference for minority status over merit that deems a student’s performance less important than her femaleness. Yet it only hurts individuals to put them in a field in which they will be unhappy or perform poorly, regardless of gender. If an individual, no matter how gifted, is averse to the risk of possibly burning out and forgoing a good grade, then maybe STEM isn’t the right field.

    STEM curricula are deliberately rigorous, as their subjects are not easy, and bridges tend to collapse when things go wrong. This is why there are weed-out classes to discourage students from pursuing them lightly. In general, women earn higher marks, but students trying to maintain a high GPA — something women value more than men — might rather avoid such classes. There is no guarantee that in STEM subjects reasonable effort will earn one an A.

    Thus, we should not mistake an individual’s willingness to work hard with fitness for STEM. Rather, it is their ability to cope with the possibility of burnout and lower grades, in addition to hard work, that is the better indicator. The National Bureau of Economic Research study clearly shows that men express this ability at a higher rate.

    The authors’ view presents yet another dilemma. If we are to close the gender gap in STEM, why not also do so in other areas? What if the history, philosophy, and business departments also have this disparity? Why not intervene in every department, every class, and so on? This would create an endless continuum of administrative oversight and indifference to merit.

    The authors would likely agree that such an approach would be too extreme, but this concession destroys their argument. The goal is to close the gender gap, but if this end is not pursued to the extreme, one group will still be “less equal” by their definition.

    We should ask ourselves if we are really to throw out pure merit for the sake of an unbacked ideal like “We need more women in STEM.” We never seem to question why we pursue these ideals, or the many unseen effects of pursuing such policies. We just accept them as sacred.


    Tyler Durden

    Tue, 01/07/2020 – 21:50

    Tags

  • Indonesia Deploys Fighter Jets To South China Sea Amid Tensions With China
    Indonesia Deploys Fighter Jets To South China Sea Amid Tensions With China

    The Indonesian Air Force has deployed four General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcons to the South China Sea on Tuesday in a stand-off with China over its exclusive economic zone, reported Reuters.

    The stand-off began last month when Beijing sent a coast guard vessel and commercial fishing boats to the disputed waters off the coast of Indonesia’s northern Natuna islands.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Fajar Adriyanto, the air force spokesman, said four F-16 fighter jets have been conducting flight missions over the islands as a deterrent against China.

    “They’re doing standard patrols to protect our sovereign area. It just so happened that they’re patrolling Natuna,” Adriyanto said. “We don’t have the order to start a war with China.”

    Indonesian President Joko Widodo said Monday that increased Chinese vessels in the disputed waters is a direct violation of international law.

    Widodo said there’s no negotiation with China when it comes “to our sovereignty.”

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    In the last week, the Indonesian Navy has ramped up patrols in the same region that is known for vast natural resources, reported Channel News Asia.

    China’s foreign ministry spokesman Geng Shuang said Tuesday Beijing had “opened diplomatic channels” with Indonesia since the stand-off began, and said “both countries shoulder responsibility for maintaining regional peace and stability.”

    Reuters notes that ship tracker data shows at least two Chinese ships, Zhongguohaijing and Haijing 3511, were on the edge of Indonesia’s exclusive economic zone on Tuesday. Both ships were located on China’s “nine-dash line.”

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    This isn’t the first time both countries have faced a stand-off near Natuna. Indonesia has, for years, deterred Chinese vessels from the region, it’s just this time Indonesia has deployed fighter jets as a response to China’s aggression.

    What can possibly go wrong at a time when the Middle East is on the verge of war?

     


    Tyler Durden

    Tue, 01/07/2020 – 21:25

  • Finance Professors: Buybacks Done As Open-Market Repurchases Should Be Banned
    Finance Professors: Buybacks Done As Open-Market Repurchases Should Be Banned

    Authored by William Lazonick, Mustafa Erdem Sakinç, and Matt Hopkins via Harvward Business Review,

    Even as the United States continues to experience its longest economic expansion since World War II, concern is growing that soaring corporate debt will make the economy susceptible to a contraction that could get out of control.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The root cause of this concern is the trillions of dollars that major U.S. corporations have spent on open-market repurchases — aka “stock buybacks” — since the financial crisis a decade ago. In 2018 alone, with corporate profits bolstered by the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, companies in the S&P 500 Index did a combined $806 billion in buybacks, about $200 billion more than the previous record set in 2007. The $370 billion in repurchases which these companies did in the first half of 2019 is on pace for total annual buybacks that are second only to 2018. When companies do these buybacks, they deprive themselves of the liquidity that might help them cope when sales and profits decline in an economic downturn.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Making matters worse, the proportion of buybacks funded by corporate bonds reached as high as 30% in both 2016 and 2017, according to JPMorgan Chase. The International Monetary Fund’s Global Financial Stability Report, issued in October, highlights “debt-funded payouts” as a form of financial risk-taking by U.S. companies that “can considerably weaken a firm’s credit quality.”

    It can make sense for a company to leverage retained earnings with debt to finance investment in productive capabilities that may eventually yield product revenues and corporate profits. Taking on debt to finance buybacks, however, is bad management, given that no revenue-generating investments are made that can allow the company to pay off the debt. In addition to plant and equipment, a company needs to invest in expanding the knowledge and skills of its employees, and it needs to reward them for their contributions to the company’s productivity. These investments in the company’s knowledge base fuel innovations in products and processes that enable it to gain and sustain an advantage over other firms in its industry.

    The investment in the knowledge base that makes a company competitive goes far beyond R&D expenditures. In fact, in 2018, only 43% of companies in the S&P 500 Index recorded any R&D expenses, with just 38 companies accounting for 75% of the R&D spending of all 500 companies. Whether or not a firm spends on R&D, all companies have to invest broadly and deeply in the productive capabilities of their employees in order to remain competitive in global markets.

    Stock buybacks made as open-market repurchases make no contribution to the productive capabilities of the firm. Indeed, these distributions to shareholders, which generally come on top of dividends, disrupt the growth dynamic that links the productivity and pay of the labor forceThe results are increased income inequity, employment instability, and anemic productivity.

    Buybacks’ drain on corporate treasuries has been massive. The 465 companies in the S&P 500 Index in January 2019 that were publicly listed between 2009 and 2018 spent, over that decade, $4.3 trillion on buybacks, equal to 52% of net income, and another $3.3 trillion on dividends, an additional 39% of net income. In 2018 alone, even with after-tax profits at record levels because of the Republican tax cuts, buybacks by S&P 500 companies reached an astounding 68% of net income, with dividends absorbing another 41%.

    Why have U.S. companies done these massive buybacks?

    With the majority of their compensation coming from stock options and stock awardssenior corporate executives have used open-market repurchases to manipulate their companies’ stock prices to their own benefit and that of others who are in the business of timing the buying and selling of publicly listed shares. Buybacks enrich these opportunistic share sellers — investment bankers and hedge-fund managers as well as senior corporate executives — at the expense of employees, as well as continuing shareholders.

    In contrast to buybacks, dividends provide a yield to all shareholders for, as the name says, holding shares. Excessive dividend payouts, however, can undercut investment in productive capabilities in the same way that buybacks can. Those intent on holding a company’s shares should therefore want it to restrict dividend payments to amounts that do not impair reinvestment in the capabilities necessary to sustain the corporation as a going concern. With the company plowing back profits into well-managed productive investments, its shareholders should be able to reap capital gains if and when they decide to sell their shares.

    Stock buybacks done as open-market repurchases emerged as a major use of corporate funds in the mid-1980s after the Securities and Exchange Commission adopted Rule 10b-18, which gives corporate executives a safe harbor against stock-price manipulation charges that otherwise might have applied. As a mode of distributing corporate cash to shareholders, buybacks surpassed dividends in 1997, helping to elevate stock prices in the internet boom. Since then, buybacks, which are much more volatile than dividends, have dominated distributions to shareholders when the stock market is booming, as companies have repurchased stock at high prices in a competition to boost their share prices even more. As shown in the exhibit “Buying When Prices Are High,” major companies have continued to do buybacks in boom periods when stock prices have been high, rendering these businesses more financially fragile in subsequent downturns when abundant profits disappear.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    JPMorgan Chase has constructed a time series for 1997 through 2018 that estimates the percentage of buybacks by S&P 500 companies that have been debt-financed, increasing the financial fragility of companies. In general, the percentage of buybacks that have been funded by borrowed money has been far higher in stock-market booms than in busts, as companies have competed with one another to boost their stock prices.

    In 2018, however, as stock buybacks by companies in the S&P 500 Index spiked to more than $800 billion for the year, the proportion that were financed by debt plunged to about 14% in the last quarter. Why was there a sharp decline in 2018, when the dollar volume of buybacks far surpassed the previous peak years of 2007, 2014, and 2015?

    The answer is clear: Corporate tax breaks contained in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 provided the corporate cash for the vastly increased level of buybacks in 2018. First, there was a permanent cut from 35% to 21% in the tax rate on corporate profits earned in the United States. Second, going forward, the 2017 law permanently freed foreign profits of U.S.-based corporations from U.S. taxation (Under the Act, the U.S. Treasury has been reclaiming some tax revenue lost because of a tax concession dating back to 1960 that had enabled U.S.-based corporations to defer payment of U.S. taxes on their foreign profits until repatriating them).

    In 2018 compared with 2017, corporate tax revenues declined to $205 billion from $297 billion, hypothetically increasing the financial capacity of U.S.-based corporations to do as much as $92 billion more in buybacks in 2018 without taking on debt. Given that from 2017 to 2018 stock buybacks by S&P 500 companies increased by $287 billion (from $519 billion to $806 billion), the reality is that, through the corporate tax cuts, the federal government essentially funded $92 billion in buybacks by issuing debt and printing money to replace the lost corporate tax revenues.

    Since the total federal government deficit increased by $114 billion (from $665 billion in 2017 to $779 billion in 2018), we can (again hypothetically) think of $92 billion of this additional government debt as taxpaying households’ gift to business corporations to enable them to do even more buybacks debt-free, shifting the debt burden of stock buybacks from corporations to taxpayers. If, as a “transfer payment,” we add $92 billion to the $150 billion in debt that, according to the JPMorgan data, S&P 500 companies used to fund buybacks in 2018, the percentage of their 2018 buybacks that were debt-financed rises to 30%, greater than the proportion of 29% for 2017. But because of corporate tax cuts, in 2018 taxpaying households were burdened with about 38% of the combined government and business debt that enabled corporations to do buybacks.

    Whether it is corporate debt or government debt that funds additional buybacks, it is the underlying problem of the corporate obsession with stock-price performance that makes U.S. households more vulnerable to the boom-and-bust economy. Debt-financed buybacks reinforce financial fragility. But it is stock buybacks, however funded, that undermine the quest for equitable and stable economic growth.

    Buybacks done as open-market repurchases should be banned.


    Tyler Durden

    Tue, 01/07/2020 – 21:00

  • Born Right: Chelsea Clinton Has Made $9M Sitting On Corporate Board
    Born Right: Chelsea Clinton Has Made $9M Sitting On Corporate Board

    Chelsea Clinton has made $9 million in under nine years while serving on the board of an internet investment company, according to Barron’s.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    According to the report, Clinton receives an annual salary of $50,000 and $250 in restricted stock units from IAC/InterActiveCorp, which owns such brands as Vimeo, College Humor, OkCupid, Tinder, Angie’s List and Home Advisor.

    Clinton, who has been an IAC director since 2011, receives an annual $50,000 retainer and $250,000 in restricted IAC stock units, or RSUs. As of Dec. 31, she owned the equivalent of 35,242 IAC shares, consisting of 29,843 shares and 5,399 share units under a deferred-compensation plan, according to a form she filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Share units convert to stock when an IAC director leaves the board.

    The value of Clinton’s stake has surged along with the stock. Her IAC shares were valued at $8.95 million as of Friday’s close at $253.91. That is up from $7.2 million in June, and up from $6.6 million in October 2018. –Barron’s

    Notably, Chelsea joined the board of IAC the same year she joined NBC News as a $600,000 per year ‘special correspondent’ doing virtually nothing, before switching to a month-to-month contract three years later.

    While Chelsea ostensibly wasn’t hired to protect a Ukrainian oligarch from prosecution, it’s clear that those who are ‘born right’ receive dividends in spades.


    Tyler Durden

    Tue, 01/07/2020 – 20:35

  • Indian Ocean Naval Base Diego Garcia: The Launchpad To Attack Iran
    Indian Ocean Naval Base Diego Garcia: The Launchpad To Attack Iran

    Submitted by Great Game India, a journal on Geopolitics and International Relations.

    The Indian Ocean island Naval Base of Diego Garcia is the key launchpad for United States in case of an attack on Iran in the wake of the assassination of Iranian General Qassem Soleimani in a drone strike. The Pentagon has send six B-52 strategic bombers to military base on Diego Garcia that is beyond the range of Iran’s ballistic missiles to prepare to hit Tehran if given the order.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    B-52 Bombers deployed at Diego Garcia

    The US Defense Department is sending six B-52 bombers to the Diego Garcia military base in the northern Indian Ocean as preparations for possible military action against Iran move forward.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The Pentagon is deploying six B-52 Stratofortress bombers (like the ones seen in the above stock image) to a military base in the northern Indian Ocean, according to a CNN report from Monday

    Pentagon officials told CNN on Monday that the B-52 will be available for operations against the Islamic Republic if ordered into action, though the deployment does not signal a decision has been made about any attack plans, as reported by Dailymail.

    The United States maintains several military bases in a number of Middle Eastern countries in close proximity to Iran, but it chose to deploy its bombers to Diego Garcia because it is out of reach of Iran’s longest range missiles, according to the Pentagon.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    This is the second time in the last year that the American military has deployed B-52 bomber aircraft to the region due to rising tensions with Iran.

    In May, the White House ordered six B-52s to deploy to an American military base in Qatar as well as other bases in ‘southwest Asia’ after it received reports of alleged threats from Iran.

    Diego Garcia – British occupied American Naval Base in Indian Ocean

    The Chagos Islands were colonized by France in the 18th century and African slaves were shipped in to cultivate coconuts. In 1814, France ceded the islands to Britain, which in 1903 merged them with Mauritius, its colony about 1,200 miles to the south-west.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Diego Garcia is a British Occupied Indian Ocean Territory and the largest of the islands in the Chagos Archipelago about 1,000 miles south off the coast of India

    In 1965, Britain separated the Chagos Islands from Mauritius, paying £3million for them. When Mauritius became independent in 1968, the islands remained under British control, and were renamed the British Indian Ocean Territory. In 1966, Britain leased the islands to the United States for 50 years.

    Between 1968 and 1973, about 2,000 Chagos islanders were evicted. Most were shipped to Mauritius and the Seychelles. Evicted islanders enlisted the help of human rights lawyer Amal Clooney when they took their fight to the Supreme Court in 2015, but the court ruled against them.

    The secretive military base on Diego Garcia, the largest island, has been dubbed ‘the Guantanamo of the East’ amid suspicions it was a key staging post in the US rendition and torture program.

    In 2016, the US lease was extended to 2036.

    Strategic location

    The American presence there can be attributed to the fact that Diego Garcia’s location is strategically vital. Diego Garcia has been a launching point for US military actions in the Middle East – including the 2001 campaign against Afghanistan following the September 11 attacks and the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The horseshoe-shaped atoll of Diego Garcia (right) measures about 17 square miles. It is surrounded by about 60 other atolls. The coastline of Diego Garcia form a natural harbor, making it ideal to station a naval base there

    It is also a refueling station for US Air Force jets that patrol the South China Sea. Diego Garcia was also designated an emergency landing spot for space missions by NASA.

    The future of the American presence on the atoll was thrown into doubt earlier this year when a United Nations court ruled that the British illegally seized control of the island. The court, in a nonbinding ruling, said that control over the territory should be returned to Mauritius.

    Diego Garcia is home to between an estimated 3,000-5,000 American military personnel. There is also believed to be a small number of British soldiers stationed at the site as well as civilian contractors mostly from Mauritius. These contractors are believed to cook and clean for the soldiers and sailors.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    This satellite image taken in 2006 shows B-52s and KC-135s on the ramp at Diego Garcia

    The horseshoe-shaped atoll measures about 17 square miles. It is surrounded by about 60 other atolls. The coastline of Diego Garcia form a natural harbor, making it ideal to station a naval base there. Diego Garcia is also a tropical paradise that is home to a significant population of turtles, giant migrating birds, and coconut crab.

    The US military has long been tight-lipped about Diego Garcia. Unlike the base in Guam, spouses of military personnel are not allowed on the atoll. It was also reported that Diego Garcia was used as one of the CIA’s ‘black sites’ – the secret rendition program in which the Americans interrogated and tortured suspected extremists.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The strategic bombers were on their way Monday to Diego Garcia, an atoll that is home to a vital US military base

    But its most important function for the American military is the airstrip. The runways at Diego Garcia allow US warplanes to freely operate in the skies above Africa to the southwest; the Middle East and Central Asia to the north and west; and the Far East and Asia to its east, as reported by Business Insider.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    USAF RC-135S 62-4128 CHAOS45 departed Diego Garcia at 2330Z for a mission in the Bay of Bengal to monitor India’s ASAT anti-satellite missile test

    The Americans used this Naval base at Diego Garcia to spy on India’s Mission Shakti. USAF RC-135S 62-4128 CHAOS45 departed Diego Garcia at 2330Z for a mission in the Bay of Bengal to monitor India’s ASAT anti-satellite missile test. USAF KC-135Rs FRESH53 and 54 provided tanker support and returned to Diego Garcia.

    In response to India’s Mission Shakti the US launched what is dubbed as Operation Olympic Defender. At the Space Symposium the head of United States Strategic Command Gen. John Hyten called for Space Rules in response to India’s ASAT test sharing for the first time American Space War plans, known as Operation Olympic Defender, with a small number of allies. It is believed these allies referred to by Hyten are members of the Five Eyes.

    American Military Bases on Target

    The American military footprint in the Middle East and central Asia includes approximately 14,000 troops in Afghanistan; 13,000 soldiers in Kuwait; 13,000 more in Qatar; 7,000 in Bahrain; 6,000 in Iraq; 5,000 in the United Arab Emirates; 3,000 in Saudi Arabia; 3,000 in Jordan; and 2,500 in Turkey. There are much smaller troop levels in Syria and Oman, according to The Washington Post.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Unlike US military bases in the Middle East, Diego Garcia is out of range of Iran’s most advanced missiles. The map above shows Iranian missile capabilities

    In total, Iran could conceivably strike at areas that would place more than 55,000 American soldiers at risk. Its ballistic missile arsenal includes weapons that are very difficult to target because they are either road-mobile or hidden inside highly fortified mountain fortresses, according to The War Zone.

    In the event of war between Iran and either the United States or its Sunni Arab allies, the Iranians would only need a few minutes to launch ballistic missiles from subterranean strongholds. Iran could hit American bases, airfields, and other key sites.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Any conflict with Iran would most likely include a US deployment of its B-2 stealth bomber, though there are no reports indicating that the Pentagon has forward deployed these planes to the region. A B-2 bomber is seen above dropping a GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator

    That is why the Pentagon would most likely rely on its fleet of strategic bombers based in Diego Garcia. If war did break out with Iran, the US has at its disposal machines of war like the B-52 and the B-2 Spirit bombers that can unleash devastating blows.

    The Americans would most likely deploy the B-2s to drop precision-guided 40,000-pound ‘bunker buster’ GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrators (MOPs), which are specially designed to pierce through Iran’s mountain complexes.

    The B-52 Stratofortress: America’s long-range strategic bomber

    The United States Air Force currently has 76 B-52 Stratofortress bombers in service today. Designed and built by the Seattle-based Boeing Company, the B-52 is a long-range strategic bomber that has been used by the Air Force since the 1950s.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    A US Air Force B-52 Stratofortress heavy bomber drops bombs in this undated file photo

    It is capable of carrying up to 70,000 pounds of weapons while flying at a combat range of more than 8,800 miles without aerial refueling. This heavy bomber is powered by 8 turbofan engines manufactured by Pratt & Whitney. Each engine is capable of producing 17,000 pounds of thrust to propel the plane forward in the air.

    The B-52 also boasts a wingspan of 185ft. Each aircraft has a length measuring 159ft4in. The plane stands at a height of 40ft8in. The aircraft weighs approximately 185,000 pounds. It can take off at a maximum weight of 488,000 pounds.

    To fly its long-range bombing missions, it needs fuel – a lot of it. Each B-52 has a fuel capacity of 312,197 pounds. The plane is a subsonic aircraft that can reach speeds of 650mph. It can also fly at a top altitude of 50,000ft as claimed by the Boeing Company.

    US-Iran tensions

    An Iranian government minister denounced Trump as a ‘terrorist in a suit’ after the US president sent a series of Twitter posts on Saturday threatening to hit 52 Iranian sites, including targets important to Iranian culture, if Tehran attacks Americans or US assets to avenge Soleimani’s death.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Tensions in the Middle East have soard since a top Iranian general, Qassem Soleimani (pictured), was killed in a US drone strike near Baghdad airport on Friday, shocking the Islamic Republic

    Talking to reporters aboard Air Force One on the way to Washington from Florida on Sunday evening, Trump stood by those comments. ‘They’re allowed to kill our people. They’re allowed to torture and maim our people. They’re allowed to use roadside bombs and blow up our people. And we’re not allowed to touch their cultural sites? It doesn’t work that way,’ he said.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Iranian state media said ‘millions’ of people had gathered in Tehran to mourn Soleimani’s death in scenes not witnessed since the death of revolutionary leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in 1989

    Democratic critics of the Republican president have said Trump was reckless in authorizing the strike, and some said his comments about targeting cultural sites amounted to threats to commit war crimes. Many asked why Soleimani, long seen as a threat by US authorities, had to be killed now. Republicans in Congress have generally backed Trump’s move.

    The Iraqi Resolution

    The Iraqi parliament passed a resolution calling for an end to all foreign troop presence, reflecting the fears of many in Iraq that Friday’s strike could engulf them in another war between two bigger powers long at odds in Iraq and across the region.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei (center) leading a prayer as President Hassan Rouhani (fifth right) perform the prayer over the caskets of slain Iranian military commander Qassem Soleimani and Iraqi paramilitary chief Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis at Tehran University on Monday

    While such resolutions are not binding on the government, this one is likely to be heeded: Prime Minister Adel Abdul Mahdi had earlier called on parliament to end foreign troop presence as soon as possible.

    Trump also threatened sanctions against Iraq and said that if US troops were required to leave the country, Iraq’s government would have to pay Washington for the cost of a ‘very extraordinarily expensive’ air base there.

    He said if Iraq asked US forces to leave on an unfriendly basis, ‘we will charge them sanctions like they’ve never seen before ever. It’ll make Iranian sanctions look somewhat tame.’ Iran and the United States have been competing for clout in Iraq since the US-led invasion in 2003 that toppled Saddam Hussein.

    Russian Spying over Mar-a-Lago

    About 24 hours after arriving from Moscow, a private jet regularly used by the head of Russia’s largest state-run bank remained at an airport just a short drive from where Donald Trump was vacationing, giving rise to concerns whether the Russians were spying on top secret discussions taking place at Mar-a-Lago where the decision to assassinate Iranian General Qassem Soleimani was taken by US President Donald Trump.


    Tyler Durden

    Tue, 01/07/2020 – 20:10

  • "If I'm A Criminal, It’s Open Season": Atlanta Police To Stop Chasing Criminals
    "If I'm A Criminal, It’s Open Season": Atlanta Police To Stop Chasing Criminals

    In a country where the balance of power swings wildly between law enforcement and criminals, Atlanta has launching a program that as of this moment will let crime run rampant without and police officers in pursuit. Literally.

    Last week, Atlanta Police Chief Erika Shields sent out an email to the entire police force notifying officers that the department will no longer chase suspects, in what is now called a “zero chase policy.” According to WSB-TV, Shields cited “the risk to the safety of the officers and the public for each chase”, and “knowing that the judicial system is largely unresponsive to the actions of the defendants.”

    Ostensibly, the change comes after public outcry following a deadly crash last month that killed two men during a police chase. The APD’s response: halt all police chases indefinitely.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    “Please know that I realize this will not be a popular decision; and more disconcerting to me personally, is that this decision may drive crime up,” Shields said in a memo announcing the change. “I get it.”

    While she noted that “an overwhelming number of crimes are committed where a vehicle is involved” and that significant arrests often follow zeroing in on a specific vehicle, other factors influenced the decision.

    “Namely, the level of pursuit training received by officers who are engaging in the pursuits, the rate of occurrence of injury/death as a result of the pursuits and the likelihood of the judicial system according any level of accountability to the defendants as a result of the pursuit. At his point and time, the department is assuming an enormous risk to the safety of officers and the public for each pursuit, knowing that the judicial system is largely unresponsive to the actions of the defendants.”

    Additionally, in her email, Sands said that while Executive Command Staff “will work to identify specific personnel and certain specialized pursuit training to enable the department to conduct pursuits in limited instances, but until these standards have been formalized, effective immediately, the department has a zero chase policy.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Adding insult to injury, and further crippling police officer morale, the police chief went so far to suggest that the US court system is broken, and allows criminals to get away without punishment: “I don’t want to see us cost someone their life in pursuit of an auto theft person or a burglar, when the courts aren’t even going to hold them accountable”, Sands said on Friday.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    APD’s previous pursuit policy, which went into effect Sept. 15, 2018, allowed up to three police vehicles to join in a vehicle chase. Under that policy, officers were authorized to pursue a vehicle in one of the following situations: the suspect has a deadly weapon, the officer believes the suspect poses an immediate threat of violence to officers or others; or when there is probable cause to believe the suspect has committed or threatened serious physical harm. Additionally, all police officers involved in a vehicle pursuit were instructed to utilize their siren, flashing blue lights and headlights.

    But the department’s policy has come under scrutiny, along with other law enforcement agencies, when bystanders were harmed or killed by the pursuit.

    On Dec. 4, two friends and neighbors, Mark Hampton and Jermanne Jackson, were running errands, according to their families. Hampton had to pick up medication for his disabled son. The two were killed when their car was hit by an SUV speeding through the intersection of Campbellton Road and Lee Street, according to police. Hampton was 43; Jackson was 44. The two 19-year-olds in the SUV had allegedly carjacked someone hours earlier, according to police, and both Marguell Scott and Emmanuel Fambro were charged with murder.

    “It’s so senseless,” said Hampton’s mother, Deborah Hampton, told The Atlanta Journal-Constitution days after his death. “It just seems like it’s a dream. A nightmare.”

    It will soon be a nightmare for all law abiding citizens, however: Chris Rich, who has lived in Atlanta for about five years, was trying to make sense of the policy decision Friday afternoon (he was hardly alone):

    “This is pretty drastic,” he said. “If I’m a criminal, it’s open season. It’s going to impact all the law-abiding citizens. It’s worrisome.”

    Then again, Rich understands where Shields is coming from, and wishes the police department felt more support from other agencies: “We’ve got these guys working hard, trying to make our streets safe, and then you’ve got this revolving door with these repeat offenders. I just cannot understand why the mayor’s office is not putting more pressure on the DA’s office or the judicial system. There needs to be a unified front.”

    Alas, now that crime itself has become ‘racist’ instead of a united front, expect more cities to take a position that makes it “open season” for criminals who now will know in advance that no police will give chase if and when any particular crime escalates. In other words, expect a surge in crime because the alternative, a crackdown on crime, is now seen as racist and politically disadvantageous to those in charge of inner city slums.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js


    Tyler Durden

    Tue, 01/07/2020 – 19:45

    Tags

  • Markets In Turmoil: Gold & Oil Spike As Stocks, Bond Yields Plunge After Iran Attack
    Markets In Turmoil: Gold & Oil Spike As Stocks, Bond Yields Plunge After Iran Attack

    Just when you thought it was safe to buy the most expensive, most complacent stock market rally in the world…

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Iran begins retaliation against America’s killing of Soleimani…

    Dow futures are down over 400 points

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Gold has soared above $1600…

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    And WTI has erupted above $65…

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Brent Crude futures have spike over 5% to the highest since the spike during the Saudi refinery attack…

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Source: Bloomberg

    Treasury yields are plunging…

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Source: Bloomberg

    Bitcoin is bid…

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Source: Bloomberg

    And VIX futures are exploding higher…

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Time to get on the phone!

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

     


    Tyler Durden

    Tue, 01/07/2020 – 19:34

  • 2020 Will Be A Crucial Year For Oil
    2020 Will Be A Crucial Year For Oil

    Authored by Nick Cunningham via OilPrice.com,

    It’s the start of a new year and a new decade, and the oil market is as unpredictable as ever.

    Will OPEC+ extend its cuts? Will U.S. shale finally grind to a halt? Is this the “year of the electric vehicle”? Here are 10 stories to watch in 2020.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Shale debt, shale slowdown.

    The debt-fueled shale drilling boom is facing a reckoning. Around 200 North American oil and gas companies have declared bankruptcy since 2015, but the mountain of debt taken out a few years ago is finally coming due. Roughly $41 billion in debt matures in 2020, which ensures more bankruptcies will be announced this year. The wave of debt may also force the industry to slam on the breaks as companies scramble to come up with cash to pay off creditors.

    Year of the EV.

    Some analysts say that 2020 will be the “year of the EV” because of the dozens of new EV models set to hit the market. In Europe, available EV models will rise from 100 to 175. The pace of sales slowed at the end of last year, but the entire global auto market contracted. EVs may struggle to keep the pace of growth going, but EVs are capturing a growing portion of a shrinking pie.

    Climate change.

    2020 starts off with hellish images from the out-of-control Australian bushfires. 2019 was one of the warmest years on record and the 2010s was the warmest decade on record. As temperatures rise and disasters multiply, pressure will continue to mount on the oil and gas industry. As Bloomberg Opinion points out, climate change has surged as a point of concern for publicly-listed companies. Oil executives are betting against climate action, but they are surely aware of the rising investment risk. In the past two months, the European Investment Bank is ending financing for oil, gas and coal, and Goldman Sachs cut out financing for coal and Arctic oil. More announcements like this are inevitable.

    IMO.

    Sulfur rules from the IMO kicked in at the start of the year. The rules – lowering sulfur concentration limits from 3.5 to 0.5 percent – affects a 4-mb/d market for marine fuels. Refiners and shippers have used several strategies to comply, including the installation of scrubbers and the ramp up of low-sulfur fuels. Once seen as a looming disaster, the IMO rules take effect with few hiccups, although Reuters reports there are some problems with sediment found in the new fuels.

    Oversupply, oversupply, oversupply.

    Several markets are suffering from oversupply – coal, gas (LNG) and crude oil. While a lot of factors are at play, OPEC+ has a great deal of influence over crude. The glut of natural gas in the U.S. will be harder to correct, and gas associated with crude oil may continue to rise despite the financial wreckage in the shale gas industry. The global market for LNG is also oversupplied, with JKM prices hitting multi-year lows for the time of year. Some analysts have even raised the prospect of cancelled deliveries as spot prices continue to fall.

    Renewables continue to grow.

    Renewables accounted for the majority of new capacity additions in the U.S. in 2019. Energy storage capacity is expected to double in 2020. Some ambitious state-level policies were announced last year, targeting 100 percent renewable energy. Roughly 10 U.S. utilities have announced decarbonization plans. Renewables vastly outperformed oil and gas stocks last year, but with falling costs and policies increasingly favorable to renewables, the future for solar and wind looks bright.

    Geopolitical risks persist.

    The surest of sure bets, geopolitical risk will continue to loom over oil markets. The year started off with a standoff at the U.S. embassy in Baghdad, which follows the U.S. airstrikes a few days earlier. The immediate situation presents little risk to oil supplies, but the incident comes on the heels of unrest in Basra, where much of the country’s oil is concentrated. Beyond that, the crisis in Iraq is really a proxy battle between the U.S. and Iran, a conflict that has once again flared up. Civil war in Libya, sanctions and unrest in Venezuela, and more regional conflict in the Middle East are just a few of the many potential flashpoints in 2020.

    Trade war de-escalation.

    The global economy may have avoided economic recession, with some indicators turning positive in recent months. The tariff reduction between the U.S. and China also points to an easing of economic headwinds. Every twist and turn of the trade war had enormous influence over oil prices in 2019, and the thaw between Washington and Beijing provided a boost at the end of the year. A further de-escalation – or a slide back to confrontation – will exercise enormous influence over commodity markets in 2020.

    Shale gas-to-oil ratio.

    Not only do U.S. shale drillers have financial problems, but operationally, the challenges are also mounting. 2019 saw deflated hopes surrounding well density, with a few high-profile disappointments related to parent-child well interference. There is also evidence that the tendency of shale wells to produce more gas over their lifetimes is a worse problem than previously thought. Meanwhile, the WSJ reported that shale wells are not producing as much as companies once promised. 2020 could offer more unwelcome surprises from the shale patch.

    2020 election.

    While every election is billed as the most important in recent memory, the 2020 U.S. presidential election is. A Trump reelection would ensure unfettered support for the oil and gas industry continues, despite the worsening climate crisis. A possible Democratic victory could see a fracking ban, new regulations and other taxes targeting fossil fuels, while potentially massive support for renewables. A lot is on the line.


    Tyler Durden

    Tue, 01/07/2020 – 19:25

  • Did Goldman Just Steal A Page From The WeWork Crisis Playbook?
    Did Goldman Just Steal A Page From The WeWork Crisis Playbook?

    Is Goldman Sachs taking a page out of WeWork’s crisis playbook?

    As the investment bank works to try and repair its reputation as a cloistered and, ultimately, corrupt institution that sometimes uses its penchant for secrecy to commit massive abuses like it did in the 1MDB scandal, Goldman has revealed planned changes to its financial disclosures that analysts said will offering more transparency into how the bank makes money, according to the WSJ.

    The filing, which was published late Monday, comes ahead of the bank’s first investor day later this month, Goldman explained the changes to how it breaks down the performance of its various businesses. During the late Jan. investor day, Goldman execs are expected to outline new profit metrics and goals the bank expects to hit.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Investors should remember that WeWork authorized several changes to its corporate governance intended to allow more transparency and dilute the control of former CEO Adam Neumann, both the changes were derided as too little, too late, and the IPO was scrapped.

    Beginning with Q4, Goldman plans to report performance broken down into four main businesses: Services for the bank’s corporate clients, trading, money management and services for wealthy – and now, even non-wealthy – individuals.

    A quick look at Goldman’s 8-k filing reveals a chart that breaks down these changes, offering a preview of how they will appear in the bank’s Q4 earnings report.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Another chart offers some context by detailing some of the biggest moves of businesses from Goldman’s old to its new structure.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    And here’s a bullet-point breakdown, included in the filing, that offers a little more clarity on the changes:

    • Investing & Lending results are now included across the four segments as described below.
    • Investment Banking additionally includes the results from lending to corporate clients, including middle-market lending, relationship lending and acquisition financing, previously reported in Investing & Lending. These results are included within Corporate lending.
    • Institutional Client Services has been renamed Global Markets and additionally includes the results from providing warehouse lending and structured financing to institutional clients, previously reported in Investing & Lending, and the results from transactions in derivatives related to client advisory and underwriting assignments, previously reported in Investment Banking.
    • Investment Management has been renamed Asset Management and additionally includes the results from investments in equity securities and lending activities related to the firm’s asset management businesses, including investments in debt securities and loans backed by real estate, both previously reported in Investing & Lending.
    • Consumer & Wealth Management is a new segment that includes management and other fees, incentive fees and results from deposit-taking activities related to the firm’s wealth management business, all previously reported in Investment Management. It also includes the results from providing loans through the firm’s private bank, providing unsecured loans and accepting deposits through the firm’s digital platform, Marcus: by Goldman Sachs, and providing credit cards, all previously reported in Investing & Lending.

    As investors try to suss out the implications of these changes, it’s worth remembering that last time Goldman did something like this, it was operating from a “position of weakness,” according to WSJ. Back in 2011, the bank started disclosing its profits from its proprietary investing, a practice that continues to this day in a way that’s seemingly designed to skirt the Dodd-Frank ban on prop trading.

    Indeed, an early VC investment made by Goldman in Uber netted the firm hundreds of millions in profits during the ride-hailing company’s IPO last year. Some might say Goldman was one of the few Wall Street banks for whom Uber’s floundering IPO was still a smash-hit success.

    Circling back to the filing, Goldman is setting aside $302 million for potential consumer credit losses in the first nine months of 2019, compared with $338 million for 2018 and $123 million in 2017.

    Infamous banking analyst Mike Mayo (now with Wells Fargo) praised the changes in an interview with Bloomberg.

    “The presentation is more consistent with the way the business is run and the way it is presented by peers,” Mike Mayo, an analyst at Wells Fargo & Co., said in a note. “While we view management as focused more on long-term value, this attitude shows that management is aware of an underperforming stock price.”

    The news had a positive impact on Goldman’s shares, sending them up 1% on a day where US indexes have been in the red all morning.

    Last year, Goldman’s shares climbed 38%, managing to shrug off worries about the bank’s role in the 1MDB scandal, as well as a consumer-lending business that hasn’t lived up to the bank’s (and Wall Street analysts’) expectations. Despite this, the bank still lags its peers – including archrival Morgan Stanley – on several key valuation metrics.

    The changes are part of CEO David Solomon’s efforts to put a “shot of transparency” into the bank for investors. The move will “peel back the curtain on Goldman’s lending and proprietary bets and reshape its quarterly reports to investors to look more like those of its peers,” like JPM and BofA.

    Solomon’s motives are simple and obvious: despite shares rallying nearly 40% last year, Solomon reportedly believes Goldman shares could be trading much higher than where they are right now. In a private gathering, Solomon reportedly told other executives that Goldman shares could climb above $400 (it’s trading at $235 on Tuesday).

    With that in mind, expect the bank to pull out every gimmick it can to try and boost investors’ confidence that Solomon is reforming the bank after the post-crisis years where the bank trawled the emerging world for business, cowboy-style, under the leadership of former CEO Lloyd Blankfein.

    Read Goldman’s new 8-K below:

    8k-01-06-20 by Zerohedge on Scribd


    Tyler Durden

    Tue, 01/07/2020 – 19:05

  • The "Real" Phillips Curve Is Not Flat
    The "Real" Phillips Curve Is Not Flat

    Submitted by Joseph Carson, former global director of economic research at AllianceBernstein

    Jerome Powell, Chairman of the Federal Reserve, has stated that the relationship between unemployment and inflation “was a strong one 50 years ago…. and has gone away”. This relationship, called the Phillips Curve, now has disappeared according to the Fed view. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Contrary to Powell’s assertion, the ”real” Phillips curve is not flat, but the appearance of a “flatter” relationship between prices and wages is largely due to a technical change in the measurement of housing prices, the single most important item in the inflation index. 

    In 1998, the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) made a technical change in the measurement of owner-occupied housing. Because of an inadequate and declining sample of owner-occupied housing, BLS statisticians felt the process was “time-consuming” and “futile” as it could no longer provide a consistent and accurate reading of housing costs from the owner-occupied units. 

    So the remedy, according to BLS, was to drop the owner-housing sample. They instead linked the price data from the rental market to owner-occupied market, even though the two markets are fundamentally separate. 

    At the time, there was little reaction or opposition from the technical change for the simple reason no one knew, perhaps even the statisticians at BLS, what the new measurement would eventually show in real time. 

    Yet, in hindsight, the impact of the change should have been obvious to all parties since the change involved replacing a house price series that accelerates during economic growth cycles with a rental series that does not. In reality, the technical change had the effect of “flattening” reported consumer price inflation.  

    Why is this important?

    First, before declaring the Phillips curve relationship is gone, it is advisable to look at all of the factors that could be altering the relationship between prices and wages. Comparing inflation-to-inflation readings before and after 1998 is a non-starter due to materially different measures of housing inflation. The removal of the house price signal from reported inflation contributed to the breakdown of the Phillips curve for the simple reason it removed the single largest cyclical driver of consumer price inflation. 

    Second, companies use reported consumer price inflation, among other things, to help them gauge wage increases, so it’s not surprising that there has been a close affinity between reported inflation and wage increases. To the extent the post-1998 measure of consumer price inflation rises less quickly than the older version, it would follow logically that wage growth would be slower as well, as else being equal. In other words, “flatter” reported inflation results in “flatter” wages so it theoretically takes even lower levels of unemployment to generate wage increases.  

    Third, reported consumer price inflation has a direct connection to policy rates, even more so since the introduction of an inflation-targeting regime to help guide monetary policy decisions. Policymakers have yet to acknowledge how the 1998 change in reported inflation and the direct link to official rates have impacted the economy and the financial markets in real time. 

    It’s always difficult to prove causation but since 1998 there have been three asset price cycles – two involving unprecedented increases in equity prices relative to GDP and the other one centered in real estate prices. The occurrence of a single asset price spike could be considered a one-off, but three in a span of 20 years strongly suggests there is a cause and effect from monetary policy.

    Policymakers have mistakenly misread the breakdown of the Phillips curve, resulting in prolonged loose monetary policy. The Phillips curve is not dead, but it changed it stripes. The most important price signals nowadays mainly flow through the asset markets, which from operational standpoint shift the focus of monetary policy towards financial/market stability and away from price stability.    

    Kathleen Curran Aguiar, Chartered Financial Analyst, contributed to this article.  


    Tyler Durden

    Tue, 01/07/2020 – 18:45

  • CNN Settles $275M Lawsuit With 'Punchable' Teenager Nick Sandmann
    CNN Settles $275M Lawsuit With 'Punchable' Teenager Nick Sandmann

    CNN settled its $250 million lawsuit with Covington High School Student Nicholas Sandmann for an undisclosed sum on Tuesday.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Sandmann was viciously attacked by left-leaning news outlets over a deceptively edited video clip from the January, 2019 March for Life rally at the Lincoln Memorial, in which the teenager, seen wearing a MAGA hat, appeared to be mocking a Native American man beating a drum (a known political grifter who lied about the incident, and stole valor).

    Around a day later, a longer version of the video revealed that Sandmann did absolutely nothing wrong – but not until the media had played judge, jury and executioner of Sandmann’s reputation

    That included CNN‘s Reza Aslan, who asked over Twitter “Have you ever seen a more punchable face than this kid’s?”

    “Contrary to its ‘Facts First’ public relations ploy, CNN ignored the facts and put its anti-Trump agenda first in waging a 7-day media campaign of false, vicious attacks against Nicholas, a young boy who was guilty of little more than wearing a souvenir Make America Great Again cap,” Sandmann claimed in a 58-page lawsuit filed last May, according to the Washington Times.

    Sandmann’s attorney told Fox News last March that “CNN was probably more vicious in its direct attacks on Nicholas than The Washington Post. And CNN goes into millions of individuals’ homes. It’s broadcast into their homes.”

    In total, Sandmann has sought $800 million after also suing the Washington Post and NBC Universal.

    Sandmann claims that the Post – which helped publicize a now infamous photo that helped trigger an Internet mob that swiftly outed the teen and demanded he be punished – led the hate campaign against Sandmann – and failed to practice proper journalistic due diligence – “because he was the white, Catholic student wearing a red ‘Make America Great Again’ souvenir cap on a school field trip to the January 18 March for Life in Washington, D.C. when he was unexpectedly and suddenly confronted by Nathan Phillips (‘Phillips’), a known Native American activist, who beat a drum and sang loudly within inches of his face (‘the January 18 incident’).”

    Trial dates have not yet been set in those cases.

    “This case will be tried not one minute earlier or later than when it is ready,” said Sandmann’s attorney, Lin Wood, who says they also plan to sue the owners of The Enquirer, Gannett, within the next 60 days.

    Meanwhile, filmmaker and pundit Mike Cernovich compiled a short list of some of CNN‘s more memorable reporting screwups (via Cernovich.com):

    • Jake Tapper reported that fired FBI director James Comey would testify that he never told Trump he was under investigation. After Comey testified, Tapper’s article was updated to include this disclaimer, “The article and headline have been corrected to reflect that Comey does not directly dispute that Trump was told multiple times he was not under investigation in his prepared testimony released after this story was published.
    • Jim Acosta claimed Trump did not visit Steve Scalise after the tragic mass shooting committed by a far left wing terrorist.
    • CNN had to retract a story about Anthony Scaramucci being under investigation after it was revealed to be fake news.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    • CNN White House Reporter Jeremy Diamond claimed Trump was first President since George H.W. Bush to not take questions at a press conference held in China. Jake Tapper himself RT’ed Diamond. This claim was false.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    • CNN claimed that Trump committed a faux pas during a fish feeding ceremony held in Japan.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    • White House reporter Manu Raju claimed Donald Trump Jr. had advanced knowledge of the Wikileaks release of the Podesta emails. This story was confirmed by two sources, and it was fake news. To this day, Raju refuses to burn the sources who fed him a fake story.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>


    Tyler Durden

    Tue, 01/07/2020 – 18:44

  • The S&P's Biggest Bear Capitulates
    The S&P's Biggest Bear Capitulates

    First it was Dennis Gartman shutting down his newsletter after more than three decades, lamenting a market that no longer made any sense (a lament shared by Deutsche Bank’s Aleksanda Kocic), and now the market’s QE4-driven meltup has forced Wall Street’s biggest sellside bear to capitulate on his November call that the market will drop in 2020; instead UBS’ head of US equity strategy, Francois Trahan, has joined the bullish herd hiking his year-end S&P price target from 3,000, where he set the bottom of the year-ahead market forecasts alongside Morgan Stanley’s notorious bear Michael Wilson, to 3,250.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    That said, as Bloomberg notes, Trahan’s new forecast is hardly exuberant, as it indicated a market that will close the year virtually unchanged from today’s level of 3,241. Still, he does joins other strategists in turning more optimistic after the S&P 500’s 29% rally in 2019 exceeded almost everyone’s expectations.

    In a note to clients, Trahan writes that it will take time for the Fed’s lower borrowing costs to work though the economy and the benefits won’t take hold until 2021. As such, he believes that stocks are likely to pull back in the first half as earnings expectations are at risk of falling, and then recover during the later half in anticipation of a pickup in growth. This, as readers may recall, is the opposite of what BofA’s Michael Hartnett predicted: his forecast is for the S&P to ramp to 3,333 by March 3 after which it will drift lower heading into the political uncertainty of the November elections.

    “We see this year as having two distinct phases for equities as markets transition from pricing in slower growth to pricing in an economic recovery,” Trahan wrote. “We expect a V-shaped year for the S&P 500”, he added although it is rather bizarre why the market will ramp into the election, especially if Democrats are gaining traction in the polls and as inflation starts to push higher, leaving the Fed with no opportunity to cut in the coming year.

    While Trahan has skewed bearish for the past two years, his capitulation demonstrates a problem that has plagued most Wall Street strategists, whose modest 2019 year-end forecasts caught almost everyone scrambling to catch up to the market’s year-end rally. This skepticism has carried across, and according to Bloomberg’s latest survey, for 2020 sellside strategists provided the least optimistic annual outlook in two decades. As the chart below shows, the average prediction for the S&P 500 to end the year is at 3,318, which is only a 2.7% expected increase from current levels, the smallest for any year in data going back to 1999.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Earlier this week, two more strategists joined the bull parade, raising their own forecasts: Citi’s Tobias Levkovich hiked his price target by 75 points to 3,375 while RBC’s Lori Calvasina also boosted her target to 3,460 from 3,350. As we noted in December, even the market’s so-called permabear, Morgan Stanley’s Wilson, cautioned of the “risk” that the S&P 500 could melt up above his year-end fair projected range of 3,000 to 3,250, and in a Monday note, Wilson said that the index could surge as high as 3,500 in the first half because of central bank support.

    “Markets can overshoot fair value in liquidity driven bull market,” Wilson wrote. “Depending on how the economic and earnings data came in during the year will determine if we need to raise our year-end targets or not.”


    Tyler Durden

    Tue, 01/07/2020 – 18:25

  • Trump Tweets "All Is Well" After Iran Fires Missiles At Two US Airbases In Iraq
    Trump Tweets "All Is Well" After Iran Fires Missiles At Two US Airbases In Iraq

    Summary:

    • President Trump has tweeted that “All is well!

    “Missiles launched from Iran at two military bases located in Iraq.

    Assessment of casualties & damages taking place now. So far, so good!

    We have the most powerful and well equipped military anywhere in the world, by far!

    I will be making a statement tomorrow morning.”

    • Iranian foreign minister Javid Zarif has tweeted:

    Iran took and concluded proportionate measures in self-defense under Article 51 of UN Charter targeting base from which cowardly armed attack against our citizens and senior officials were launched.”

    • Iran has launched more than a dozen ballistic missiles against multiple bases housing U.S. troops in Iraq, an have threatened “more crushing responses” if Washington carried out further strikes.

    • Initially, nine rockets hit the sprawling Ain al-Asad airbase in the country’s west, the largest of the Iraqi military compounds where foreign troops are based.  The attack came in three waves just after midnight, AFP reported.

    • Iran swiftly claimed responsibility for the attack, with state TV saying it had launched “tens of missiles” on the base.

    • Iranian sources are claiming that the operation has a name: ‘Operation Martyr Suileimani’. Iran’s airforce has reportedly been deployed.

    • Iraqi PMF announced the start of military operation “Overwhelming Response.”

    • No confirmed details on injured/casualties – “working on initial battle damage assessments.” According to social media sources, the Pentagon has said that the Iranian missile attack resulted in casualties among Iraqis only

    • President Trump “has been briefed” is “monitoring the situation closely and consulting with his national security team,” and despite initial reports from CNN he was set to address the nation, the press secretary has denied that Trump will address the nation tonight.

    • The FAA has imposed restrictions for civilian flights over the Persian Gulf.

    • ISNA reports that Iran has sent a letter to The United Nations Security Council saying it’s not after war.

    • Markets are turmoiling: Safe-haven assets are soaring (bonds, bitcoin, and gold), Oil prices are jumping, and Stocks are getting slammed

    Rabobank’s Michael Every has an early hot-take on the situation:

    At this stage, with news hazy and facts on the ground absent, there appear two realistic scenarios.

    One is that this attack is theatre to placate the large crowds who were so recently on Iran’s streets.

    The alternative is that Iran has genuinely decided to test Trump by also upping the ante.

    The only way to tell is if there are US casualties.

    If we get images of dead and injured US soldiers, then the worst-case scenarios begin to open up. If no real damage has been done by these missiles, but Tehran gets to show the crowds it responded, then more positive possibilities are still available. We will find out shortly – but breaking news is that there are ‘only’ Iraqi casualties, according to its Ministry of Defence. It remains to be seen if that is a red line for Trump, or is the kind of collateral damage he was expecting after taking out former IRGC head Soleimani.

    Given that this move from Iran appears totally out of keeping with their usual strategic acumen, either the loss of Soleimani has meant a total loss of talent, and/or self-control, or this is indeed a token level of revenge.

    I will *cautiously* stick to that interpretation for now.

    *  *  *

    Update 16: President Trump has tweeted:

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    And Iranian foreign minister Javid Zarif has also tweeted:

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Stock futures have erased almost the entire drop…

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    And crude has tumbled back…

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    As if it never happened.

    *  *  *

    Update 15: Between President Trump’s silence (no planned address to the nation) and reports that Iran has told the UN Security Council that “it does not seek war,” futures markets have pared losses…

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    *  *  *

    Update 14: According to NBC’s Ali Arouzi, Iran has said that if there is no retaliation from America for these latest attacks then they will stop attacking. But if America attacks then their response “will be crushing and wide spread.”

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    * * *

    Update 13: The FAA has banned all civilian flights over Iran, Iraq, the Persian Gulf, and the Gulf of Oman “due to heightened military activities” and the “potential for miscalculation or misidentification” according to AP.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    * * *

    Update 12: Iran has warned that if there is retaliation for the two waves of attacks they launched their 3rd wave will destroy Dubai and Haifa.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    *  *  *

    Update 11: According to CNN, the White House is making plans for Trump to address the nation from the Oval Office tonight, although according to the NYT this won’t happen:

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Meanwhile, according to Iran’s Mehr news agency and other sources, if still unconfirmed officially, the Iranian air-force has been has been deployed.

    Separately, social media sources report that according to the Pentagon, the Iranian missile attack resulted in casualties among Iraqis only.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    * *  *

    Update 10: Amid reports from VoA that a total of 3 US locations have been hit in Iraq by Iran cruise missiles – Al Asad, Erbil and Taji – we now wait for the US counter-response: just after 730pm, US Defense Secretary Mark Esper and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo arrived at the White House, as did the Chairman of Joint Chiefs. In short, Trump’s entire war cabinet is now at the White House.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Meanwhile, in addition to what is clearly a military operation out of Iran, moments ago the Iraqi PMF announced the start of military operation “overwhelming response.”

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    And here is the clearest footage yet of the Iran ballistic missile launch against US targets in Iraq:

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    * * *

    Update 9: According to Iran’s semi-official news agency Tasnim, a “second wave” of attacks targeting an unidentified US base in Iraq. Meanwhile, the Iran Revolutionary Guard Corps, or IRGC, has issued a statement urging U.S. people to call back American soldiers from the region. The IRGC statement adds that more details of the missile attack will be published later.

    * * *

    Update 8: The Pentagon has released a full statement on the attacks, claiming that more than a dozen missiles were fired from within Iran, and that at least two Iraqi military bases hosting US troops were targeted.

    Statement from Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs Jonathan Hoffman

    At approximately 5:30 p.m. (EST) on January 7, Iran launched more than a dozen ballistic missiles against U.S. military and coalition forces in Iraq. It is clear that these missiles were launched from Iran and targeted at least two Iraqi military bases hosting U.S. military and coalition personnel at Al-Assad and Irbil.

    We are working on initial battle damage assessments.

    In recent days and in response to Iranian threats and actions, the Department of Defense has taken all appropriate measures to safeguard our personnel and partners. These bases have been on high alert due to indications that the Iranian regime planned to attack our forces and interests in the region.

    As we evaluate the situation and our response, we will take all necessary measures to protect and defend U.S. personnel, partners, and allies in the region.

    Due to the dynamic nature of the situation, we will continue to provide updates as they become available.

    Meanwhile, more footage of the attacks has appeared on social media:

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    US F-35s have been scrambled from bases in Turkey and the UAE.

    Meanwhile, Iran claims that a “second wave” of attacks targeting an unidentified US base in Iraq is beginning, according to semi-official news agency Tasnim. The IRGC is also threatening to attack any other countries that host US troops.

    * * *

    Update 7: This is about to go to ’11’. 

    US jets are reportedly “in the air” and leaving Turkey as stocks extend their decline, and oil futures continue to climb. Reports are claiming that shelling has stopped at Al Asad Air Base, and that roughly 35 rounds hit the base.

    White House spokeswoman Stephanie Grisham: “We are aware of the reports of attacks on US facilities in Iraq. The President has been briefed and is monitoring the situation closely and consulting with his national security team,” White House spokeswoman Stephanie Grisham said in a statement.”

    The Pentagon has confirmed that more than a dozen missiles were launched from Iran. “It is clear that these missiles were launched from Iran.” But others claim there appears to be some doubt.

    Some media reports noted that the base has been visited by President Trump in the past, giving the attack a special significance. US military sources are saying that troops at the base are still in lockdown, though the attack is said to be over.

    Initial reports on NBC Nightly News claimed US officials are looking into whether the attacks originated from within Iranian territory, a question that was also explored immediately following the Aramco attack late last year.

    Iranian TV is already threatening “more violent responses” if the US retaliates for these latest attacks.

    And so, Iran’s promised “historic nightmare” has begun.

    * * *

    Update 6: The drop in S&P futures is accelerating as more senior US military officials confirm that a US army base in Iraq is under ballistic missile attack. The drop in S&P futures is accelerating as US and Iranian sources report attacks “all over the country.”

    Brent futures have extended their gains to 3% on the news, which seems to suggest that the crisis between the US and Iran over the killing of Suleimani is far from over.

    While details on casualties are still unclear, experts are saying that the weapons used were either cruise missiles, or short-range ballistic weaponry, or possibly a mix.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    And we now have a statement from the IRGC claiming responsibility for the attacks: “The brave soldiers of IRGC’s aerospace unit have launched a successful attack with tens of ballistic missiles on Al Assad military base in the name of martyr Gen. Qasem Soleimani.”

    Looking ahead, many are wondering if the fighting will reach Baghdad.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    And the White House has confirmed that President Trump has been briefed on the attacks, and is monitoring the situation closely with his national security team at the White House.

    Given the severity of the situation, it’s still strange that the US was slow to confirm the initial reports. A reporter for CNN is reporting that the Pentagon was slow to respond because officials were “sent home early for what was supposed to be a major snowstorm” in DC.

    Nancy Pelosi was reportedly briefed about the attacks during a steering meeting. Her response to her fellow members? Pray….

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Iranian sources are claiming that the operation has a name: ‘Operation Martyr Suileimani’.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    * * *

    Update 5: Bloomberg has now confirmed WaPo’s reporting, adding that at least nine rockets have now hit Al-Asad Airbase. There have also been reports of IRGC commanders claiming to have launched “tens of missiles” at the base.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Al Mayadeen TV has also confirmed.

    And just like that, ES is sliding, and Brent is spiking…

    * * *

    Update 4: Confirmation at last.

    After hours of vague and unconvincing reports about a string of attacks on US buildings in Iraq, the Washington Post has apparently confirmed that at least one of the attacks – the most recent to be reported – is real.

    Reporter Dan Lamothe described his source as “very credible.”

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Video of alleged Iranian rockets raining down on the American base has just hit Twitter.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    So it looks like this really is the Iranian retaliation that we’ve been waiting for.

    * * *

    Update 3: And the stream of strange reports of attacks and sirens at US bases and consulates around the Middle East continues, as a reporter for Al-Monitor, a credible English-language source of news and analysis on the Middle East region, claims another missile attack has been reported, this time at Al-Asad airbase in Anbar Province.

    Reports claim that more than 30 missiles have been launched at the base, and still more are coming in.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Following reports of a siren heard at the US consulate in Erbil, Iraqi TV is reporting that flights into the local airport have been suspended.

    Once again, Iranian media is reporting the attacks, though we must admit, the photo below doesn’t exactly look genuine.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    The mainstream American press and Pentagon are still eerily quiet.

    * * *

    Update 2: The UK tabloid Daily Mail is now reporting at “siren test” at Taji military base in Iraq, which it says is host to British and American troops. The report appears to have verified claims that at least five rockets have hit the base, and that sirens have been heard ringing out at consulates around the area, including Erbil, which we noted below.

    Critically, the paper notes that some reports suggest that the missile strike might simply be a drill. It also noted that the alleged strike is unfolding just hours after a flurry of US airstrikes on militia bases in Western Iraq and Syria, targeting the Iran-backed Popular Mobilization Units.

    One local journalist reports that his sources say the “attack” was merely just a drill, and that the base is “calm tonight.”

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    * * *

    More unconfirmed reports are trickling in, this time from Australia-based cleric Imam Tawhidi.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    And a video purporting to depict a warning at the base advising personnel to “shelter in place” – though there’s no way of telling whether it is authentic.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    * * *

    Update: The Jerusalem Post has apparently picked up reports from Iran’s Fars news agency claiming that at least five rockets have hit Taji, potentially placing the lives of American troops in peril.

    That means the reports of the attack, which were first circulated by unconfirmed accounts, have now been vetted by the mainstream press. Though some on social media claim that people on the ground in the area don’t see any signs of the attack, and are skeptical that this might be another Iranian attempt at disruptive media hacking.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    And, as we noted below, markets are taking the news seriously.

    Get ready for more hysteria about the dawn of WWIII.

    Meanwhile, in reference to a separate incident, local media reports that alarms that sounded at the US consulate in Erbil were a test.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    If these reports are true, it’s also notable that President Trump appeared to back away from threats to attack Iranian cultural sites during an “exchange” with reporters int he Oval Office ahead of his meeting with Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis Tuesday afternoon, per the Washington Post.

    Though, in typical Trump style, Trump also defended the strike against Suleimani and suggested he wasn’t happy about restraining his rhetoric toward Iran.

    “They’re allowed to blow up everything that we have and there’s nothing that stops them,” he said. “And we are, according to various laws, supposed to be very careful with their cultural heritage. And you know what, if that’s what the law is, I like to obey the law.”

    Asked about the future of US troops in Iraq, Trump said the US would like to get out “at some point.”

    “At some point, we want to get out, but this isn’t the right point,” he said, adding that the United States would want to be reimbursed for costs related to fighting the Islamic State militant group.

    * * *

    Following four days of increasingly belligerent threats from Iran and its leadership, unconfirmed reports claim 5 missiles have just struck a US base in Iraq.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The base is called Taji camp, and it’s situated about 17 miles north of Baghdad. Notably, US troops are housed at the camp.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    If this is an Iranian attack, it’s notable that it’s coming at the end of the four days of mourning for General Qasem Suleimani, who was killed last week in an audacious drone strike ordered by President Trump while Suleimani was attending a meeting in Baghdad.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Ominously, the heavily-followed (though not official) twitter account @Iran, tweeted a threatening message a few hours ago…

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Though the reports are unconfirmed, news of what could be the beginning of Iran’s threatened retaliation for the killing of General Qasem Suilemani inspired a slight pop in crude futures.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Gold jumped…

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    …while stocks are unhappy.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>


    Tyler Durden

    Tue, 01/07/2020 – 18:12

  • Krieger: The Final Chapter In The Decline Of US Imperial Dominance Has Begun
    Krieger: The Final Chapter In The Decline Of US Imperial Dominance Has Begun

    Authored by Mike Krieger via Liberty Blitzkrieg blog.

    Another Stupid War

    All I wanted to do this week was work on part 2 of my localism series, but circumstances quickly got the best of me. The assassination of Iran’s top general Qassem Soleimani was an event of such historical significance, I feel obligated to detail my thoughts on what it means and how things unfold from here, especially given how much of a role geopolitics and questions of empire have played in my writings.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    First off, we need to understand the U.S. is now at war with Iran. It’s an undeclared, insane and unconstitutional war, but it is war nonetheless. There is no world in which one government intentionally assassinates the top general of another government and that not be warfare. You can argue the U.S. and Iran were already engaged in low-level proxy wars, and that’s a fair assessment, but you can’t say we aren’t currently in far more serious a state of war. We are.

    Soleimani was not only a powerful general, he was a popular figure within Iran. Unlike other blows the U.S. and Iran have inflicted upon one another, this cannot be walked back. There’s no deescalation from here, only escalation. Even if you want to pretend this didn’t happen and turn back the clock, it’s impossible. This is a major event of historical proportions and should be seen as such. Everything has been turned up a notch.

    Before discussing what happens next and the big picture implications, it’s worth pointing out the incredible number of blatant lies and overall clownishness that emerged from U.S. officials in the assassination’s aftermath. It started with claims from Trump that Soleimani was plotting imminent attacks on Americans and was caught in the act. Mass media did its job and uncritically parroted this line, which was quickly exposed as a complete falsehood.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    It’s incredibly telling that CNN would swallow this fact-free claim with total credulity within weeks of discovering the extent of the lies told about Syrian chemical attacks and the Afghanistan war. Meanwhile, when a reporter asked a state department official for some clarification on what sorts of attacks were imminent, this is what transpired.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Naturally, we learned soon after from the Iraqi PM himself that Soleimani was in Iraq as part of a diplomatic effort to de-escalate tensions. In other words, he was apparently lured to Baghdad under false pretenses so he’d be a sitting duck for a U.S. strike. Never let the truth get in the way of a good story.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    As you’d expect, some of the most ridiculous propaganda came from Mike Pompeo, a man who genuinely loves deception and considers it his craft.. For example:

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Then there’s what actually happened.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Moving on to the really big question: what does this assassination mean for the future role of the U.S. in the Middle East and American global hegemony generally? A few important things have already occurred. For starters, the Iraqi parliament passed a resolution calling for U.S. troops to leave. Even more important are the comments and actions of Muqtada al-Sadr.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Unmentioned in the above tweet, but extremely significant, is the fact al-Sadr has been a vocal critic of both the American and Iranian presence in Iraq. He doesn’t want either country meddling in the affairs of Iraqis, but the Soleimani assassination clearly pushed him to focus on the U.S. presence. This is a very big deal and ensures Iraq will be far more dangerous for U.S. troops than it already was. 

    Going forward, Iran’s response will be influenced to a great degree by what’s already transpired. There are three things worth noting. First, although many Trump supporters are cheering the assassination, Americans are certainly nowhere near united on this, with many including myself viewing it as a gigantic strategic blunder. Second, it ratcheted up anti-American sentiment in Iraq to a huge degree without Iran having to do anything, as highlighted above. Third, hardliners within Iran have been given an enormous gift. With one drone strike, the situation went from grumblings and protests on the ground to a scene where any sort of dissent in the air has been extinguished for the time being.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Iranian leadership will see these developments as important victories in their own right and will likely craft a response taking stock of this much improved position. This means a total focus on making the experience of American troops in the region untenable, which will be far easier to achieve now.

    If that’s right, you can expect less shock and awe in the near-term, and more consolidation of the various parties that were on the fence but have since shifted to a more anti-American stance following Soleimani’s death. Iran will start with the easy pickings, which consists of consolidating its stronger position in Iraq and making dissidents feel shameful at home. That said, Iran will have to publicly respond with some sort of a counterattack, but that event will be carefully considered with Iran’s primary objective in mind — getting U.S. troops out of the region.

    This means no attacks on U.S. or European soil, and no attacks targeting civilians either. Such a move would be as strategically counterproductive as Assad gassing Syrian cities after he was winning the war (which is why many of us doubted the narrative) since it would merely inflame American public opinion and give an excuse to attack Iran in Iran. There is no way Iranian leadership is that stupid, so any such attack must be treated with the utmost skepticism.

    It’s impossible to know exactly what will happen in the short-term, but in the much bigger picture I have a strong view of what this means. The assassination of Soleimani kicks off the beginning of the final chapter in the decline of U.S. imperial dominance. It will likely play out over the course of the first part of this decade (2020-2025), and by the time it’s over it’ll be undeniable that the U.S. is no longer the global hegemon it once was. The world at that stage will be unmistakably multi-polar.

    The signs are everywhere.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    This is not a time for despair, as there can be a huge silver lining to all of this. A singular focus on imperial hegemony has been terrible for most Americans. It has made us weak, it has destroyed the middle class, and it has entrenched a small subset of sociopaths into positions of total, unaccountable power.

    The energy and spirit of the American people have been pushed aside and smothered so a bunch of defense contractors, politicians and finance criminals can play a game of RISK at the public’s expense. The transition is likely to be quite traumatic and fraught with danger, but empire has been a curse and has hollowed out the country. Shaking off empire at least gives us a shot at a revival.

    *  *  *

    Liberty Blitzkrieg is an ad-free website. If you enjoyed this post and my work in general, visit the Support Page where you can donate and contribute to my efforts.


    Tyler Durden

    Tue, 01/07/2020 – 18:05

    Tags

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Today’s News 7th January 2020

  • A Terrorist Attack Against Eurasian Integration?
    A Terrorist Attack Against Eurasian Integration?

    Authored by Federico Pieraccini via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

    The murder of Iranian general Qasem Soleimani in Baghdad, in the early hours of January 3 by US forces, only highlights the extent to which US strategy in the Middle East has failed. It is likely to provoke reactions that do not benefit US interests in the region.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    To understand the significance of this event, it is necessary to quickly reconstruct the developments in Iraq. The US has occupied Iraq for 17 years, following its invasion of the country in 2003. During this time, Baghdad and Tehran have re-established ties by sustaining an important dialogue on post-war reconstruction as well as by acknowledging the importance of the Shia population in Iraq.

    Within two decades, Iraq and Iran have gone from declaring war with each other to cooperating on the so-called Shia Crescent, favoring cooperation and the commercial and military development of the quartet composed of Iran, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon. Such ties, following recent victories over international terrorism, have been further consolidated, leading to current and planned overland connections between this quartet.

    Local movements and organizations have been calling for US troops to leave Iraqi territory with increasing vigor and force in recent months. Washington has accused Tehran of inciting associated protests.

    At the same time, groups of dubious origin, that have sought to equate the Iranian presence with the American one, have been calling for the withdrawal of the Popular Mobilization Units (PMUs) that are linked to Iran from Iraq. The protests from such groups appear to be sponsored and funded by Saudi Arabia.

    With mutual accusations flying around, the US hit a pro-Iranian faction known as Kataib Hezbollah on December 29. This episode sparked a series of reactions in Iraq that ended up enveloping the US embassy in Baghdad, which was besieged for days by demonstrators angry about ongoing airstrikes by US forces.

    The US secretary of state, Mike Pompeo, blamed this volatile situation on Iran, warning that Tehran would be held responsible for any escalation of the situation involving the embassy.

    In the early hours of January 3, 2020, another tangle was added to the Gordian Knot that is the Middle East. Qasem Soleimani was assassinated when his convoy was attacked by a drone near Baghdad International Airport. The most effective opponents of ISIS and Wahabi jihadism in general was thus eliminated by the US in a terrorist act carried out in foreign country in a civilian area (near Baghdad International Airport). The champagne would have no doubt been flowing immediately upon receiving this news in the US Congress, the Israeli Knesset, Riyadh royal palace and in Idlib among al Nusra and al Qaeda militants.

    It remains to be seen what the reasons were behind Trump’s decision to okay the assasination of such an influential and important leader. Certainly the need to to demonstrate to his base (and his Israeli and Saudi financiers) plays into his anti-Iranian crusade. But there are other reasons that better explain Trump’s actions that are more related to the influence of the US in the region; the geopolitical chess game in the Middle East transcends any single leader or any drone attack.

    In Syria, for example, the situation is extremely favorable to the government in Damascus, with it only being a matter of time before the country is again under the control of the central government. General Soleimani and Iran have played a central role in ridding the country of the scourge of terrorism, a scourge directed and financed by the US and her regional allies.

    In Iraq, the political situation is less favorable to the US now than it was back in 2006. Whatever progress in relations between Baghdad and Tehran has also been due to General Soleimani, who, together with the PMUs and the Iraqi army, freed the country from ISIS (which was created and nurtured by Western and Saudi intelligence, as revealed by Wikileaks).

    It would seem that the US sanctions against Iran have not really had the intended effect, instead only serving to consolidate the country’s stance against imperialism. The US, as a result, is experiencing a crisis in the region, effectively being driven out of the Middle East, rather than leaving intentionally.

    In this extraordinary and unprecedented situation, the Russians and Chinese are offering themselves variously as military, political and economic guarantors of the emerging Eurasian mega-project (the recent naval exercises between Beijing, Moscow and Tehran serving as a tangible example of this commitment). Naturally, it is in their interests to avoid any extended regional conflict that may only serve to throw a monkey wrench into their vast Eurasian mega-project.

    Putin and Xi Jinping face tough days ahead, trying to council Iran in avoiding an excessive response that would give Washington the perfect excuse for a war against Iran.

    The prospects of a region without terrorism, with a reinvigorated Shia Crescent, led by Iran at the regional level and accompanied by China and Russia at the economic (Belt and Road Initiative) and military level, offer little hope to Riyadh, Tel Aviv and Washington of being able to influence events in the region and this is likely going to be the top argument that Putin and Xi Jinping will use to try to deter any Iranian overt response.

    Deciding to kill the leader of the Quds Force in Iraq proves only one thing: that the options available to Trump and his regional allies are rapidly shrinking, and that the regional trends over the next decade appear irreversible. Their only hope is for Tehran and her allies to lash out at the latest provocation, thereby justifying the regional war that would only serve to benefit Washington by slowing down regional unification under Iranian leadership.

    We must remember that whenever the US finds itself in a situation where it cannot control a country or a region, its tendency is to create chaos and ultimately destroy it.

    By killing General Soleimani, the US hopes to wreak havoc in the region so as to slow down or altogether scupper any prospect of integration. Fortunately, China, Russia and Iran are well aware that any conflict would not be in any of their own interests.

    No drone-launched missiles will be enough to save the US from decades of foreign-policy errors and their associated horrors; nor will they be enough to extinguish the memory of a hero’s tireless struggle against imperialism and terrorism.


    Tyler Durden

    Tue, 01/07/2020 – 00:05

  • Where U.S. Troops Are Based In The Middle East
    Where U.S. Troops Are Based In The Middle East

    After the death of top Iranian military commander Qassem Soleimani by a U.S. missile on Friday in Baghdad, the Iraqi government has voted in a non-binding resolution Sunday to expel U.S. troops from the country. Prime minister Adel Abdul-Mahdi could now take back the invitation that allows 6,000 troops to currently stay in Iraq.

    But, as Statista’s Niall McCarthy notes, while the U.S. presence in Iraq is sizable, other Middle Eastern countries host many more U.S. troops. The largest U.S. base in the Middle East is in Qatar. The country hosts around 13,000 U.S. troops, according to numbers compiled by the Washington Post. Located southwest of Doha, Al Udeid Air Base has proven crucial in the fight against ISIS. Qatar invested $1 billion in constructing the base and it’s also home to the the U.S. Combined Air Operations Center, responsible for coordinating U.S. and allied air power across the Middle East, particularly in airspace over Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan.

    The following infographic highlights just how important Qatar, along with Kuwait, is to the U.S. presence in the Middle East. Both countries hosts an estimated 13,000 U.S. troops.

    Infographic: Where U.S. Troops Are Based In The Middle East | Statista

    You will find more infographics at Statista

    Neighboring Bahrain is also vital to American interests in the region, home to the Naval Support Activity Bahrain, the U.S. Fifth Fleet and a substantial military presence at Isa Air Base. 7,000 troops are based there.

    U.S. troops have been withdrawing from Syria after the Trump administration’s decision in October, which has decimated their numbers from an estimated 2,000 in September to currently around 800.


    Tyler Durden

    Mon, 01/06/2020 – 23:45

  • The Three Main Reasons Trump Can't Lose 2020 – Dispelling Nonsense-Polls & Wishful-Thinking
    The Three Main Reasons Trump Can't Lose 2020 – Dispelling Nonsense-Polls & Wishful-Thinking

    Authored by Joaquin Flores via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

    Cutting through the media noise and outright nonsense in assessing the upcoming election is going to be a necessity for anyone who wants to know what’s truly afoot.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Back in October, Moody’s Analytics assessed their confidence that Trump will win in 2020. While yet another impeachment fiasco has been advanced by Democrats, this time going as far as a vote in the lower house, Moody’s has not issued any change in their assessment. That’s probably because this impeachment charade is being seen for what it is.

    Many of the figures being discussed otherwise in the news cycle are quite irrelevant. This is because they are national polls, when only the opinions of certain cross-sections within swing states can reasonably said to be of any significance. Republicans still back Trump, Democrats still oppose him.

    Here are the three real reasons why Trump will win…

    With no buzz, there’s no victory.

    This is the most important, and deserves the most attention. The Democrat-controlled media establishment from the NYT, MSNBC to CNN, is abusing their push-poll powers to promote boring and centrist candidates. But it’s the genuine energy and enthusiasm of precinct walkers and phone bankers that matters more than most numbers.  Enthusiasm is contagious, and a lack of enthusiasm creates a vicious cycle.

    DNC strategists and pollsters make the same error that almost every single top-down managed company makes in their own sales-team policies. They wrongly imagine that no matter the product they are selling, what makes a product sell is a direct consequence of the advertising dollars and deals with media. They believe that creating energy around a product is entirely a hyper-reality based simulacrum with little-to-no basis in the real world.

    To the contrary, for most products it’s the word-of-mouth enthusiasm of consumers and potentials, along with the enthusiasm of the sales team that actually pushes sales. If the enthusiasm isn’t genuine, then it isn’t there. If there’s no buzz, there can be no victory.

    So when it comes to a combination of union and NGO staffers, who have to mobilize dues paying members and volunteers to get out the vote, people cannot fake enthusiasm.

    Obama won despite the country trending conservative across a number of matrixes since the victory of Bush I in 2000. This was because of the tremendous energy and excitement around his campaign based in the themes of hope and change. Obama posed as a very left-wing candidate who would not only be the first African-American president of the country, but moreover bring in socialized health-care and end the war in Iraq, and reverse decades old legislation that had hampered labor’s ability to organize.

    Without Obama-level energy, it’s only natural that a conservative would beat someone who appeared liberal across social and ‘pc’ matters but was flat on labor and real economic justice matters. That’s because without an invigorated candidate running an economically ‘radical’ platform, the blue collar left and idealistic leftist students who form the backbone of a genuine grass-roots campaign can’t get excited.

    In the present paradigm, Democrats can only win the White House when new voters come out to vote.

    Democrats will probably lose no matter what, given the immutable facts around this election and the incumbent, but the way they are running their strategy so far will guarantee it is a Trump electoral college landslide bigger than 2016. Right now Democrats might only succeed in getting more Democrats to turn out in states they were already going to win.

    And so strangely, in 2020 we might expect Democrats to win even bigger on the popular vote, simply because Hillary is not going to be candidate, and given how populous states like New York and California are, but lose harder on the Electoral College.

    The any given Sunday rule still applies to elections, and so taken all together, the only chance Democrats do have to win is some combination of Sanders, Yang, and Gabbard.

    The Impeachment is Galvanizing Trump’s base and Independents didn’t appreciate Pelosi’s moves

    This is something like the opposite of the Democrat’s lack of an exciting candidate, and really explains why no candidate but Gabbard (who played the right card with her ‘present’ vote on impeachment’), can come out of this unscathed. Many polls seem to indicate that Trump’s numbers across numerous key matrixes improved surrounding the impeachment gambit.

    In reality, this election will rest on a) independents who are in b) swing states. Independents are prone to the galvanizing excitement of partisans. Since Trump’s people are galvanized, and Democrats are not exciting their base, independents will go for Trump. That was also reflected in polling over impeachment itself.

    Independents are not some 5 or 10% of the voting base that might just ‘push one candidate or other’ over a notch to victory. Independents make up a whole 38% of the electorate.

    Only 41% of independents supported impeachment.

    Looking at Pelosi’s statements and methods, it would appear that the process left Democrats looking extremely partisan to the detriment of getting the business of the country done. That business included the USMCA, the Mexico-Canada Agreement that redefines a host of matters previously mishandled by Bill Clinton’s tremendously unpopular NAFTA. Why this seems to be the case – Trump was in the process of getting his USMCA through congress, and with high support from organized labor. As we consistently explain, Democrats rely on organized labor not only for votes, but more critically for their entire ground campaigns, especially making phone calls to other voters, and precinct walking during the campaign and on Election Day. That labor always opposed NAFTA and generally supports the USMCA is critical. The key line in Pelosi’s post impeachment charade statement, regarding why they were not actually going to send the articles to the Senate and therefore complete the process of impeaching the president, was that she said specifically that they needed instead to prioritize passing the USMCA.

    Imagine that for a moment. Because of the relationship between labor and the Democrat Party, it was necessary for Democrats to appear as its champion, even that it was their idea in the first place. This means that Democrats had the practical wisdom to understand that their impeachment charade did not appeal to blue collar Democrat voters, but in fact would work against them. What they needed in part in the impeachment, apart from implementing their strategy of a thousand cuts, was to energize college educated upper middle-class boomers, which form the bulk of the Rachel Maddow, and Democrat leaning mainstream media consumer demographic. While these people control work-place politics and effectively police water-cooler talk, this back-fires. Voting in the US is secret ballot – and so with this class in control of people’s ability to remain employed, unenthusiastic, rehearsed, regurgitated, manufactured ‘orange man bad’ utterances are more commonly heard than they are truly believed. People say one thing at work to keep their job, and then vote another way on Election Day.

    But the USMCA fiasco surrounding the impeachment tells us a lot. Eight years of Bill Clinton and decades of his NAFTA has been symptomatic of the Democrat’s anti-labor politics. Democrats from that time onward invested their political capital into developing socialism. However, they didn’t develop this in the US, but in China – while in the US a crony class grew up and lined their own pockets from it all. This is something which is perhaps, in a strange turn of events, quite good for China and many other developing parts of the world including Africa. But that has come at the expense not of America’s wealthy ‘bourgeoisie’, but rather its own ‘working class’. Bill Clinton was supposed to work to reverse 12 years of Reagan-Bush, whose anti-labor policies amounted to one of the single greatest austerity campaigns in US history. And yet this was only to be outdone by Clinton’s outsourcing and off-shoring of jobs, and deregulation of the financial sector.

    What has shown to matter least of all, and especially where Trump is concerned, are polls. And even here too, polls – when read correctly – point to a Trump victory.

    There are also reasons why left-wing Democrats like documentary film maker Michael Moore also understand that Trump is likely to win. Needless to say, his fixation therefore on an impeachment succeeding, and his blanket support for Nancy Pelosi’s absurd and failing strategy, is also why even progressive Democrats like Sanders fail to understand why Trump is unbeatable. Their placing hopes in impeachment isn’t so much that impeachment is viable or likely, but from a sober and scientific approach, it’s only more likely than an electoral defeat of Trump at the polls given that the party stubbornly  insists on promoting Biden and Buttigieg.

    “It’s the economy, stupid”

    Sure, it will always be argued that the improved economy under Trump was in fact either related to impersonal forces of the global economy unrelated to Trump; sun spots, the invisible hand, or Obama policies whose fruits we are now only reaping. But voters never go for this reasoning. Partisans do, but voters don’t.

    Democrats at best are going to point out that while employment numbers have improved, ‘never before have so many earned so little’. And while that’s true, we are dealing with a badly bruised and insecure American working class. Things right now appear to be going in the right direction, and so being able to find work even if it’s a lower salary than they had before their several-year unemployed stint, they are literally thanking the heavens, the stars, and even Trump, that today they have any job at all. And even here, Trump’s tax cuts put a few thousand dollars back in the pockets of households where the average combined income is about $70k. His even larger, but targeted, tax cuts for the rich in certain areas, due to the economic growth these cuts in part inspired, resulted in more tax revenues overall.

    And yes, we get it – old black people like Biden. At least mainstream media reports on certain polls, whose methodologies we can’t see, report as much. What did that question actually look like? We think the push-poll went something like: “In the coming election, would you support Obama’s good friend and Vice President, a gay mayor, a neurotic Jew, a Hindu veteran who may have PTSD, Pocahontas, or a Chinaman good at math? Obama’s VP was Biden. Will you vote for Biden? Y/N”.

    But still this figure is misleading, and doesn’t relate to Biden’s electability, but is supposed to get past this trope that he’s a racist – a meme trending surrounding the first few debates. Older black voters won’t turn swing-states, and older black voters aren’t part of an energized or energizing electorate for new voters. This means that the media’s reportage cycle on this ‘factoid’ is about virtue signaling to the above mentioned Rachel Maddow demographic that Biden is ‘progressive since black people like him’. Oh, you don’t like Biden? Well black people like Biden. Don’t you like black people?

    And our jokingly hypothetical poll question aside, the reality isn’t far off. This targeted poll of black voters relates almost entirely back to labor union activism. The DNC controls organized labor, and Biden is the DNC’s choice. Black workers are extraordinarily over-represented in the public sector, and the public sector is extraordinarily over-represented in union membership. Older people are more likely to be involved in activism in their labor union, and as a consequence, older black people trend towards Biden more than other candidates. This factoid may trend well right now in media, but will have nothing to do with the outcome of the election except that it will guarantee Trump’s victory if Biden is the Democrat nominee.

    And so we have it, our three primary reasons Trump will win: the lack of enthusiasm for the DNC’s picks, the increasing enthusiasm among Trump supporters which will be contagious (again), and the economic growth which, while favoring the rich, in fact did in this case ‘trickle down’.


    Tyler Durden

    Mon, 01/06/2020 – 23:25

    Tags

  • 66 Dead After Rapidly-Sinking Jakarta Pummeled By Worst Monsoons This Century
    66 Dead After Rapidly-Sinking Jakarta Pummeled By Worst Monsoons This Century

    Indonesia better hurry up and find a new capital city before its current one sinks into the swampwater and soil.

    The death toll from some of the most devastating flooding that has rocked Indonesia’s capital city of Jakarta has risen to 66, with two people still missing, according to local authorities cited by CNN.

    Flooding that began when Indonesia was hit by some of the most powerful monsoons the country has seen in years. Thanks to its position along the “Ring of Fire”, Indonesia is regularly rocked by devastating tsunamis, earthquakes, eruptions and floods. But the flooding that kicked off the new decade forced thousands to flee their homes, or risk being trapped by landslides.

    More than 173,000 residents were seeking refuge on Friday, and it’s very likely that things are going to get worse before they get better. Heavy rain and thunderstorms are forecast to continue for the coming days.

    As CNN pointed out, the rainfall is some of the worst Jakarta has seen this century:

    The current inundation is some of the worst the Indonesian capital has seen this century. Indonesia’s Meteorology, Climatology and Geophysical Agency measured 15 inches (38 centimeters) of rain at an East Jakarta airport on January 1, the highest flood reading since 1996, Reuters reported.

    Jakarta and the surrounding area of central Java, Indonesia’s largest island by population, are expected to be pummeled by up to 4 inches of rain in the next few days.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    As search and rescue operations continue, the Red Cross has started spraying Jakarta with disinfectant to stop the spread of dangerous waterborne diseases. Photos from Jakarta and the surrounding area (which, with about 30 million people, is one of the world’s largest cities) show people wading through chest-high water, and using inflatable rafts to navigate city streets.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Around Jakarta, rescue workers and men in orange vests clearing trash and debris could be seen.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Unfortunately, Jakarta’s latest problems are just par for the course. As we pointed out last year, Jakarta is rapidly sinking into the swamp upon which it was built (the already saturated land makes it difficult for the soil to absorb rainwater, contributing to the flooding), and Indonesia is rapidly searching for a suitable location to build a new capital city.

    This latest round of deadly flooding will no doubt spur the country to speed up that search.


    Tyler Durden

    Mon, 01/06/2020 – 23:05

  • Escobar On The Soleimani Psyop & The Financial WMDs
    Escobar On The Soleimani Psyop & The Financial WMDs

    Authored by Pepe Escobar via The Saker blog,

    On foreign soil, as a guest nation, US has assassinated a diplomatic envoy whose mission the US had requested

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei (3rd L), Iranian President Hassan Rouhani (2nd L) and Iranian Parliament Speaker Ali Larijani (L) attend the Jan. 6 funeral ceremony in Tehran of Qasem Soleimani, commander of Iranian Revolutionary Guards’ Quds Forces, who was killed in a US drone airstrike in Iraq. Photo: AFP / Iranian Presidency handout / Anadolu Agency

    The bombshell facts were delivered by caretaker Iraqi Prime Minister Adil Abdul-Mahdi, during an extraordinary, historic parliamentary session in Baghdad on Sunday.

    Maj. Gen. Qasem Soleimani had flown into Baghdad on a normal carrier flight, carrying a diplomatic passport. He had been sent by Tehran to deliver, in person, a reply to a message from Riyadh on de-escalation across the Middle East. Those negotiations had been requested by the Trump administration.

    So Baghdad was officially mediating between Tehran and Riyadh, at the behest of Trump. And Soleimani was a messenger. Adil Abdul-Mahdi was supposed to meet Soleimani at 8:30 am, Baghdad time, last Friday. But a few hours before the appointed time, Soleimani died as the object of a targeted assassination at Baghdad airport.

    Let that sink in – for the annals of 21st century diplomacy. Once again: it does not matter whether the assassination order was issued by President Trump, the US Deep State or the usual suspects – or  when. After all, the Pentagon had Soleimani on its sights for a long time, but always refused to go for the final hit, fearing devastating consequences.

    Now, the fact is that the United States government – on foreign soil, as a guest nation – has assassinated a diplomatic envoy who was on an official mission that had been requested by the United States government itself.

    Baghdad will formally denounce this behavior to the United Nations. However, it would be idle to expect UN outrage about the US killing of a diplomatic envoy. International law was dead even before 2003’s Shock and Awe.

    Mahdi Army is back

    Under these circumstances, it’s no wonder the Iraqi Parliament approved a non-binding resolution asking the Iraqi government to expel foreign troops by cancelling a request for military assistance from the US.

    Translation: Yankee go home.

    Predictably, Yankee will refuse the demand. Trump: “If they do ask us to leave, if we don’t do it in a very friendly basis, we will charge them sanctions like they’ve never seen before ever. It’ll make Iranian sanctions look somewhat tame.”

    US troops already are set to remain in Syria illegally – to “take care of the oil.” Iraq, with its extraordinary energy reserves, is an even more serious case. Leaving Iraq means Trump, US neocons and the Deep State lose control, directly and indirectly, of the oil for good. And, most of all, lose the possibility of endless interfering against the Axis of Resistance – Iran-Iraq-Syria-Hezbollah.

    Apart from the Kurds – bought and paid for – Iraqis all across the political spectrum are tuned in to public opinion: this occupation is over. That includes Muqtada al-Sadr, who reactivated the Mahdi Army and wants the US embassy shut down for good.

    As I saw it live at the time, the Mahdi Army was the Pentagon’s nemesis, especially around 2003-04. The only reason the Mahdi Army were appeased was because Washington offered Sadr Saddam Hussein, the man who killed his father, for summary execution without trial. For all his political inconsistencies, Sadr is immensely popular in Iraq.

    Soleimani pysop

    Hezbollah’s secretary-general Sayyed Nasrallah, in a very detailed speech, goes to the jugular on the meaning of Soleimani’s assassination.

    Nasrallah tells how the US identified the strategic role of Soleimani in every battlefield – Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Afghanistan, Iran. He tells how Israel saw Soleimani as an “existential threat” but “dared not to kill him. They could have killed him in Syria, where his movements were public.”

    So the decision to assassinate Soleimani in public, as Nasrallah reads it, was a psyop. And the “fair retribution” is “ending the American military presence in our region.” All US military personnel will be kept on their toes, watching their backs, full time. This has nothing to do with American citizens: “I’m not talking about picking on them, and picking on them is forbidden to us.”

    With a single stroke, the assassination of Soleimani has managed to unite not only Iraqis but Iranians, and in fact the whole Axis of Resistance. On myriad levels, Soleimani could be described as the 21st century Persian Che Guevara: the Americans have made sure he’s  metastasizing into the Muslim Resistance Che.

    Oil war

    No tsunami of pedestrian US mainstream media PR will be able to disguise a massive strategic blunder – not to mention yet another blatantly illegal targeted assassination.

    Yet this might as well have been a purposeful blunder. Killing Soleimani does prove that Trump, the Deep State and the usual suspects all agree on the essentials: there can be no entente cordiale between Saudi Arabia and Iran. Divide and rule remains the norm.

    Michael Hudson sheds light on what is in effect a protracted “democratic” oil war: “The assassination was intended to escalate America’s presence in Iraq to keep control of the region’s oil reserves, and to back Saudi Arabia’s Wahhabi troops (Isis, Al Qaeda in Iraq, Al Nusra and other divisions of what are actually America’s foreign legion) to support U.S. control of Near Eastern oil as a buttress of the US dollar. That remains the key to understanding this policy, and why it is in the process of escalating, not dying down.”

    Neither Trump nor the Deep State could not fail to notice that Soleimani was the key strategic asset for Iraq to eventually assert control of its oil wealth, while progressively defeating the Wahhabi/Salafist/jihadi galaxy. So he had to go.

    ‘Nuclear option’

    For all the rumble surrounding Iraqi commitment to expel US troops and the Iranian pledge to react to the Soleimani assassination at a time of its choosing, there’s no way to make the imperial masters listen without a financial hit.

    Enter the world derivatives market, which every major player knows is a financial WMD.

    The derivatives are used to drain a trillion dollars a year out of the market in manipulated profits. These profits, of course, are protected under the “too big to prosecute” doctrine.

    It’s all obviously parasitic and illegal. The beauty is it can be turned into a nuclear option against the imperial masters.

    I’ve written extensively about it. New York connections told me the columns all landed on Trump’s desk. Obviously he does not read anything – but the message was there, and also delivered in person.

    This past Friday, two American, mid-range, traditional funds bit the dust because they were leveraging in derivatives linked to oil prices.

    If Tehran ever decided to shut down the Strait of Hormuz – call it the nuclear option – that would trigger a world depression as trillions of dollars of derivatives imploded.

    The Bank for International Settlements (BIS) counts about $600 billion in total derivatives. Not really. Swiss sources say there are at least 1.2 quadrillion with some placing it at 2.5 quadrillion. That would imply a derivatives market 28 times the world’s GDP.

    On Hormuz, the shortage of 22% of the world oil supply simply could not be papered over. It would detonate a collapse and cause a market crash infinitely worse than 1933 Weimar Germany.

    The Pentagon gamed every possible scenario of a war on Iran – and the results are grim. Sound generals – yes, there are some – know the US Navy would not be able to keep the Strait of Hormuz open:  it would have to leave immediately or, as sitting ducks, face total annihilation.

    So Trump threatening to destroy 52 Iranian sites – including priceless cultural heritage – is a bluff. Worse: this is the stuff of bragging by an ISIS-worthy barbarian. The Taliban destroyed the Bamiyan Buddhas. ISIS nearly destroyed Palmyra. Trump Bakr al-Mar-a-Lago wants to join in as the destroyer of Persian culture.


    Tyler Durden

    Mon, 01/06/2020 – 22:45

    Tags

  • Soy-Boys & Unions Sink America's Biggest Milk Producer
    Soy-Boys & Unions Sink America's Biggest Milk Producer

    Borden Dairy Company filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy on Monday amid rising milk prices and what court filings described as an “unsustainable” debt pile, reported Bloomberg

    Borden was founded in 1857, one of America’s oldest and largest dairy producers is the second major dairy company to fold in months. 

    Court filings said the company would use Chapter 11 bankruptcy to “pursue a financial restructuring designed to reduce its current debt load, maximize value and position the company for long-term success.”

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Dean Foods, the nation’s largest milk producer, filed for voluntary Chapter 11 in November, citing unsustainable business practices, changing consumer trends, and rising competition.

    Filings showed Borden had assets and liabilities of around $100 million to $500 million. The company plans to conduct routine operations through the restructuring period.

    The filing noted that its debt load and pension obligations were a significant factor that made operations unsustainable. 

    The company has approximately 3,330 employees, with 22% of them covered by a collective bargaining agreement. The filing doesn’t say if layoffs or a complete liquidation is imminent

    Net sales of $1.2 billion were recorded in 2018 but resulted in a net loss of $14.6 million. The company reported a net loss of $42.4 million in 2019, the filing said.

    Besides too much debt, the company blamed shifting consumer trends, one where American refrigerators are being stockpiled with almond, soy, rice and nut milk, instead of traditional dairy products.  

    “While milk remains a household item in the United States, people are simply drinking less of it,” CFO Jason Monaco said in court papers.

    “In parallel, since the turn of the century, the number of U.S. dairy farms has rapidly declined.”

    The filing also outlined an abundance of milk supply despite spot prices rising 27% in 2019, even as retail prices and margins are plunging. The mechanics behind the demise of Borden is also how Dean Foods failed

    At the moment, Borden needs a cash infusion of $26.6 million to operate through bankruptcy – if it cannot obtain a source of liquidity – then the company might collapse under its weight of debt. 


    Tyler Durden

    Mon, 01/06/2020 – 22:25

  • Why Pirates Are Giving Up On Oil
    Why Pirates Are Giving Up On Oil

    Authored by Julianne Geiger via OilPrice.com,

    Piracy in some of the world’s most critical oil chokepoints is on the rise – but now, pirates are resorting back to another method of income generation better suited to times of lower oil prices: taking human captives.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Sometimes, black market oil prices just aren’t lucrative enough. In the days of $100 oil, oil theft was a hot commodity. Today, pirates are supplementing their stolen oil income with ransomed sailors, creating a whole new set of problems for the oil industry to tackle.

    Where Piracy is Hot, and Where It’s Not

    Piracy is being dealt with fairly successfully in certain regions of the world. In others, efforts to shore up maritime security have failed. But the threat of pirates taking human captives is alive and well in all regions.

    East Africa – Once a piracy hotspot, piracy off Somalia’s coast has fallen in recent years as the international community–including Iran–stepped up to tackle this pressing problem that disrupted the flow of goods, including oil, through the critical oil route. Somalia, too, has stepped up its ability to prosecute pirates. The East Africa area includes the Bab-el-Mandeb between Yemen and Djibouti, as well as the Gulf of Aden. Piracy incidents here hit a high of 54 in 2017, before falling back to just 9 in 2018, according to One Earth Future’s annual report The State of Maritime Piracy 2018.  

    But while piracy off Somalia has toned down in recent years, the problem of using captive humans as an additional income stream has not gone away. One Iranian seafarer, for example, who was held captive by Somalia pirates was finally released after four years due to poor health. Three of his shipmates, however, are still being held to this day.

    West Africa – While things appear to be cooling off in the pirate world off Africa’s east coast, the west side is seeing a disturbing rise in piracy. And not just any piracy–piracy with a human captive component. The area most subject to piracy here is off the coast of Nigeria and the Gulf of Guinea in general. So much so has this alarming shift risen from oil to persons over the course of the last year in West Africa, that India–the most prolific source of maritime sailors in the region–has banned all Indian seafarers from working on vessels in Nigerian waters and in the Gulf of Guinea. On the line here for Nigeria is $10 billion annually in crude oil sales to India, who purchases more than one-third of all Nigerian oil.  

    Just last month, pirates in the Gulf of Guinea hijacked two Indian oil tankers in two separate instances. But they didn’t stop with the crude oil. They also took the Indian crewmembers hostage both times. While one set of hostages have since been released, the second batch is still being held in captivity, adding to the growing unrest in the region as shippers and sailors fear for their own safety and for the safety of their crew.

    Overall in 2019, there were a total of 89 crew hijacked for ransom in the Gulf of Guinea, and there is now even a special rider offered by one insurer, Beazley, called the “Gulf of Guinea Piracy Plus” that compensates vessels up to a certain maximum should they fall prey to pirates.

    This area is where 82% of all kidnappings on the world seas take place, as crime syndicates in the Niger Delta region of Nigeria look to capitalize not only on the country’s sizable crude oil trade but on the ransom for the many kidnapped sailors that traverse nearby waters as well.

    The rise of this oil-piracy-with-a-side-of-people has been attributed, quite lazily, on poverty in the area, but the extracurricular kidnappings and ransoms come with a special brand of gratuitous brutality that speaks less of poverty-induced desperation and more of wanton criminality and woefully insufficient prosecutorial infrastructure and corrupt governments.

    Southeast Asia – There is also a rise in piracy off the Singapore Strait, Strait of Malacca, and in the Sulu and Celebes Seas. In the last month of 2019, there were six attempted piracy attacks over a string of just six days. All together for 2019, there were 30 recorded piracy incidents just in the Strait of Singapore alone. The area is another critical path for oil traveling from the Persian Gulf to the booming East Asian market.

    There has not only been an overall increased risk of piracy in this area, but an increased risk of kidnapping for ransom as well. In the Sulu Sea, most of the ransom incidents were claimed by Islamist terrorist organization Abu Sayyaf Group (ASG), based out of the southern Phillippines.  Its latest ransom demand for a kidnapped Indonesian national was $567,000. The group is known for beheading hostages when ransoms aren’t paid.

    The Cost of Piracy

    Piracy has a cost, but it’s more than just stolen oil. All of the costs associated with stolen oil, including the lost oil itself, the ransom money, insurance risk premiums, and so on will invariably be added into the cost of every barrel of oil the world over. Ransom payments, per person, can range anywhere from $18,000 to $570,000. And those ransoms are mostly being paid.

    “Pirates are predominantly taking crew because that is where the money is. People are paying it,” Phil Diacon, Dryan Global chief executive told Maritime Intelligence.  

    War risk premiums for ships traveling through the Gulf of Guinea, for example, incurred $18 million in extra charges in 2017. And over a third of all ships traversing the Gulf carried an additional kidnap and ransom rider at a total cost of $20 million–just for the Gulf of Guinea.

    Contracted maritime security is another expense. 

    All together, piracy in West Africa alone cost more than $800 million in 2017.

    Then there is the human cost. Some captives are held as little as a few days while payments are arranged. Others are held for years. Case in point: The captives are often subjected to beatings, starvation, threats, and uninhabitable conditions.

    The most recent incident of oil piracy came over the last days of 2019, as eight sailors were abducted from a Greek oil tanker near a port in Cameroon. 

    Persistent weak maritime security in pirate-stricken oil chokepoints across the globe will continue to weigh heavily on the oil industry and chip away at oil profits.


    Tyler Durden

    Mon, 01/06/2020 – 22:05

  • China Embassy Issues US Travel Warning Amid Threats Of Terrorism By Iran
    China Embassy Issues US Travel Warning Amid Threats Of Terrorism By Iran

    The Chinese embassy in Washington issued a travel warning to its citizens living or on holiday in the U.S. of increasing security threats following President Trump’s airstrike that killed Iran’s top military commander major general Qassem Soleimani in Iraq on Friday.

    “The Chinese embassy suggests and reminds Chinese citizens in the U.S. to closely watch the security situation, stay alert and take safety precautions, be cautious before going to public places,” the Embassy of the People’s Republic of China in the U.S. said in a Sunday statement, the Hong Kong-based South China Morning Post reported.

    Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, warned in a statement that the “criminals” responsible for Soleimani’s assassination will face “severe revenge,” and that his work fighting on behalf of the Iranian people “won’t be stopped by his martyrdom,” according to a statement published on Twitter.

    China is worried that Iran-backed Hezbollah sleeper cells embedded in major US metropolitan areas could be activated in the coming days, weeks, and or months could attack soft targets that are not heavily defended, such as restaurants, sporting events, and shopping malls. 

    Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security Chad Wolf published a special bulletin Saturday via the National Terrorism Advisory System, indicating that there is no credible terrorist threat but warns of lone-wolf terrorists and cyber-attacks.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    China’s travel warning to the U.S. was read more than 130 million times on Weibo, as it appears this could result in lower tourism to the U.S. 

    “Our fellow compatriots in the U.S., please be careful and stay safe!” one Weibo user said.

    Since the airstrike, Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Geng Shuang said Beijing was “highly concerned” about the threat of conflict in the Middle East.

    “China advocates that all parties should earnestly abide by the purposes and principles of the U.N. Charter and the basic norms of international relations,” Shuang said Friday.

    “We urge all parties concerned, especially the United States, to keep calm and exercise restraint and avoid a further escalation of tensions,” he added.

    The threat of a terrorist attack could lead to lower tourism figures in the months ahead as other embassies will likely warn their citizens about the travel risks associated with the US.


    Tyler Durden

    Mon, 01/06/2020 – 21:45

  • Want A Do-Over? Astrophysicist Says He Knows How To Build A Time Machine
    Want A Do-Over? Astrophysicist Says He Knows How To Build A Time Machine

    Authored by Manuel Garcia Aguilar via TheMindUnleashed.com,

    Would you like to travel back in time and change things from your past? Well, maybe you can. Ronald Mallet, an astrophysicist and tenured University of Connecticut physics professor, thinks it is theoretically possible.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Time-traveling has been in our imaginations since we discovered what time is and how we move in it. Our comprehension so far is that we move in that  one dimension constantly, always forward, and that we don’t really have a choice—unlike in the other three dimensions in which we live our lives.

    Einstein’s theory of special relativity always plays a crucial role when new theories of time traveling appear, and this is not an exception. This theory explains how time is not absolute, as we have believed, but rather, it depends on the speed at which an object is moving, and time can accelerate or decelerate depending on that.

    The Twin Paradox explains how if there are two identical twins and one of them makes a journey into space in a really high-speed rocket, after he returns to Earth he will have aged less than the one that stayed on Earth. This is well accepted in the science community as a possible scenario if we ever get to reproduce this experiment. However, time travel is not possible, at least not so far.

    While Mallet acknowledges that his theories and designs are unlikely to allow time travel in his lifetime, that’s not stopping him from pursuing his dream and to meet his beloved father again; therefore, he has developed some scientific equations and principles upon which he says a time machine could be created.

    Mallet was age 10 when his father suddenly died from a heart attack, that event changed the track of his life forever.

    “For me, the sun rose and set on him, he was just the center of things,” he told CNN Travel“Even today, after all of these years, there’s still an unreality about it for me.”

    Ron Mallett and his family at Bronx Park in the 1950s.

    Mallet has spent his career investigating black holes as well as general relativity On his professional journey, he has also been theorizing about time travel and a complex mission to build a machine capable of visiting the past. Some of his peers would argue he’ll never get there.

    “If you can bend space, there’s a possibility of you twisting space,” Mallett told CNN“In Einstein’s theory, what we call space also involves time—that’s why it’s called space-time, whatever it is you do to space also happens to time.”

    Mallet believes that it is theoretically possible to twist time into a loop that would allow for time travel into the past. He has even built a prototype showing how lasers might help him achieve this goal.

    “By studying the type of gravitational field that was produced by a ring laser,” Mallett told CNN“this could lead to a new way of looking at the possibility of a time machine based on a circulating beam of light.”

    Mallet is conscious that his idea is wholly theoretical at this point and that some restrictions may apply. 

    “You can send information back,” he told CNN, “but you can only send it back to the point at which you turn the machine on.”

    Physics is beautiful and complicated. Some of the greatest minds across history doubted themselves when they became aware of the size of the discovery they had made and Einstein was one of them, creating the “cosmological constant” to maintain a “static universe” just after he discovered that the universe and everything inside it was expanding.

    Hopefully, if Ron Mallet gets to build that machine in his lifetime, he doesn’t get too scared to actually use it.


    Tyler Durden

    Mon, 01/06/2020 – 21:25

  • How Iran Is Bankrolling Regional Instability
    How Iran Is Bankrolling Regional Instability

    After top Iranian military commander Qassem Soleimani was killed by a U.S. missile on Friday in Baghdad, Washington is awaiting retaliation from Iran. The Trump administration has said repeatedly that Soleimani’s assassination was in connection with his role in Iran’s strategy to back different militia other destabilizing armed groups throughout the Middle East. As Statista’s Niall McCarthy shows in the graphic below, data from a report from The Soufan Center sheds light on Iran’s grand strategy and “playbook” in the Middle East.

    Infographic: How Iran Is Bankrolling Regional Instability | Statista

    You will find more infographics at Statista

    Tensions between the U.S. and Iran had already started rising in May of 2019 after several tankers were “sabotaged” off the UAE coast. The New York Times reported then that National Security Advisor John Bolton ordered a military contingency plan to be presented to senior White House security officials which involves the deployment of 120,000 U.S. troops to the Middle East. That came after Bolton announced that a U.S. carrier strike group centered around the USS Abraham Lincoln would be deployed to the region along with B-52 heavy bombers.

    Iran has not developed its capabilities and regional strength in order to prevail in a conventional 21st century conflict. It has rather focused on pumping money and military hardware into regional allies, proxies and militias with the aim of spreading political prosperity and enabling them to project power in the region and beyond.

    Along with training and arms shipments, soft power (financial, political, diplomatic, public relationship and other non-military mechanisms) is an important cog in Tehran’s strategy. This allows it to portray itself as strong economically as well as enabling it to build political support overseas and insulate it proxies and allies. Examples of this include its investments in a major port project in Oman as well as its substantial gas exports to neighboring Iraq. Iran has also taken advantage of the rift between Saudi Arabia, the GCC and Qatar. It has moved to increase food exports to Doha and granted Qatar Airways the use of its airspace.

    Given the extent of its regional activities, how much money is it actually pumping into its neighbors? The Soufan Center’s research shows where Iranian money is flowing in the Middle East and where Iranian-backed proxies and militant groups are active. Syria receives an estimated $6 billion annually of economic aid, subsidized oil, commodity transfers and military aid. Iraq receives up to $1 billion, some of which ends up in the hands of militia organizations. Lebanon, which is of course home to Hezbollah, sees around $700 million of financial support, practically all of which goes to the militant group.


    Tyler Durden

    Mon, 01/06/2020 – 21:05

  • Fragmentation In 'The Axis Of Resistance' Led To Soleimani's Death
    Fragmentation In 'The Axis Of Resistance' Led To Soleimani's Death

    Authored by Elijah Magnier via EJMagnier.com,

    It was not the US decision to fire missiles against the IRGC commander Brigadier General Qassem Soleimani that killed the Iranian officer and his companions in Baghdad. Yes, of course, the order that was given to launch missiles from the two drones (which destroyed the two cars carrying Sardar Soleimani and his companion the Iraqi commander in al-Hashd al-Shaabi Jamal Jaafar Al-Tamimi aka Abu Mahdi al-Muhandes and burned their bodies in the vehicle) came from US command and control.

    However, the reason President Donald Trump made this decision derives from the weakness of the “axis of resistance”, which has completely retreated from the level of performance that Iran believed it was capable of after decades of work to strengthen this “axis”.

    A close companion of Major General Qassim Soleimani, to whom he spoke hours before boarding the plane that took him from Damascus to Baghdad, told me:

    “The nobleman died. Palestine above all has lost Hajj Qassem (Soleimani). He was the “King” of the Axis of the Resistance and its leader. He was assassinated and this is exactly what he was hoping to reach in this life (Martyrdom). However, this axis will live and will not die. No doubt, the Axis of the Resistance needs to review its policy and regenerate itself to correct its path. This was what Hajj Qassim was complaining about and planning to work on and strategizing about in his last hours.”

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The US struck Iran at the heart of its pride by killing Major General Soleimani. But the “axis of the Resistance” killed him before that. This is how:

    When Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu assassinated the deputy head of the Military Council (the highest authority in the Lebanese Hezbollah, which is headed by its Secretary-General, Hassan Nasrallah), Hajj Imad Mughniyah in Damascus, Syria, Hezbollah could not avenge him until today.

    When Trump gave Netanyahu Jerusalem as the “capital of Israel”, the “Axis of the Resistance” did not move except by holding television symposia and conferences verbally rejecting the decision.

    When President Trump offered the occupied Syrian Golan Heights to Israel and the “Axis of Resistance” did not react, the US President Donald Trump and his team understood that they were opposed by no effective deterrent. The inaction of the Resistance axis emboldened Trump to do what he wants.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    And when Israel bombed hundreds of Syrian and Iranian targets in Syria, the “Axis of the Resistance” justified its lack of retaliation by the typical sentence: “We do not want to be dragged along by the timing of the engagement imposed by the enemy,” as a senior official in this axis told me.

    In Iraq shortly before his death, Major General Soleimani was complaining about the weakening of the Iraqi ranks within this “Axis of the Resistance”, represented by the Al-Bina’ (Construction) Alliance and other groups close to this alliance like Al-Hikma of Ammar al-Hakim and Haidar al-Abadi, formerly close to Iran, that have gone over to the US side.

    In Iraq, Major General Soleimani was very patient and never lost his temper. He was trying to reconcile the Iraqis, both his allies and those who had chosen the US camp and disagreed with him. He used to hug those who shouted at him to lower tensions and continue dialogue to avoid spoiling the meeting. Anyone who raised his voice during discussions soon found that it was Soleimani who calmed everyone down.

    Hajj Qassem Soleimani was unable to reach a consensus on the new Prime Minister’s name among those he deemed to be allies in the same coalition. He asked Iraqi leaders to select the names and went through all of these asking questions about the acceptability of these names to the political groups, to the Marjaiya, to protestors in the street and whether the suggested names were not provocative or challenging to the US. Notwithstanding the animosity between Iran and the US, Soleimani encouraged the selection of a personality that would not be boycotted by the US. Soleimani believed the US capable of damaging Iraq and understood the importance of maintaining a good relationship with the US for the stability of the country.

    Soleimani was shocked by the dissension among Iraqi Shia and believed that the “axis of resistance” needed a new vision as it was faltering. In the final hours before his death, Major General Soleimani was ruminating on the profound antagonisms between Iraqis of the same camp.

    When the Iraqi street began to move against the government, the line rejecting American hegemony was fragmented because it was part of the authority that ruled and governed Iraq. To make matters worse, Sayyed Muqtada al-Sadr directed his arrows against his partners in government, as though the street demonstrations did not target him, the politician controlling the largest number of Iraqi deputies, ministers and state officials, who had participated in the government for more than ten years.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Major General Soleimani admonished Moqtada Al-Sadr for his stances, which contributed to undermining the Iraqi ranks because the Sadrist leader did not offer an alternative solution or practical project other than the chaos. Moqtada has his own men, the feared Saraya al-Salam, present in the street.

    When US Defense Secretary Mark Esper called Iraqi Prime Minister Adel Abdul-Mahdi on December 28 and informed him of America’s intentions of hitting Iraqi security targets inside Iraq, including the PMU, Soleimani was very disappointed by Abdul-Mahdi’s failure to effectively oppose Esper. Abdul-Mahdi merely told Esper that the proposed US action was dangerous. Soleimani knew that the US would not have hit Iraqi targets had Abdul-Mahdi dared to oppose the US decision. The targeted areas were a common Iranian-Iraqi operational stage to monitor and control ISIS movements on the borders with Syria and Iraq. The US would have reversed its decision had the Iraqi Prime Minister threatened the US with retaliation in the event that Iraqi forces were bombed and killed. After all, the US had no legal right to attack any objective in Iraq without the agreement of the Iraqi government. This decision was the moment when Iraq has lost its sovereignty and the US took control of the country.

    This effective US control is another reason why President Trump gave the green light to kill Major General Soleimani. The Iraqi front had demonstrated its weakness and also, it was necessary to select a strong Iraqi leader with the guts to stand to the US arrogance and unlawful actions.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Iran has never controlled Iraq, as most analysts mistakenly believe and speculate. For years, the US has worked hard in the corridors of the Iraqi political leadership lobby for its own interests. The most energetic of its agents was US Presidential envoy Brett McGurk, who clearly realised the difficulties of navigating inside Iraqi leaders’ corridors during the search for a prime minister of Iraq before the appointment of Adel Abdel Mahdi, the selection of President Barham Saleh and other governments in the past. Major General Soleimani and McGurk shared an understanding of these difficulties. Both understood the nature of the Iraqi political quagmire.

    Soleimani did not give orders to fire missiles at US bases or attack the US Embassy. If it was in his hands to destroy them with accurate missiles and to remove the entire embassy from its place without repercussions, he would not have hesitated. But the Iraqis have their own opinions, methods, modus operandi and selection of targets and missile calibres; they never relied on Soleimani for such decisions.

    Iranian involvement in Iraqi affairs was never welcomed by the Marjaiya in Najaf, even if it agreed to receive Soleimani on a few occasions. They clashed over the reelection of Nuri al-Maliki, Soleimani’s preferred candidate, to the point that the Marjaiya wrote a letter making its refusal of al-Maliki explicit. This led to the selection of Abadi as prime minister.

    Soleimani’s views contradicted the perception of the Marjaiya, that had to write a clear message, firstly, to reject the re-election of Nori al-Maliki to a third session, despite Soleimani’s insistence.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    All of the above is related to the stage that followed the 2011 departure of US forces from Iraq under President Obama. Prior to that, Abu Mahdi Al-Muhandis was the link between the Iraqis and Iran: he had the decision-making power, the vision, the support of various groups, and effectively served as the representative of Soleimani, who did not interfere in the details. These Iraqi groups met with Soleimani often in Iran; Soleimani rarely travelled to Iraq during the period of heavy US military presence.

    Soleimani, although he was the leader of the “Axis of the Resistance”, was sometimes called “the king” in some circles because his name evokes Solomon. According to sources within the “Axis of the Resistance”, he “never dictated his own policy but left a margin of movement and decision to all leaders of the axis without exception. Therefore, he was considered the link between this axis and the supreme leader Sayyed Ali Khamenei. Soleimani was able to contact Sayyed Khamenei at any time and directly without mediation. The Leader of the revolution considered Soleimani as his son.

    According to sources, in Syria, Soleimani “never hesitated to jump inside a truck, ride an ordinary car, take the first helicopter, or travel on a transport or cargo plane as needed. He did not take any security precautions but used his phone (which he called a companion spy) freely because he believed that when the decision came to assassinate him, he would follow his destiny.  He looked forward to becoming a martyr because he had already lived long.”

    Was the leader of the “resistance axis” managing and running it?

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Sayyed Ali Khamenei told Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah: “You are an Arab and the Arabs accept you more than they accept Iran”. Sayyed Nasrallah directed and managed the axis of Lebanon, Syria and Yemen and had an important role in Iraq. Hajj Soleimani was the liaison between the axis of the resistance and Iran and he was the financial and logistical officer. According to my source, “He was a friend of all leaders and officials of all ranks. He was humble and looked after everyone he had to deal with”.

    The “Axis of Resistance” indirectly allowed the killing of Qassem Soleimani. If Israel and the US could know Sayyed Nasrallah’s whereabouts, they would not hesitate a moment to assassinate him. They may be aware: the reaction may be limited to burning flags and holding conferences and manifesting in front of an embassy. Of course, this kind of reaction does not deter President Trump who wants to be re-elected with the support of Israel and US public opinion. He wants to present himself as a warrior and determined leader who loves battle and killing.

    Iran invested 40 years building the “Axis of the Resistance”. It cannot remain idle, faced with the assassination of the Leader of this axis. Would a suitable price be the US exit from Iraq and condemnation in the Security Council? Would that, together with withdrawal from the nuclear deal, be enough for Iran to avenge its General? Will the ensuing battle be confined to the Iraqi stage? Will it be used for the victory of certain Iraqi political players?

    The assassination of its leader represents the supreme test for the Axis of Resistance. All sides, friend and foe, are awaiting its response.


    Tyler Durden

    Mon, 01/06/2020 – 20:45

    Tags

  • 52 Stealth Fighter Jets Elephant Walk In Show Of Force Amid Threats Of War
    52 Stealth Fighter Jets Elephant Walk In Show Of Force Amid Threats Of War

    With another 3,000 US troops preparing to deploy to the Middle East and six Boeing B-52 Stratofortress nuclear-capable bombers headed to a major US military base at Deigo Garcia, 52 stealth fighter jets conducted a Combat Power Exercise Monday amid escalating tensions between the US and Iran. 

    Also known as the Elephant Walk exercise, 52 Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II stealth fighters carrying missiles and bombs were taxiing down a runway at Hill Air Force base in Utah on Monday. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Elephant walks are generally conducted right before a minimum interval takeoff (MITO), a technique used by the US Air Force (USAF) to scramble all jets to take off at twelve- and fifteen-second intervals. 

    The objective of the exercise is to get all fighters and bombers in the air within fifteen minutes of an alert of an incoming missile attack. 

    “The exercise, which was planned for months, demonstrated their ability to employ a large force of F-35As – testing readiness in the areas of personnel accountability, aircraft generation, ground operations, flight operations, and combat capability against air and ground targets. A little more than four years after receiving their first combat-coded F-35A Lightning II aircraft, Hill’s fighter wings have achieved full warfighting capability,” said the 388th Fighter Wing in a Facebook post. 

    From troop deployments to a show of force with B-52 bombers and stealth fighters, the Trump administration is sending a clear message to Iran. 

    Meanwhile, Iranian state media channels on Monday began “answering” US threats, broadcasting military “shows of force” against the United States to its population:

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    President Trump has already threatened an all-out attack on 52 sites inside Iran. The threat of war has never been greater, the world has dove into uncharted waters in the last week. All eyes on possible retaliation strike by Iran. 


    Tyler Durden

    Mon, 01/06/2020 – 20:25

  • Devin Nunes: "Republicans Are Actively Investigating (IG Michael) Atkinson"
    Devin Nunes: "Republicans Are Actively Investigating (IG Michael) Atkinson"

    Via SaraACarter.com,

    Ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee Devin Nunes told The Sara Carter Show that Republicans have an active investigation into Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson, who alerted lawmakers to the so-called whistleblower complaint that has led to President Donald Trump’s partisan impeachment in the House.

    Nunes, R-CA, spoke to this reporter for Monday’s podcast.

    He revealed that transcripts of Atkinson’s secret testimony will expose that the Inspector General either lied or he needs to make corrections to his statements to lawmakers. The transcripts has been kept from the public by House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-CA, because it is damaging to their “impeachment scam,” Nunes said.

    The whistleblower, who has not been formally named by lawmakers, met with Schiff’s staff members prior to submitting their complaint to Atkinson. Schiff was chided by Republican lawmakers and many members of the media for falsely claiming that his committee had no contact with the whistleblower.

    The Schiff Factor

    Schiff stated publicly “we have not spoken directly with the whistleblower.” In fact, the  whistleblower had reached out to a committee aide before filing a complaint, a story that was first reported by the New York Times.

    “We really do need to hear from the whistleblower,” Nunes told The Sara Carter Show.

    “That needs to happen and the fact that the Democrats won’t release the transcript of us interviewing the Inspector General Atkinson that brought this scam forward. Everyone needs to see that testimony and the reason that it’s not being released is because it’s very damaging, not only to the whistleblower, but also to Atkinson himself.”

    Nunes could not disclose the content of the whistleblower testimony but said “this testimony is really bad and…the Republicans have an active investigation into Atkinson.”

    Nunes noted that he, along with Reps. Kevin McCarthy, R-CA, and Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, sent a letter to Atkinson stating that the anti-Trump whistleblower did not offer any direct, first-hand evidence of alleged wrongdoing against Trump. They questioned Atkinson’s reasoning for accepting the complaint that is filled with hearsay and rumor.

    Atkinson Doesn’t Want To Answer Questions

    The Republican lawmakers asked Atkinson to explain who revised the complaint and for what reason.

    We’ve mentioned it, but I think people have just kind of ignored it because, of course, we don’t have the subpoena power, so we can’t bring Atkinson back in but he’s got serious questions to answer for because I believe that he either lied to Congress or he really needs to correct his statements and he’s refused to respond,” said Nunes, who could not elaborate on Atkinson’s testimony.

    He said that Atkinson’s response to their letter was not sufficient.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Atkinson “gave us a very typical IC response, which is to not answer the question,” said Nunes.

    “Three years ago, that might’ve worked,” he said.

    “It doesn’t work with us anymore. He is under active investigation. I’m not gonna go any farther than that because you know obviously he has a chance to come in and prove his innocence, but my guess is Schiff, Atkinson they don’t want that transcript out because it’s very damaging.

    “Being that it hasn’t been made public yet, why would it not be,” Nunes questioned.

    “And nobody in the media is calling for it,” he told The Sara Carter Show.

    “You’d think they would be, but you know I’ve talked about it on television, John Ratcliffe’s talked about it on television. There’s very few of us that actually know what’s in the transcript, but, yeah, it’s a major problem.”

    Well, this reporter is asking for it and it should be made public. American’s have a right to know exactly how the whistleblower complaint was brought to Congress and how this alleged complaint led to the partisan House impeachment of President Trump.


    Tyler Durden

    Mon, 01/06/2020 – 20:05

  • Ghosn's 'Great Escape' Masterminded By Ex-Green Beret, Involved 300-Mile High-Speed Rail Sprint
    Ghosn's 'Great Escape' Masterminded By Ex-Green Beret, Involved 300-Mile High-Speed Rail Sprint

    Writers for the inevitable HBO miniseries about former Nissan Chairman and CEO Carlos Ghosn’s “Great Escape” from house arrest in Tokyo will have no shortage of material to draw from when they try to reconstruct what has become one of the most audacious and daring corporate capers in recent memory.

    A slew of reports published over the weekend continued the drip-drip of salacious details from Ghosn’s high-wire clandestine flight across Japan and then across most of Asia via plane, all while stowed away in a hefty case meant to store audio equipment.

    First, reports identified the team responsible for planning and executing Ghosn’s “extrication.” Both WSJ and Bloomberg pointed to Michael Taylor, an ex-Green Beret whose private security company has done work for the federal government, and private entities including the New York Times, ABC, Delta Air Lines and Disney on Ice.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Taylor has a somewhat checkered past. He spent a total of 19 months in prison (on a sentence of 24 months) after being indicted back in 2012 in two criminal cases stemming from a federal bid-rigging investigation involving a 24-year FBI veteran. Taylor and his firm were eventually indicted for contract fraud and money laundering after a grand jury investigation in Utah. Details are vague, but the Feds charged Taylor with bribing the agent. “Giving federal agents money is nothing new to Mr. Taylor,” said US prosecutor Maria Lerner at Taylor’s sentencing in 2015.

    He vigorously disputed the case while imprisoned in a local Utah jail awaiting trial. He eventually pleaded guilty to both counts, even as some of his former clients wrote heart-wrenching letters to the judge overseeing the case, attesting to Taylor’s character.

    One mother praised Taylor in writing to his sentencing judge for helping secure her abducted daughter’s release in Lebanon in 1997.

    “I know that my connection with Michael was more than just a job,” the mother wrote. “His heart and soul guided him step by step to always do the right thing.”

    In a separate, earlier incident, Taylor was indicted in Massachusetts on charges including illegal wiretapping. He eventually pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor.

    Taylor’s firm was contracted for the job about three months ago, after Ghosn made the final decision to go ahead with the job. It’s unclear how, exactly, Taylor is connected to Ghosn, but both men share longstanding ties to Lebanon, along with a third man who was allegedly involved in the plot, and who allegedly traveled on the charter flight that ferried Ghosn out of Japan.

    According to WSJ, that individual was George Zayek, a Lebanese-born American citizen who has worked with Taylor’s security company in the past. Zayek is the brother of Elias Zayek, one of the founders of the Lebanese Forces, a Christian militia in Lebanon. Elias was assassinated in 1990 just months before the end of the brutal, long-running Lebanese civil war. His brother George walks with a limp from an injury sustained during fighting in Lebanon during the 1970s.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The case that Ghosn was allegedly smuggled out of Japan inside.

    Taylor also as a connection to Lebanon’s Christian community. He served in Lebanon back in the early 1980s as a Green Beret paratrooper. Taylor met his wife in Lebanon, and speaks fluent Arabic. Later, working as a private contractor, he helped train Lebanon’s Christian militias.

    Back in 2012, Taylor traveled to Lebanon to work on a classified DEA operation that insiders have described as “one of the most important DEA Operations in history.” Taylor was described as a “key player” in the operation.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Taylor

    In 2009, Taylor’s former company (as it existed before his legal troubles) was approached by the New York Times about helping to rescue reporter David Rohde from Taliban captivity in Afghanistan. Taylor planned a “snatch and grab” operation to help rescue Rohde, but before he could pull it off, Rohde escaped on his own.

    Rescuing kidnapping victims overseas has become something of a specialty for Taylor, and he has been contracted by the FBI and the State Department to rescue victims over the years.

    Taylor managed to rebuild his business following his legal troubles after winning back $2 million of $5 million in company assets that were seized by federal authorities.

    WSJ published a lengthy piece detailing the operation, while Bloomberg aggregate reports revealing small details of the operation that originally surfaced in the Lebanese press, like the fact that Ghosn’s 15-man extraction team used public transport to make the 300-mile sprint from Tokyo to Osaka before boarding the private jet that eventually carried Ghosn from Japan to Istanbul, then on to Beirut, where he finally landed at the Rafic Hariri International Airport.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    WSJ revealed that during a trip to Osaka’s Kansai Airport a few months, Taylor noticed a critical security flaw in the airport terminal for chartered flights: The security equipment used to scan luggage was too small to X-Ray oversize luggage. This proved to be critical: The box that carried Ghosn (which had holes drilled in the bottom allowing him to breath during the trip) was not closely scrutinized by airport officials.

    Ghosn surrendered his passport when he was arrested more than 13 months ago by Japanese police after landing in Tokyo. But he is a Lebanese citizen (he also carries Brazilian citizenship), and Lebanon doesn’t extradite its citizens.

    Prior to his escape, Ghosn had said he intended to stay in Japan and fight the charges against him, though he did complain that he felt Japan’s justice system was rigged, and stacked unfairly against him.

    For his supporters, the charges against Ghosn were never clear, and included failing to report income that actually wouldn’t be paid out in the form of a post-retirement bonus. Many suspect that his ouster was part of an internal vendetta organized by other senior executives, who had grown weary of Ghosn’s leadership. Before his arrest, Ghosn was revered in Japan and around the world for turning around Nissan, and was often seen as one of the world’s few rockstar CEOs.

    Taylor reportedly told friends that he sympathized with Ghosn thanks to his own legal troubles, and even referred to the executive as a “hostage” of the Japanese government.

    Japan, for what it’s worth, has defended its legal system. However, it’s impossible to ignore the fact that Japan’s justice system has a 99% conviction rate, which some human-rights experts have criticized. In a statement released by Ghosn after his escape, he insisted that his family played no part in the operation, and accused Japan of “inhumane” treatment.

    As we reported over the weekend, the private charter service that Ghosn’s extraction team hired for the mission is MNG Jet Havacilik AS, the mysterious global aircraft charter company that gained notoriety when it was implicated in media reports for helping to smuggle gold looted from Venezuela’s central bank out of the country, so that it could be illegally sold by the Maduro government for desperately needed cash.

    In a statement, the company said its planes were illegally deployed by Taylor and his team, and that it wasn’t aware that Ghosn would be a passenger on the flight. It claimed that paperwork for the flight was deliberately falsified to mislead the company.

    What happens next for Ghosn will remain is uncertain: Japan has extradition treaties with many countries, including the US, making it difficult for Ghosn to leave Lebanon. And while Ghosn is, for now, out of the reach of Japanese authorities, it’s possible that Tokyo could turn its sights on Taylor, and the rest of the team used to facilitate his escape. Turkey has already arrested the pilots of the plane used to transport Ghosn, and Japan requested an international arrest warrant for Ghosn via INTERPOL.

    Ghosn is expected to speak publicly for the first time since his arrest later this week. Whatever happens next, we imagine it will be good.


    Tyler Durden

    Mon, 01/06/2020 – 19:45

    Tags

  • Some Thoughts On The Current State Of The U.S. Military
    Some Thoughts On The Current State Of The U.S. Military

    Authored by Paul Gilbert via TheMostImportantNews.com,

    The Heritage Foundation publishes an annual Index of U.S. Military Strength, which assesses capacity, capability and readiness of each of the services, and rates them “very strong,” “strong,” “marginal,” “weak” or “very weak”.

    Based on a broad range of personnel issues; degradation of our forces and equipment from long-term involvement in the Middle East; our inability to adequately maintain and upgrade our current inventory of aircraft and warships … with reliability; and, in some instances, the strategic superiority of our adversaries, our military’s overall rating was “marginal”.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    A GAO study released in early 2019 detailed ongoing, critical problems in recruiting, training and sustaining front-line and support personnel across all services and at all levels and, purportedly, the Pentagon has no comprehensive strategy to address them. Given millennials’ attitudes toward the military, this situation will likely worsen.

    Even if these issues are adequately addressed, ensuring that our military has state-of-the-art aircraft, warships, equipment and armaments is a must… and requires the application of cutting-edge, but reliable, technologies.

    There are troubling signs here!

    For example, as the aircraft carrier U.S.S. Gerald Ford nears delivery, most of its elevators are not operational, so aircraft and armaments cannot reach the flight deck. Hydraulic systems were replaced with electro-magnetic technology, and the “bugs” have not yet been worked out. Similarly, the dependable steam-operated aircraft catapult and arresting systems have also given way to electro-magnetic ones because they are, theoretically, upgrades … except that they don’t yet work.

    Also, the aircraft carrier U.S.S. Harry Truman was taken out of service in August due to the “nagging” failure of its electrical system and no timeline was set for solving the problem … with certainty. This caused the Truman’s escort surface ships to be subsequently deployed without the Truman! The electrical problem was allegedly solved, and the Truman joined its own strike group in late November. Unfortunately, our “carrier problems” come at a time when both the RAND Corporation and the Center for a New American Security acknowledge that China is building surface ships, including carriers, and their numbers will likely surpass the U.S. within a decade.

    In the air, the USAF Mobility Command repeatedly halted delivery of KC-46’s due to construction debris found left in the aircraft. After that inexcusable problem was remedied, the planes were restricted from carrying cargo and personnel indefinitely due to cargo restraint devices continuing to come unlocked and posing a potential danger to personnel, cargo … and even the pilots’ ability to control the aircraft. Even worse, the reliable re-fueling technique involving visual cues gave way to a camera system that is flawed, and the boom needs to be re-designed since it scrapes against the airframe of numerous receiving aircraft and, in particular, does not allow the A-10 to properly connect to it … presenting hardware and software troubles that could take 3-4 years to correct. The manufacturer of the KC-46’s is the beleaguered Boeing!

    On top of all these “internal” concerns, Russia claims to have put into operation inter-continental and air-to-ground hypersonic missiles that can fly at up to 27 times the speed of sound and reach the continental U.S. within 30 minutes.

    Our “real” adversary… China… is testing similar generation of missiles that can fly at 5 times the speed of sound.

    Sadly, Secretary of Defense Mark Esper acknowledges that the U.S. is “a couple of years” from having one. In the meantime, we have placed sensors in space that can quickly detect the launch of these missiles, but we have no dependable defense against them.

    The above, as well as many other issues involving our military, need to be viewed within the context of an emerging geo-political and military alliance comprised of Russia, China and Iran.

    Iran’s role is to continue to stoke U.S. involvement in the Middle East … being the “bright shiny object” that keeps our eye off the proverbial ball, which is the combined military gains by Russia and China. Why is it that our military brain trust cannot see this? Additionally, the arrogance and ignorance of the American “left”, which effectively dismisses external (“existential”) military threats and, instead, concerns itself with undoing the results of the 2016 election and promoting domestic policies that are completely counter to the traditional values held by most Americans. Fast forward: If things remain unchanged, at some point in the not-too-distant future, the advanced weapons and technological capabilities of our adversaries will potentially be such a devastating threat that we might just capitulate … without ever returning fire!


    Tyler Durden

    Mon, 01/06/2020 – 19:25

    Tags

  • 3 People Critical In Salt Lake City After Tesla Runs Red Light, Smashes Into Car At "High Rate Of Speed"
    3 People Critical In Salt Lake City After Tesla Runs Red Light, Smashes Into Car At "High Rate Of Speed"

    Three people were critically injured after a Tesla ran a red light in Salt Lake City on Sunday morning, smashing into another car.

    According to the Deseret News, the Tesla hit another car while “traveling at a high rate of speed” through a red light, according to Salt Lake Police Lt. Brett Olsen.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Two men in the Tesla and one woman in the car that was struck were all taken to the hospital in critical condition. 

    Meanwhile – stop us if you’ve heard this one before – the Tesla’s battery then began “exploding on scene”, prompting a hazardous materials team to show up. Photographs show the front end of the Tesla completely destroyed and ravaged by flames. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Impairment was “not immediately suspected”, according to Olsen, but an investigation is ongoing. There is no word on whether or not Autopilot played a role in the accident.

    We will keep our eyes open for further developments of this story and update this post accordingly…


    Tyler Durden

    Mon, 01/06/2020 – 19:05

  • Hudson: De-Dollarization & America's Escalating "Democratic" Oil War In The Near-East
    Hudson: De-Dollarization & America's Escalating "Democratic" Oil War In The Near-East

    Authored by Michael Hudson via Counterpunch.org,

    The mainstream media are carefully sidestepping the method behind America’s seeming madness in assassinating Islamic Revolutionary Guard general Qassim Suleimani to start the New Year. The logic behind the assassination this was a long-standing application of U.S. global policy, not just a personality quirk of Donald Trump’s impulsive action. His assassination of Iranian military leader Suleimani was indeed a unilateral act of war in violation of international law, but it was a logical step in a long-standing U.S. strategy. It was explicitly authorized by the Senate in the funding bill for the Pentagon that it passed last year.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The assassination was intended to escalate America’s presence in Iraq to keep control the region’s oil reserves, and to back Saudi Arabia’s Wahabi troops (Isis, Al Quaeda in Iraq, Al Nusra and other divisions of what are actually America’s foreign legion) to support U.S. control of Near Eastern oil as a buttress to the U.S. dollar. That remains the key to understanding this policy, and why it is in the process of escalating, not dying down.

    I sat in on discussions of this policy as it was formulated nearly fifty years ago when I worked at the Hudson Institute and attended meetings at the White House, met with generals at various armed forces think tanks and with diplomats at the United Nations. My role was as a balance-of-payments economist having specialized for a decade at Chase Manhattan, Arthur Andersen and oil companies in the oil industry and military spending. These were two of the three main dynamic of American foreign policy and diplomacy. (The third concern was how to wage war in a democracy where voters rejected the draft in the wake of the Vietnam War.)

    The media and public discussion have diverted attention from this strategy by floundering speculation that President Trump did it, except to counter the (non-)threat of impeachment with a wag-the-dog attack, or to back Israeli lebensraum drives, or simply to surrender the White House to neocon hate-Iran syndrome.

    The actual context for the neocon’s action was the balance of payments, and the role of oil and energy as a long-term lever of American diplomacy.

    The balance of payments dimension

    The major deficit in the U.S. balance of payments has long been military spending abroad. The entire payments deficit, beginning with the Korean War in 1950-51 and extending through the Vietnam War of the 1960s, was responsible for forcing the dollar off gold in 1971. The problem facing America’s military strategists was how to continue supporting the 800 U.S. military bases around the world and allied troop support without losing America’s financial leverage.

    The solution turned out to be to replace gold with U.S. Treasury securities (IOUs) as the basis of foreign central bank reserves. After 1971, foreign central banks had little option for what to do with their continuing dollar inflows except to recycle them to the U.S. economy by buying U.S. Treasury securities. The effect of U.S. foreign military spending thus did not undercut the dollar’s exchange rate, and did not even force the Treasury and Federal Reserve to raise interest rates to attract foreign exchange to offset the dollar outflows on military account. In fact, U.S. foreign military spending helped finance the domestic U.S. federal budget deficit.

    Saudi Arabia and other Near Eastern OPEC countries quickly became a buttress of the dollar. After these countries quadrupled the price of oil (in retaliation for the United States quadrupling the price of its grain exports, a mainstay of the U.S. trade balance), U.S. banks were swamped with an inflow of much foreign deposits – which were lent out to Third World countries in an explosion of bad loans that blew up in 1972 with Mexico’s insolvency, and destroyed Third World government credit for a decade, forcing it into dependence on the United States via the IMF and World Bank).

    To top matters, of course, what Saudi Arabia does not save in dollarized assets with its oil-export earnings is spent on buying hundreds of billion of dollars of U.S. arms exports. This locks them into dependence on U.S. supply o replacement parts and repairs, and enables the United States to turn off Saudi military hardware at any point of time, in the event that the Saudis may try to act independently of U.S. foreign policy.

    So maintaining the dollar as the world’s reserve currency became a mainstay of U.S. military spending. Foreign countries to not have to pay the Pentagon directly for this spending. They simply finance the U.S. Treasury and U.S. banking system.

    Fear of this development was a major reason why the United States moved against Libya, whose foreign reserves were held in gold, not dollars, an which was urging other African countries to follow suit in order to free themselves from “Dollar Diplomacy.” Hillary and Obama invaded, grabbed their gold supplies (we still have no idea who ended up with these billions of dollars worth of gold) and destroyed Libya’s government, its public education system, its public infrastructure and other non-neoliberal policies.

    The great threat to this is dedollarization as China, Russia and other countries seek to avoid recycling dollars. Without the dollar’s function as the vehicle for world saving – in effect, without the Pentagon’s role in creating the Treasury debt that is the vehicle for world central bank reserves – the U.S. would find itself constrained militarily and hence diplomatically constrained, as it was under the gold exchange standard.

    That is the same strategy that the U.S. has followed in Syria and Iraq. Iran was threatening this dollarization strategy and its buttress in U.S. oil diplomacy.

    The oil industry as buttress of the U.S. balance of payments and foreign diplomacy

    The trade balance is buttressed by oil and farm surpluses. Oil is the key, because it is imported by U.S. companies at almost no balance-of-payments cost (the payments end up in the oil industry’s head offices here as profits and payments to management), while profits on U.S. oil company sales to other countries are remitted to the United States (via offshore tax-avoidance centers, mainly Liberia and Panama for many years). And as noted above, OPEC countries have been told to keep their official reserves in the form of U.S. securities (stocks and bonds as well as Treasury IOUs, but not direct purchase of U.S. companies being deemed economically important). Financially, OPEC countries are client slates of the Dollar Area.

    America’s attempt to maintain this buttress explains U.S. opposition to any foreign government steps to reverse global warming and the extreme weather caused by the world’s U.S.-sponsored dependence on oil. Any such moves by Europe and other countries would reduce dependence on U.S. oil sales, and hence on U.S. ability to control the global oil spigot as a means of control and coercion, are viewed as hostile acts.

    Oil also explains U.S. opposition to Russian oil exports via Nordstream. U.S. strategists want to treat energy as a U.S. national monopoly. Other countries can benefit in the way that Saudi Arabia has done – by sending their surpluses to the U.S. economy – but not to support their own economic growth and diplomacy. Control of oil thus implies support for continued global warming as an inherent part of U.S. strategy.

    How a “democratic” nation can wage international war and terrorism

    The Vietnam War showed that modern democracies cannot field armies for any major military conflict, because this would require a draft of its citizens. That would lead any government attempting such a draft to be voted out of power. And without troops, it is not possible to invade a country to take it over.

    The corollary of this perception is that democracies have only two choices when it comes to military strategy: They can only wage airpower, bombing opponents; or they can create a foreign legion, that is, hire mercenaries or back foreign governments that provide this military service.

    Here once again Saudi Arabia plays a critical role, through its control of Wahabi Sunnis turned into terrorist jihadis willing to sabotage, bomb, assassinate, blow up and otherwise fight any target designated as an enemy of “Islam,” the euphemism for Saudi Arabia acting as U.S. client state. (Religion really is not the key; I know of no ISIS or similar Wahabi attack on Israeli targets.) The United States needs the Saudis to supply or finance Wahabi crazies. So in addition to playing a key role in the U.S. balance of payments by recycling its oil-export earnings are into U.S. stocks, bonds and other investments, Saudi Arabia provides manpower by supporting the Wahabi members of America’s foreign legion, ISIS and Al-Nusra/Al-Qaeda. Terrorism has become the “democratic” mode of today U.S. military policy.

    What makes America’s oil war in the Near East “democratic” is that this is the only kind of war a democracy can fight – an air war, followed by a vicious terrorist army that makes up for the fact that no democracy can field its own army in today’s world. The corollary is that, terrorism has become the “democratic” mode of warfare.

    From the U.S. vantage point, what is a “democracy”? In today’s Orwellian vocabulary, it means any country supporting U.S. foreign policy. Bolivia and Honduras have become “democracies” since their coups, along with Brazil. Chile under Pinochet was a Chicago-style free market democracy. So was Iran under the Shah, and Russia under Yeltsin – but not since it elected Vladimir Putin president, any more than is China under President Xi.

    The antonym to “democracy” is “terrorist.” That simply means a nation willing to fight to become independent from U.S. neoliberal democracy. It does not include America’s proxy armies.

    Iran’s role as U.S. nemesis

    What stands in the way of U.S. dollarization, oil and military strategy? Obviously, Russia and China have been targeted as long-term strategic enemies for seeking their own independent economic policies and diplomacy. But next to them, Iran has been in America’s gun sights for nearly seventy years.

    America’s hatred of Iran is starts with its attempt to control its own oil production, exports and earnings. It goes back to 1953, when Mossadegh was overthrown because he wanted domestic sovereignty over Anglo-Persian oil. The CIA-MI6 coup replaced him with the pliant Shah, who imposed a police state to prevent Iranian independence from U.S. policy. The only physical places free from the police were the mosques. That made the Islamic Republic the path of least resistance to overthrowing the Shah and re-asserting Iranian sovereignty.

    The United States came to terms with OPEC oil independence by 1974, but the antagonism toward Iran extends to demographic and religious considerations. Iranian support its Shi’ite population an those of Iraq and other countries – emphasizing support for the poor and for quasi-socialist policies instead of neoliberalism – has made it the main religious rival to Saudi Arabia’s Sunni sectarianism and its role as America’s Wahabi foreign legion.

    America opposed General Suleimani above all because he was fighting against ISIS and other U.S.-backed terrorists in their attempt to break up Syria and replace Assad’s regime with a set of U.S.-compliant local leaders – the old British “divide and conquer” ploy. On occasion, Suleimani had cooperated with U.S. troops in fighting ISIS groups that got “out of line” meaning the U.S. party line. But every indication is that he was in Iraq to work with that government seeking to regain control of the oil fields that President Trump has bragged so loudly about grabbing.

    Already in early 2018, President Trump asked Iraq to reimburse America for the cost of “saving its democracy” by bombing the remainder of Saddam’s economy. The reimbursement was to take the form of Iraqi Oil. More recently, in 2019, President Trump asked, why not simply grab Iraqi oil. The giant oil field has become the prize of the Bush-Cheney post 9-11 Oil War. “‘It was a very run-of-the-mill, low-key, meeting in general,” a source who was in the room told Axios.’ And then right at the end, Trump says something to the effect of, he gets a little smirk on his face and he says, ‘So what are we going to do about the oil?’”

    Trump’s idea that America should “get something” out of its military expenditure in destroying the Iraqi and Syrian economies simply reflects U.S. policy.

    In late October, 2019, The New York Times reported that: “In recent days, Mr. Trump has settled on Syria’s oil reserves as a new rationale for appearing to reverse course and deploy hundreds of additional troops to the war-ravaged country. He has declared that the United States has “secured” oil fields in the country’s chaotic northeast and suggested that the seizure of the country’s main natural resource justifies America further extending its military presence there. ‘We have taken it and secured it,’ Mr. Trump said of Syria’s oil during remarks at the White House on Sunday, after announcing the killing of the Islamic State leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.” A CIA official reminded the journalist that taking Iraq’s oil was a Trump campaign pledge.

    That explains the invasion of Iraq for oil in 2003, and again this year, as President Trump has said: “Why don’t we simply take their oil?” It also explains the Obama-Hillary attack on Libya – not only for its oil, but for its investing its foreign reserves in gold instead of recycling its oil surplus revenue to the U.S. Treasury – and of course, for promoting a secular socialist state.

    It explains why U.S. neocons feared Suleimani’s plan to help Iraq assert control of its oil and withstand the terrorist attacks supported by U.S. and Saudi’s on Iraq. That is what made his assassination an immediate drive.

    American politicians have discredited themselves by starting off their condemnation of Trump by saying, as Elizabeth Warren did, how “bad” a person Suleimani was, how he had killed U.S. troops by masterminding the Iraqi defense of roadside bombing and other policies trying to repel the U.S. invasion to grab its oil. She was simply parroting the U.S. media’s depiction of Suleimani as a monster, diverting attention from the policy issue that explains why he was assassinated now.

    The counter-strategy to U.S. oil, and dollar and global-warming diplomacy

    This strategy will continue, until foreign countries reject it. If Europe and other regions fail to do so, they will suffer the consequences of this U.S. strategy in the form of a rising U.S.-sponsored war via terrorism, the flow of refugees, and accelerated global warming and extreme weather.

    Russia, China and its allies already have been leading the way to dedollarization as a means to contain the balance-of-payments buttress of U.S. global military policy. But everyone now is speculating over what Iran’s response should be.

    The pretense – or more accurately, the diversion – by the U.S. news media over the weekend has been to depict the United States as being under imminent attack. Mayor de Blasio has positioned policemen at conspicuous key intersections to let us know how imminent Iranian terrorism is – as if it were Iran, not Saudi Arabia that mounted 9/11, and as if Iran in fact has taken any forceful action against the United States. The media and talking heads on television have saturated the air waves with warnings of Islamic terrorism. Television anchors are suggesting just where the attacks are most likely to occur.

    The message is that the assassination of General Soleimani was to protect us. As Donald Trump and various military spokesmen have said, he had killed Americans – and now they must be planning an enormous attack that will injure and kill many more innocent Americans. That stance has become America’s posture in the world: weak and threatened, requiring a strong defense – in the form of a strong offense.

    But what is Iran’s actual interest? If it is indeed to undercut U.S. dollar and oil strategy, the first policy must be to get U.S. military forces out of the Near East, including U.S. occupation of its oil fields. It turns out that President Trump’s rash act has acted as a catalyst, bringing about just the opposite of what he wanted. On January 5 the Iraqi parliament met to insist that the United States leave. General Suleimani was an invited guest, not an Iranian invader. It is U.S. troops that are in Iraq in violation of international law. If they leave, Trump and the neocons lose control of oil – and also of their ability to interfere with Iranian-Iraqi-Syrian-Lebanese mutual defense.

    Beyond Iraq looms Saudi Arabia. It has become the Great Satan, the supporter of Wahabi extremism, the terrorist legion of U.S. mercenary armies fighting to maintain control of Near Eastern oil and foreign exchange reserves, the cause of the great exodus of refugees to Turkey, Europe and wherever else it can flee from the arms and money provided by the U.S. backers of Isis, Al Qaeda in Iraq and their allied Saudi Wahabi legions.

    The logical ideal, in principle, would be to destroy Saudi power. That power lies in its oil fields. They already have fallen under attack by modest Yemeni bombs. If U.S. neocons seriously threaten Iran, its response would be the wholesale bombing and destruction of Saudi oil fields, along with those of Kuwait and allied Near Eastern oil sheikhdoms. It would end the Saudi support for Wahabi terrorists, as well as for the U.S. dollar.

    Such an act no doubt would be coordinated with a call for the Palestinian and other foreign workers in Saudi Arabia to rise up and drive out the monarchy and its thousands of family retainers.

    Beyond Saudi Arabia, Iran and other advocates of a multilateral diplomatic break with U.S. neoliberal and neocon unilateralism should bring pressure on Europe to withdraw from NATO, inasmuch as that organization functions mainly as a U.S.-centric military tool of American dollar and oil diplomacy and hence opposing the climate change and military confrontation policies that threaten to make Europe part of the U.S. maelstrom.

    Finally, what can U.S. anti-war opponents do to resist the neocon attempt to destroy any part of the world that resists U.S. neoliberal autocracy? This has been the most disappointing response over the weekend. They are flailing. It has not been helpful for Warren, Buttigieg and others to accuse Trump of acting rashly without thinking through the consequences of his actions. That approach shies away from recognizing that his action did indeed have a rationale—do draw a line in the sand, to say that yes, America WILL go to war, will fight Iran, will do anything at all to defend its control of Near Eastern oil and to dictate OPEC central bank policy, to defend its ISIS legions as if any opposition to this policy is an attack on the United States itself.

    I can understand the emotional response or yet new calls for impeachment of Donald Trump. But that is an obvious non-starter, partly because it has been so obviously a partisan move by the Democratic Party. More important is the false and self-serving accusation that President Trump has overstepped his constitutional limit by committing an act of war against Iran by assassinating Soleimani.

    Congress endorsed Trump’s assassination and is fully as guilty as he is for having approved the Pentagon’s budget with the Senate’s removal of the amendment to the 2019 National Defense Authorization Act that Bernie Sanders, Tom Udall and Ro Khanna inserted an amendment in the House of Representatives version, explicitly not authorizing the Pentagon to wage war against Iran or assassinate its officials. When this budget was sent to the Senate, the White House and Pentagon (a.k.a. the military-industrial complex and neoconservatives) removed that constraint. That was a red flag announcing that the Pentagon and White House did indeed intend to wage war against Iran and/or assassinate its officials. Congress lacked the courage to argue this point at the forefront of public discussion.

    Behind all this is the Saudi-inspired 9/11 act taking away Congress’s sole power to wage war – its 2002 Authorization for Use of Military Force, pulled out of the drawer ostensibly against Al Qaeda but actually the first step in America’s long support of the very group that was responsible for 9/11, the Saudi airplane hijackers.

    The question is, how to get the world’s politicians – U.S., European and Asians – to see how America’s all-or-nothing policy is threatening new waves of war, refugees, disruption of the oil trade in the Strait of Hormuz, and ultimately global warming and neoliberal dollarization imposed on all countries. It is a sign of how little power exists in the United Nations that no countries are calling for a new Nurenberg-style war crimes trial, no threat to withdraw from NATO or even to avoid holding reserves in the form of money lent to the U.S. Treasury to fund America’s military budget.


    Tyler Durden

    Mon, 01/06/2020 – 18:45

  • Almost $300 Million Stolen From Crypto-Exchanges In 2019
    Almost $300 Million Stolen From Crypto-Exchanges In 2019

    Authored by Patrick Thompson via CoinTelegraph.com,

    Twelve major cryptocurrency exchange hacks occurred in 2019. Of these, 11 hacks resulted in the theft of cryptocurrency while one only involved stolen customer data. In total, $292,665,886 worth of cryptocurrency and 510,000 user logins were stolen from crypto exchanges in 2019. Cryptocurrency exchanges experienced more hacks last year than in 2018, when only nine cryptocurrency exchanges fell victim to security breaches.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    image courtesy of CoinTelegraph

    As time goes on, you might think that cryptocurrency exchanges would become more secure. The reality, however, is that more hacks on cryptocurrency exchange are taking place year after year. In general, crypto exchanges remain unregulated, and it’s still unclear which regulatory agency has jurisdiction over the crypto markets.  

    Although there are no established rules regarding how cryptocurrency exchanges should safeguard customer funds, there are crypto-friendly countries and states. CanadaMalta and the American state of Wyoming have created crypto-friendly legislation that makes it easier for businesses to operate and gives them guidelines regarding security practices.

    Sadly, not all countries have created guidelines or laws that help crypto businesses operate and reduce the risk for consumers. The way cryptocurrency exchanges store and protect their customer’s wealth differs from exchange to exchange; unfortunately, this makes cryptocurrency exchanges a hotbed for hacks that result in the theft of cryptocurrency or customer data.  Let’s take a closer look at the cryptocurrency exchange hacks of 2019 and how much cryptocurrency, fiat and customer data was stolen in each incident.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    1. Cryptopia

    Date: Jan. 14, 2019

    Headquarters: New Zealand

    Amount stolen: $16,002,108

    Just two weeks into the year, the first hack on a cryptocurrency exchange took place. New Zealand-based Cryptopia was hacked for over $16 million worth of cryptocurrency at the time. Social media users started their own investigation, according to which, over 20 different cryptocurrencies were taken from the exchange’s hot wallet.

    2. LocalBitcoins

    Date: Jan. 26, 2019

    Headquarters: Finland

    Amount stolen: $27,000

    A few weeks later, the popular over-the-counter Bitcoin exchange LocalBitcoins was the victim of a security breach. Attackers were able to replace the official link to the exchange’s forum with a fraudulent link that led users to a fake page that resembled the discussion board but collected the information of the users who attempted to log in.

    The attackers used the information they obtained to steal 7.9 Bitcoin — worth $27,000 at the time — from at least six user accounts.

    3. Coinmama 

    Date: Feb. 15, 2019

    Headquarters: Israel

    Amount stolen: 450,000 account usernames and passwords

    In just the second month of the year, Israel-based cryptocurrency broker Coinmama learned that its database had been breached. As a result, an estimated 450,000 user account logins and passwords had been compromised and posted on a darknet registry.

    4. DragonEx

    Date: March 24, 2019

    Headquarters: Singapore

    Amount stolen: $7.09 million 

    On March 24, Singapore-based exchange DragonEx posted in its official Telegram group that it had experienced a hacking attack, and as a result, a portion of the users’ and the platform’s crypto assets had been stolen. Days later, DragonEx released an announcement on its website, saying: “On March 24th, DragonEx suffered APT attack, which is the greatest challenge since DragonEx was first launched in the year of 2017. 7.09 million USDT assets are stolen.”

    5. CoinBene

    Date: March 25, 2019

    Headquarters: Singapore

    Amount stolen: $105 million

    Just two days after the DragonEx hack, another cryptocurrency exchange in Singapore, CoinBene, was hacked. Many CoinBene users became suspicious of a hack when the CoinBene site unexpectedly went down for maintenance. Individuals who were tracking the CoinBene hot wallet noticed that a whopping $105 million worth of crypto assets had been removed. Even though all of the evidence is on the blockchain, CoinBene continues to deny that it was ever hacked.

    6. Bithumb

    Date: March 30, 2019

    Headquarters: South Korea

    Amount stolen: $18.7 million

    March was a bad month for cryptocurrency exchanges. Just a few days after the CoinBene hack, Bithumb was hacked for an estimated $18.7 million — $12.5 million in EOS tokens and $6.2 million in XRP. Unlike other exchange hacks, Bithumb believed that the theft was an inside job committed by a former Bithumb employee who had access to its hot wallets.

    7. Binance

    Date: May 7, 2019

    Headquarters: Malta

    Amount stolen: $40 million

    On May 7, Binance — the world’s biggest cryptocurrency exchange — experienced a security breach. As a result, 7,000 BTC, equivalent to $40 million at the time, was stolen. In addition, Binance said that hackers were able to obtain user API keys, two-factor authentication codes and possibly more user information.

    Later, on Aug. 7, it was revealed that hackers were in possession of over 60,000 pieces of Know Your Customer data from the Binance exchange. An individual going by the name “Bnatov Platon” said he or she hacked the individuals that hacked Binance back in May and discovered that the original hackers had also gained access to 60,000 pieces of customer KYC data, including the photo IDs of 10,000 Binance users.

    8. GateHub

    Date:  June 1, 2019 

    Headquarters: United Kingdom

    Amount stolen: $10 million

    In June, GateHub made an announcement, saying 100 of its users’ XRP wallets had been compromised. A GateHub community member took a deep dive into the hack and discovered that by June 5, 23,200,000 XRP had been stolen from 80–90 of these wallets — the equivalent to about $10 million at the time. 

    9. Bitrue

    Date: June 26, 2019

    Headquarters: Singapore

    Amount stolen: $4.23 million

    At the end of June, Bitrue was hacked, and roughly $4.23 million was stolen. Hackers learned of a vulnerability in Bitrue’s security that gave them access to about 90 user accounts. Afterward, hackers used what they learned from their 90-account takeover to successful compromise Bitrue’s hot wallet. As a result, 9.3 million XRP and 2.5 million ADA were stolen.

    10. BITPoint

    Date: July 11, 2019

    Headquarters: Japan

    Amount stolen: $32 million

    On July 11, Japan-based cryptocurrency exchange BITPoint was alerted of an irregular outflow of XRP from its hot wallet. Several hours later, BITPoint became aware that Bitcoin, XRP, Ether, Bitcoin Cash and Litcoin had been moved from the exchange’s hot wallet without authorization. In total, $32 million worth of cryptocurrency was moved out of BITPoint’s hot wallet — $23 million of which belonged to BITPoint users.

    11. VinDAX

    Date: Nov. 5, 2019

    Headquarters: Vietnam

    Amount stolen: $500,000

    For the most part, the VinDAX hack is a mystery. VinDAX is a small cryptocurrency exchange based in Vietnam that primarily hosts token offerings for unheard of companies. Information regarding this security breach is scarce. However, The Block took a deep dive into this mysterious hack and learned from the VinDAX support staff that roughly 23 cryptocurrencies — worth $500,000 in total — had been removed from its hot wallet without authorization.

    12. Upbit

    Date: Nov. 27, 2019

    Headquarters:  South Korea

    Amount stolen: $49,116,778.00

    And finally, the last hack of the decade: Upbit. Upbit is a South Korea based cryptocurrency exchange that was hacked for 342,000 ETH — equivalent to $49,116,778 at the time — on Nov. 27. All that is really known is that hackers were able to gain access to Upbit’s hot wallet and move Ether without authorization. However, Upbit released a statement shortly afterward telling users that it would be covering all of the losses with the exchange’s assets.

    *  *  *

    The damage

    In total, $292,665,886 worth of cryptocurrency was stolen from 11 cryptocurrency exchanges and 510,000 pieces of user information were taken from the database of one exchange — a total of 12 cryptocurrency exchanges experienced security breaches.

    So, what does this all mean? It means that cryptocurrency exchanges have to do better in terms of industry standards and security practices. Sadly, we did not see enough legislation and security improvement in 2019, and we experienced even more cryptocurrency exchange hacks than in any previous year. But hopefully, these things will change in 2020 and the cryptocurrency markets will be safer for every party involved in the cryptocurrency ecosystem.


    Tyler Durden

    Mon, 01/06/2020 – 18:25

  • Soleimani Was In Baghdad On Peace Mission To De-Escalate With Saudis: Report
    Soleimani Was In Baghdad On Peace Mission To De-Escalate With Saudis: Report

    In the post-2003 Iraq invasion world based on fake WMD claims, any US official claims based on unspecified “intelligence assessments” should be treated with deep skepticism if not outright rejection. For this reason, many rightly immediately questioned the official Trump administration narrative that Qasem Soleimani was in Baghdad on the night of his death by US drone strike in order to organize more attacks on Americans and US interests. This key claim served as the White House’s post hoc justification for killing the top Iranian general.

    And now it has emerged that the slain IRGC Quds Force chief had arrived at Baghdad airport last Thursday night as part of ongoing diplomatic efforts to mediate peace and an easing of tensions between Saudi Arabia and Iran. This according to no less than Iraqi (caretaker) Prime Minister Adel Abdul-Mahdi.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Saudi King Salman, left, speaks with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, via AP/Times of Israel.

    Iraq had been reportedly serving as intermediary for crucial Saudi attempts at diplomacy which saw tensions soaring between Tehran and Riyadh after a summer of “tanker wars” and the Sept.14 Aramco attacks, widely blamed on Iran and its proxies in the region. 

    Adel Abdul Mahdi told parliament in a speech on Sunday the Soleimani’s killing was a “political assassination” by the US, according to The Daily Mail, which reports further:

    Abdul Mahdi suggested that the Iranian military leader was in Baghdad as part of Iraqi-mediated negotiations with Iran’s main regional rival, Saudi Arabia.

    He said that Soleimani was going to meet him on the same day that he was killed.

    ‘He came to deliver me a message from Iran, responding to the message we delivered from Saudi Arabia to Iran,’ Abdul Mahdi told The Washington Post.

    The Iraqi leader did not provide any further details.

    This would mean the high level assassination further served to disrupt peace efforts on a huge scale — something which Iran hawks, including Israeli government officials, likely saw as an additional benefit to the strike. 

    Iraq has further identified that Soleimani had been traveling in the capacity of a “formal” and “high profile” guest of the Iraqi government, and had been delivering Tehran’s reply to a Saudi de-escalation letter at the moment he was killed

    Journalists and western sources have also separately confirmed Iraqi PM Mahdi’s claim the IRGC general had been engaged as a diplomatic intermediary at the time of his death:

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Multiple journalists with sources in the administration have since referred to the US justification for the assassination as “razor thin”.

    This further helps explain why Soleimani and his entourage, which included Iraqi paramilitary commander Abu Mahdi al-Mohandes — killed in the same attack — were traveling so “out in the open” through Baghdad’s main international hub

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Image source: West Asia News Agency via Reuters

    Given that a fundamental rationale for a continued muscular US presence in the Middle East is to “thwart Iranian ambitions,” it remains crucial for the hawks to be able to point to the ‘necessity’ of protecting Saudi Arabia.

    Hence also the recent thousands-strong troop deployment in the kingdom since September. 

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    At this point it remains dubious that any back-channel peace efforts between Riyadh and Tehran remain open, especially now that Iranian leaders have vowed that a “severe retaliation” is coming. 


    Tyler Durden

    Mon, 01/06/2020 – 18:05

    Tags

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Today’s News 6th January 2020

  • The Cause Of America's Dysfunctionality
    The Cause Of America’s Dysfunctionality

    Authored by Jacob Hornberger via The Future of Freedom Foundation,

    In analyzing the causes for the dysfunctional nature of American society (e.g., soaring suicide rates, especially among young people, massive drug addiction and alcoholism, and widespread violence, including irrational mass killings), among the things to consider is the replacement of America’s founding economic, monetary, and governmental system with a different system.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    There were good founding principles in America and bad founding principles. Among the bad ones, needless to say, were slavery and denial of women’s rights. It was a good thing that America abandoned its bad founding principles.

    But there were also good founding principles. It was the abandonment of those principles that has to be considered a major cause of the many woes that America is undergoing today.

    Let’s consider those good founding principles that were abandoned in favor of the system that Americans live under today:

    1. Americans were free to keep everything they earned.

    No income tax returns. No IRS. No rushing to the Post Office on April 15. No withholding or payroll taxes. No threats of audits, liens, garnishments, and criminal prosecution for failure to pay income taxes. Whatever people earned or received, they kept 100 percent of it.

    2. Americans were free to decide for themselves what to do with their own money.

    No mandatory charity, including Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps, farm subsidies, corporate bailouts, and foreign aid. Charity was entirely voluntary. No one was forced to take care of anyone. No federal welfare departments and agencies.

    3. No drug laws.

    Americans were free to ingest whatever they wanted, no matter how harmful or destructive, without fear of being punished for it by the government.

    4. No immigration controls.

    Except for a cursory tuberculosis and mental health examination at Ellis Island, the borders were open to the free movement of foreigners into the United States.

    5. No minimum-wage laws and very few economic regulations.

    Economic enterprise was free of federal governmental management and control. No federal regulatory departments and agencies.

    6. No public schooling systems.

    With the exception of Massachusetts in the 1850s, there were no compulsory school-attendance laws at the state and local level. No federal involvement or subsidization of education. The matter of education was left largely to the free market.

    7. No gun control.

    No gun registration or background checks. While communities sometimes imposed gun restrictions, Americans were free to keep and bear arms without federal governmental control or infringement.

    8. No Federal Reserve, fiat (i.e., paper) money, or monetary inflation or debasement of the currency.

    The Constitution called into existence a monetary system in which gold coins and silver coins were the official money of the country. The states were expressly prohibited from making anything but gold and silver coins legal tender.

    9. No national-security state, foreign military bases, or foreign interventionism.

    The Constitution brought into existence a limited-government republic. No Pentagon, military-industrial complex, CIA, NSA, or FBI. No wars of aggression (except the Mexican War), undeclared wars, coups, state-sponsored assassinations, foreign military bases, foreign aid, war on terrorism, war on communism, or alliances with foreign dictatorships or other regimes.

    10. No denial of due process of law or trial by jury. No unreasonable searches and seizures. No cruel and unusual punishments. No coerced confessions.

    Whenever federal officials targeted a person for criminal prosecution, the accused was guaranteed due process, trial by jury, and other civil liberties.

    Those were the founding principles that caused our American ancestors to consider themselves the freest people in history. Moreover, not only did America become the country with the highest standard of living in history, which was why poor people were flooding into America from foreign lands, it also became the most charitable society in history, entirely on a voluntary basis.

    Those were the good founding principles that were abandoned by later generations of Americans, in favor of what is commonly known today as a welfare-state, warfare-state way of life.

    Ironically, even though they live under an opposite type of system from that of their American ancestors, today’s Americans are themselves convinced that they live lives of freedom. That sentiment is best manifested by the eagerness of modern-day Americans to thank imperial troops serving in faraway lands for protecting “our freedom” by killing and destroying people over there.

    Johann Goethe wrote, “None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.”

    I submit that that psychological denial of reality with respect to freedom as well as the abandonment of America’s good founding principles are the root cause of the dysfunctional nature of American society today.


    Tyler Durden

    Sun, 01/05/2020 – 23:30

  • China Replaces Top Hong Kong Official; Appoints "Strongman" In Signal To Protesters
    China Replaces Top Hong Kong Official; Appoints “Strongman” In Signal To Protesters

    China changed its top representative to Hong Kong in the first major leadership reshuffle since anti-government protests broke out in the city seven months ago, unexpectedly replacing Wang Zhimin with a “strongman” party stalwart who has no experience in Hong Kong as its new top official based in the city, signaling its intention to restore law and order after almost seven months of social unrest. Luo Huining, the former party leader of Shanxi province, has been named as the new director of the central government’s liaison office in the city, Xinhua reported on Saturday.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Luo Huining is the new head of Beijing’s liaison office in Hong Kong.

    According to the SCMP, Wang, who was blamed in some quarters for the unrest, will be given a dignified exit: he will be recalled to Beijing and reassigned to another position unrelated to Hong Kong affairs; the Hong Kong publication notes that the reshuffle should not be seen as a punishment for Wang but a change of strategy.

    Wang was liaison office director since September 2017. His term of two years and three months made him the shortest-serving head of the office since the return of Hong Kong to the mainland. Before taking the position in Hong Kong, he served as director of the liaison office in Macau for around a year. One reason for Wang’s short tenure: his inability to normalize the situation in Hong Kong which has been in the grip of protests since June last year, sparked by the now-withdrawn extradition bill before morphing into a wider anti-government campaign that has been marked by mass rallies and often-violent clashes.

    As for Luo’s appointment, it appears to presage a new phase in Beijing’s crackdown of ongoing Hong Kong protests.

    Having reached the retirement age of 65 in October, he was just named on December 28 as the deputy director of the financial and economic affairs committee of the national people’s congress – a position usually reserved for retired officials. Luo served for more than a decade in China’s far-flung western province Qinghai – one of the poorest regions populated by ethnic minorities – and became deputy chairman of the financial and economic committee of the National People’s Congress last month. According to Bloomberg, Chinese media credited him with bringing Shanxi back to its feet, enforcing the central government’s campaign to purge corruption and weed out disloyal officials.

    In Shanxi, Luo excelled himself and impressed the top leadership by swiftly weeding out corruption and overhauling the government. He is among a selected few Chinese officials who could boast the experience of having managed two provinces, each with the population of a midsized European country.

    It is this “strongman” background that made Luo China’s perfect candidate to take over Hong Kong, even though he has never held any position directly related to Hong Kong before. Apart from one business trip to Hong Kong in 2018, he has no known connections here.

    “Luo seems to have had the experience to end chaos and restore stability in Shanxi,” said Victoria Hui, associate professor of political science at the University of Notre Dame. “Since the outbreak of anti-extradition protests, Beijing has been trying to rein in Hong Kong,” and “it’s not clear why a strongman like him was not picked earlier.”

    Luo will be the first Hong Kong liaison director with such rich local experience. Most of his predecessors were specialist bureaucrats who worked in the central government before taking up the Hong Kong assignment.

    “One key consideration is that Luo does not have connections with Hong Kong’s business and other community, therefore his work will not be complicated by any relationship,” the source said.

    Li Xiaobing, an expert on Beijing’s policies on Hong Kong at Nankai University in Tianjin, said the choice highlighted Beijing’s will to break the deadlock in Hong Kong.

    “The problem of choosing someone from the Hong Kong and Macau system is they will be constrained by the existing frameworks and relationships,” he said. “His past experiences showed that he is capable of providing out-of-box solutions.”

    Luo, who held a PhD in Economics, is known for his efforts in curbing corruption and boosting economies in less-developed regions in Anhui, Qinghai and Shanxi. A Shanxi official who had worked under Luo told the Post: “He seldom raises his voice. But he is very determined and demanding when he wants to get things done. No jokes.”


    Tyler Durden

    Sun, 01/05/2020 – 23:00

    Tags

  • Ricky Gervais Slams "Woke" Virtue-Signaling, Drops "Epstein Didn't Kill Himself" Joke At Golden Globes
    Ricky Gervais Slams “Woke” Virtue-Signaling, Drops “Epstein Didn’t Kill Himself” Joke At Golden Globes

    Authored by Paul Joseph Watson via Summit News,

    British comedian Ricky Gervais is dropping red pills at the Golden Globes, joking about “Epstein didn’t kill himself” while telling ‘woke’ virtue signaling celebrities to stop talking about politics.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    “Spoiler alert, season 2 is on the way, so in the end he obviously didn’t kill himself – just like Jeffrey Epstein,” said Gervais, before adding, “Shut up, I know he’s your friend but I don’t care, you had to make your own way here in your own plane didn’t you?”

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    In another quip, Gervais slammed actors for calling themselves “woke” while taking money from Apple, Amazon and Disney, who use slave labor.

    “If ISIS started a streaming service, you’d call your agent,” joked Gervais.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    “If you do win an award tonight, don’t use it as a platform to make a political speech. You’re in no position to lecture the public about anything. You know nothing about the real world. Most of you spent less time in school than Greta Thunberg. So if you win, come up, accept your little award, thank your agent and your God and fuck off,” he added.

    Will Gervais be invited back again after this? Unlikely.

    *  *  *

    My voice is being silenced by free speech-hating Silicon Valley behemoths who want me disappeared forever. It is CRUCIAL that you support me. Please sign up for the free newsletter here. Donate to me on SubscribeStar here. Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.


    Tyler Durden

    Sun, 01/05/2020 – 22:30

  • Meet Qassem Soleimani's Replacement: Esmail Ghaani Is Iran's New Top Military Leader
    Meet Qassem Soleimani’s Replacement: Esmail Ghaani Is Iran’s New Top Military Leader

    While Iran’s iconic military leader, Qassem Soleimani, has yet to be buried, a new Iranian general has stepped out of the shadows to lead the country’s elite Quds Force, becoming responsible for Tehran’s numerous proxies across the Mideast as the Islamic Republic threatens the US with “harsh revenge” for killing Soleimani.

    Meet Esmail Ghaani.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on Friday appointed Qassem Soleimani’s deputy, Maj. Gen. Esmail Ghaani as the new commander of the Revolutionary Guard’s Quds Force.(Office of the Iranian Supreme Leader via AP)

    In announcing Ghaani as Soleimani’s replacement, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei called the new leader “one of the most prominent commanders” in service to Iran. The Quds Force “will be unchanged from the time of his predecessor,” Khamenei said, according to IRNA.

    As the AP reports, like his predecessor, the young Ghaani faced the carnage of Iran’s eight-year war with Iraq in the 1980s and later joined the then-newly founded Quds, or Jerusalem, Force. The elite Quds Force is part of the 125,000-strong Revolutionary Guard, a paramilitary organization that answers only to Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. The Guard oversees Iran’s ballistic missile program, has its naval forces shadow the US Navy in the Persian Gulf and includes an all-volunteer Basij force.

    While much still remains unknown about Ghaani, 62, Western sanctions suggest he’s long been in a position of power in the organization. And likely one of his first duties will be to oversee whatever revenge Iran intends to seek for the U.S. airstrike early Friday that killed his longtime friend Soleimani.

    “We are children of war,” Ghaani once said of his relationship with Soleimani, according to Iran’s state-run IRNA news agency. “We are comrades on the battlefield and we have become friends in battle.”

    The Guard has seen its influence grow ever-stronger both militarily and politically in recent decades. Iran’s conventional military was decimated by the execution of its old officer class during the 1979 Islamic Revolution and later by sanctions. A key driver of that influence comes from the elite Quds Force, which works across the region with allied groups to offer an asymmetrical threat to counter the advanced weaponry wielded by the U.S. and its regional allies. Those partners include Iraqi militiamen, Lebanon’s Hezbollah and Yemen’s Houthi rebels.

    Soleimani had long has been the face of the Quds Force; his fame surged after American officials began blaming him for deadly roadside bombs targeting U.S. troops in Iraq. Images of him, long a feature of hard-line Instagram accounts and mobile phone lockscreens, now plaster billboards calling for Iran to avenge his death.

    And while Soleimani’s exploits in Iraq and Syria launched a thousand analyses, Ghaani has remained much more in the shadows of the organization. He has only occasionally come up in the Western or even Iranian media. But, as the AP notes, his personal story broadly mirrors that of Soleimani.

    * * *

    Born on Aug. 8, 1957 in the northeastern Iranian city of Mashhad, Ghaani grew up during the last decade of monarchy. He joined the Guard a year after the 1979 revolution. Like Soleimani, he first deployed to put down the Kurdish uprising in Iran that followed the shah’s downfall. Iraq then invaded Iran, launching an eight-year war that would see 1 million people killed. Many of the dead were lightly armed members of the Guard, some of whom were young boys killed in human-wave assaults on Iraqi positions.

    Volunteers “were seeing that all of them are being killed, but when we ordered them to go, would not hesitate,” Ghaani later recounted. “The commander is looking to his soldiers as his children, and in the soldier’s point of view, it seems that he received an order from God and he must to do that.”

    He survived the war to join the Quds Force shortly after its creation. He worked with Soleimani, as well as led counterintelligence efforts at the Guard. Western analysts say that while Soleimani focused on nations to Iran’s west, Ghaani’s remit was those to the east like Afghanistan and Pakistan. However, Iranian state media has not elaborated on his time in the Guard.

    In 2012, the U.S. Treasury sanctioned Ghaani, describing him as having authority over “financial disbursements” to proxies affiliated with the Quds Force. The sanctions particularly tied Ghaani to an intercepted shipment of weapons seized at a port in 2010 in Nigeria’s most-populous city, Lagos. Authorities broke into 13 shipping containers labeled as carrying “packages of glass wool and pallets of stone.” They instead found 107 mm Katyusha rockets, rifle rounds and other weapons. The Katyusha remains a favored weapon of Iranian proxy forces, including Iraqi militias and the Lebanese militant group Hezbollah.

    An Iranian and his Nigerian partner later received five-year prison sentences over the shipment, which appeared bound for Gambia, then under the rule of dictator Yahya Jammeh. Israeli officials had claimed the rockets would be shipped to militants in the Gaza Strip, while Nigerian authorities alleged that local politicians could use the arms in upcoming elections.

    Also in 2012, Ghaani drew criticism from the U.S. State Department after reportedly saying that “if the Islamic Republic was not present in Syria, the massacre of people would have happened on a much larger scale.” That comment came just after gunmen backing Syrian President Bashar Assad killed over 100 people in Houla in the country’s Homs province.

    “Over the weekend we had the deputy head of the Quds Force saying publicly that they were proud of the role that they had played in training and assisting the Syrian forces — and look what this has wrought,” then-State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said at the time.

    In January 2015, Ghaani indirectly said that Iran sends missiles and weapons to Palestinians to fight Israel.

    “The U.S. and Israel are too small to consider themselves in line with Iran’s military power,” Ghaani said at the time. “This power has now appeared alongside the oppressed people of Palestine and Gaza in the form of missiles and weapons.”

    Now, Ghaani is firmly in control of the Quds Force. Yet while Iran’s leaders say they have a plan to avenge Soleimani’s death, no plan has been announced yet as the country prepares for funerals for the general starting Sunday.

    Whatever that plan for revenge is, Ghaani will be leading it.

    “That Qaani survived at such high ranks in the (Guard), and remained Soleimani’s deputy for so long, says a lot about the trust both Khamenei and Soleimani had in him,” said Afshon Ostovar, the author of a book on the Guard. “I suspect he’ll have little difficulty filling Soleimani’s shoes when it comes to operations and strategy.”


    Tyler Durden

    Sun, 01/05/2020 – 22:00

  • "It's Like An Atomic Bomb" – Australia Deploys Military As Monstrous Storm Creates It's Own Weather Crisis
    “It’s Like An Atomic Bomb” – Australia Deploys Military As Monstrous Storm Creates It’s Own Weather Crisis

    Authored by Elias Marat via TheMindUnleashed.com,

    Australia’s government has announced that it would call up 3,000 military reservists to confront an unprecedented bushfire crisis that is producing nightmarish “firenados” – cyclonic fire-tornadoes – and conditions that some are comparing to the aftermath of nuclear warfare.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    On Saturday, beleaguered Prime Minister Scott Morrison sought to reassure the country’s population that his government would take unprecedented measures to contain the fires, which have raged since September. According to AFP, Morrison said:

    “Today’s decision puts more boots on the ground, puts more planes in the sky, puts more ships at sea.” 

    The addition of 3,000 reservists to firefighting efforts, which have already seen the deployment of roughly 2,000 military personnel, amounts to what authorities say is most likely the largest maritime rescue operation in Australia’s history, reports the New York Times.

    NASA issued this stunning satellite-based visualization of the state of the fires in Australia…

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Military aircraft, naval ships, and other materiel will also be made available to assist evacuation and firefighting efforts.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Defense Minister Linda Reynolds said:

    “The government has not taken this decision lightly … It is the first time that reserves have been called out in this way in living memory.”

    The environmental calamity has been stoked by a combination of extreme winds, record-shattering heat waves, and drought-parched forests, grasslands, and brush.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Australia’s bushfires have also grown so monstrous that they are generating their own weather in the form of pyro-cumulonimbus clouds – dry thunderstorms that create more fires – according to Victoria’s Bureau of Meteorology. Fire-generated thunderstorms have appeared over the fires in two different locations. NASA describes them as the “fire-breathing dragon of clouds.”

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    The storms have further introduced an unpredictable dynamic to the spread of fires and rapid, erratic changes, CNN reports. Bureau of Meteorology spokesman Neil Bennett told Australia’s ABC:

    “The prediction of fire weather in terms of wind is critical and when you’ve got a highly variable wind environment as you do with a thunderstorm, if you have that in the fire environment, those winds become very, very difficult to predict.”

    The dry thunderstorms have also triggered cyclonic fire-tornadoes, or “firenados,” which have ripped through arid regions of southern Australia in recent days.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    On Monday, firefighter Samuel McPaul was killed in “truly horrific” incident when extreme weather produced by the fire lifted his 12-ton fire truck into the air and dumped it on its roof. Two other firefighters on the scene are being treated for serious burns due to the “freakish” weather incident.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Shane Fitzsimmons, the New South Wales Rural Fire Service Commissioner, was visibly shaken when he announced how the truck was flipped in what he described as a “pyro-convective line” of “cyclonic type winds.” He said:

    “The local crews that were able to catch up with him in the field at the accident scene describe what they experienced as truly horrific. They described it as an extraordinary wind event, describing it as a fire tornado.

    We have a completely devastated family, a devastated local community at what just has been an extraordinary loss.”

    As of Saturday, over 23 lives have been claimed by the deadly fires, which have burned over 12 million acres of land, an area larger than Switzerland. On Saturday, Fire Commissioner of the Rural Fire Service in New South Wales (NSW), Shane Fitzsimmons, confirmed to reporters that over 148 active fires continue to burn in his state, 12 of which are at emergency levels. Meanwhile, in Victoria, authorities say that 50 active fires continue to burn.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Ecologists fear that nearly 500 million mammals, reptiles and birds—including 8,000 koalas—are estimated to have been killed, although the current death toll is impossible to calculate. The massive loss of life threatens to forever tip the balance for entire species of animals and plants on an island continent where 87 percent of wildlife is endemic to the country, meaning it can only be found on Australia.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Kangaroos, koalas, wallabies, wombats, potoroos, bandicoots, echidnas, possums, and other species all have populations that live in regions currently being devastated by the fires—and because the fires have extended to the wetlands, dry eucalyptus forests, and even rainforests, the animals have no place to find refuge.

    Jim Radford, a research fellow at La Trobe University in Melbourne, told the Times:

    “We’ve never seen fires like this, not to this extent, not all at once, and the reservoir of animals that could come and repopulate the areas, they may not be there.”

    Many experts are using terms to describe the crisis that would have previously been unimaginable. New Zealand Herald reports that Andrew Constance, the transport minister in NSW, told ABC radio:

    “I’ve got to be honest with you, this isn’t a bushfire, it’s an atomic bomb.

    It’s indescribable the hell it’s caused and the devastation it’s caused.”

    Perhaps this will add some more context…

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>


    Tyler Durden

    Sun, 01/05/2020 – 21:30

  • Fake Noose? '60 Minutes' Shreds Epstein Suicide Theory
    Fake Noose? ’60 Minutes’ Shreds Epstein Suicide Theory

    ’60 Minutes’ has revealed several new data points in the death of wealthy pedophile Jeffrey Epstein which raise more questions than they answer, and suggest that the financier did not kill himself – an opinion the New York City Medical Examiner’s office stands “firmly” behind.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The New York City Medical Examiner’s Office ruled Epstein’s death a suicide by hanging, but a forensic pathologist who observed the four-hour autopsy on behalf of  Epstein’s brother, Mark, tells 60 Minutes the evidence released so far points more to murder than suicide in his view. Dr. Michael Baden’s key reason: the unusual fractures he saw in Epstein’s neck. –CBS News

    While we’ve heard all sorts of theories about the improbabilities of the force required by the nearly 6 foot tall Epstein to successfully hang himself while breaking an unusual three bones in his neck usually seen in strangulations, that’s nowhere near the most peculiar part of Epstein’s demise (notwithstanding the ol’ homeless guy switcharoo theory).

    For the first time, we get to look at the noose Epstein used to allegedly kill himself. Photos admitted as evidence reveal a clean cloth with no blood, despite Epstein’s clearly bloody neck. Moreover, both ends of the noose were hemmed, not cut – while the guard who found Epstein reportedly cut him down.

    Also odd is that Epstein’s ligature wound, allegedly left by said bloodless noose, is fairly low on his neck.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    It doesn’t look like anybody ever took scissors to it,” said 60 Minutes’ Sharyn Alfonsi. “So there is some question—is that the right noose?”

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    The photos also reveal other potential nooses – none of which are bloodied, as well as orange sheets strewn around the room.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    “There were fractures of the left, the right thyroid cartilage and the left hyoid bone,” said Baden. “I have never seen three fractures like this in a suicidal hanging.”

    “Going over a thousand jail hangings, suicides in the New York City state prisons over the past 40-50 years, no one had three fractures,” he added.

    Other irregularities include Epstein being taken off suicide watch, broken cameras which didn’t record the front of his cell during the cruicial period, and of course, the fact that his guards failed to check on perhaps the most high-profile inmate in modern history – and were instead browsing the web and sleeping.


    Tyler Durden

    Sun, 01/05/2020 – 21:00

  • 2020: Get Ready For The Geopolitical Olympics
    2020: Get Ready For The Geopolitical Olympics

    Authored by Peter Tasker via Japan-Forward.com,

    According to Vladimir Lenin, “There are decades when nothing happens and weeks when decades happen.”

    As Japan moves into the second year of the Reiwa era, there is a palpable sense that world history is going through a phase of acceleration, driven by the rapid economic rise of Asia and the relentless worldwide spread of the internet and social media.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Hence, the intensifying confrontation between the United States and China. This may appear to have been sparked by the unpredictable trade policies of President Donald Trump, which came as a shock after the laid-back attitude toward China of his predecessors, Barack Obama and George W. Bush. In reality, though, the clash of wills was inevitable, as there is a fundamental incompatibility of national interests between the world’s two largest economies.

    What is at stake is supremacy in two vital and interconnected areas: new technologies — such as A.I., 5G, and biogenetics — and influence in Asia.

    Calm Before the Storm

    As with the original Cold War, it is a struggle for control of the future. The contest will be long drawn out and multi-faceted, involving high-tech, trade, finance, soft power, political values, alliances, cyber warfare, espionage, and military muscle.

    Though there will be ebbs and flows in tensions, these fundamentals will remain in place — regardless of whether President Trump wins re-election in 2020 or not. And the logic of U.S.-China strategic competition means that Japan cannot be a passive observer, as it was largely in the first Cold War. Thanks to geography, it is on the front line, like it or not.

    In recent years, Japan has been an oasis of calm in a turbulent global landscape. Indeed, the most heated political controversies concern such trivialities as the budget for the government’s annual cherry blossom viewing party.

    Compare that with the street violence and bitter political polarization in Hong Kong, which has been experiencing a few of those “weeks that contain decades.” This follows two decades when, basically, nothing happened.

    Hong Kong people used to be famous for their apolitical pragmatism and single-minded devotion to business, so the scenes of masked demonstrators fighting riot police were shocking to many observers. Perhaps the increasingly obvious flaws of Hong Kong’s governance should have been debated more openly before.

    Perhaps in recent times Hong Kong has been too calm. In contrast, the United Kingdom’s long and heated debate about Brexit appeared chaotic, but in fact the political system has been working as it should. Brexit is now a fait accompli and will soon fade from the world’s headlines.

    The lesson for Japan is that crucial and divisive issues are better debated in the open than ignored until a “Lenin week” occurs. And that could happen at any time. Nothing has changed concerning the North Korean missile threat or China’s military build-up and expansionist tendencies.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Geopolitical Olympics and 21st Century Realities

    Fortunately, in the coming year it is likely that Japanese citizens will have the opportunity to engage in a thorough, ongoing debate about national security as part of the process of constitutional reform. It will be controversial and divisive, but also necessary and healthy.

    Indeed, Reiwa 2 will be a year packed with politics. Prime Minister Shinzo Abe may call a general election in order to establish the necessary two thirds majority in the twin houses of the Diet for passing his constitutional bill. If successful, he would then hold a referendum, the first in Japan’s history, in order to gain the public’s approval.

    For the first time, ordinary Japanese citizens would be given a direct voice in their own governance. Leaving aside the specific issue in question — the legitimacy of Japan’s Self-Defense Forces — this would be a spectacular illustration of Japan’s democratic maturity.

    Japan is unusual in never having amended its constitution. Globally, about 30 constitutional amendments take place every year.

    Germany’s constitution has been amended some 60 times since it was established in 1949. India’s constitution has been amended over 100 times in a similar timespan.

    Constitutional reform was the official policy of Japan’s Liberal Democratic Party, which was in power through nearly all that period, but nothing was attempted. Both politicians and the public lacked the sense of urgency and, more important, the confidence in their own institutions to make it happen.

    Circumstances have changed, as has the national mood, especially among younger people. Opinion surveys show that it is the older generation which is most opposed to constitutional revision — the same generation that is most opposed to increasing numbers of immigrant workers. The under-30s are much more comfortable with 21st century realities.

    2020 is the year of the Tokyo Olympics. It is to be hoped that the event passes off in fine style and the host nation secures a satisfying haul of medals.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Of more lasting significance will be how Japan performs in the geopolitical Olympics that lies ahead. It will be a test of agility, stamina, strength, guile, and concentration — closer to martial arts than synchronized swimming.


    Tyler Durden

    Sun, 01/05/2020 – 20:30

    Tags

  • "This Is Unprecedented!" Guaido Denied Entry To Venezuelan Parliament, Only To Be Reelected Hours Later
    “This Is Unprecedented!” Guaido Denied Entry To Venezuelan Parliament, Only To Be Reelected Hours Later

    Between Turkey, Venezuela and efforts to remove Donald Trump from office, it’s been tough sledding for coup d’états over the last several years.

    In the case of Venezuela, would-be President Juan Guaido’s journey is just sad at this point – after the opposition leader said on Sunday that police prevented him from entering the country’s National Assembly, only to be reelected for a second term as speaker of parliament hours later.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Guaido has led opposition to Venezuela’s socialist president Nicolas Maduro for the past 12 months and had hoped to be confirmed in the post in a key vote.

    When he arrived for the special parliament session, police prevented him from entering. DW

    At one point he tried to jump the fence, only to be repelled.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    “This is unprecedented!” Guaido told a guard amid a heated exchange.

    The regime is kidnapping and persecuting deputies, militarizing the Federal Legislative Palace, preventing access and blocking entry to the free press,” he later tweeted.

    “This is the reality in Venezuela: the desire for change in the face of a dictatorship that continues to persecute.”

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    That said, despite the earlier impasse, Guaido was reelected president of Parliament by the majority of deputies hours later.

    The standoff outside the parliamentary chambers went on for more than an hour as troops reviewed the credentials for each lawmaker. According to DW, critics said this was a delay strategy to prevent the assembly from reaching quorum. Journalists were denied entry as well.

    Guaido declared Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro illegitimate after the May, 2018 elections.


    Tyler Durden

    Sun, 01/05/2020 – 20:00

  • Trump Says "US Will Not Leave" Iraq Unless Billions For Air Base Are Repaid, Threatens Baghdad With "Very Big" Sanctions
    Trump Says “US Will Not Leave” Iraq Unless Billions For Air Base Are Repaid, Threatens Baghdad With “Very Big” Sanctions

    Just hours after Iraq voted to expel US troops stationed in Iraq, Trump made it clear that he has no interest in vacating the nation that has been a stalwart US military outpost in the middle east for nearly two decades ever since it was invaded by, well, the US in search of non-existent weapons of mass destruction, and speaking to reporters on Air Force One said “we’re not leaving” unless Iraq “pays us back” for a US air base built in Iraq.

    “We have a very extraordinarily expensive air base that’s there. It cost billions of dollars to build. Long before my time. We’re not leaving unless they pay us back for it.” Trump told the AF1 reporter pool.

    That, however, wasn’t enough, and Trump also made it clear that that in addition to billions in reimbursements, unless the US left on a “very friendly basis”, the US would hit Iraq with “very big” sanctions like “they’ve never seen before ever.”

    “If they do ask us to leave, if we don’t do it in a very friendly basis. We will charge them sanctions like they’ve never seen before ever. It’ll make Iranian sanctions look somewhat tame.”

    And just to make it abundantly clear, Trump also added that “if there’s any hostility, that they do anything we think is inappropriate, we are going to put sanctions on Iraq, very big sanctions on Iraq.”

    Trump also addressed his Saturday threat to attack various Iranian cultural sites in retaliation to any escalation out of Tehran, threatening “major retaliation” on Iran if they “do anything” and saying that “they’re allowed to kill our people. They’re allowed to torture and maim our people. they’re allowed to use roadside bombs and blow up our people. And we’re not allowed to touch their cultural sites? It doesn’t work that way.”

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Amusingly, if Trump is indeed serious that Iraq will have to reimburse the US for its countless military bases, camps and other installations, the US will be able to repay its $23 trillion in debt (and have money leftover), when all is said and done: here is a partial list of the US camps in iraq:

    • Camp Abu Naji / FOB Garry Owen (Al Amarah)
    • Camp Adder also known as Tallil Air Base and Ali Air Base located in Nasiriyah
    • Camp Al Adala / Camp Justice / Camp Bonzai (Kadhamiyah / Baghdad)
    • Camp Al Amal / Camp Hope (Baghdad)
    • Camp Al Asad (Al Asad Air Base)
    • Camp Al-Hurya Al-Awal / Camp Freedom I / Camp Warhorse (Baqubah Air Field)
    • Camp Al-Hurya Al-Thani (Green Zone)
    • Camp Al-Isdehar (Al Salam)
    • Camp Al-Istiglal (Baghdad Air Base)
    • Camp Al-Khalis (Rock City F.O.B.)
    • Camp Al-Nasr (Abu Ghurayb)
    • Camp Al Qa’im (Al Qa’im train station, Al Anbar)
    • Camp Al-Saqr (Rasheed Air Base)
    • Camp Al-Sharaf / Camp Honor (Green Zone)
    • Camp Al-Tadamum (Adhamiyah / Baghdad)
    • Camp Al-Tahreer (Abu Ghurayb)
    • Camp Al-Tawheed Al-Awal (Al Sijood)
    • Camp Al-Tawheef Al-Thani (Al Sijood)
    • Camp Al Watani (Green Zone)
    • Camp Anaconda (Balad Air Base)
    • Camp Anah / COP Anah
    • Camp Andaluz (Kufa)
    • Camp Anderson (Diwaniyah)
    • Camp Apache / Camp Gunner Main
    • Camp Arkansas (Al Salam)
    • Camp Arrow (Ad Dawr)
    • Camp Ashraf, also known as Camp New Iraq, located near Khalis
    • Camp Avalanche (Abu Ghurayb)
    • Camp Babylon
    • Camp Baharia (Fallujah)
    • Camp Balad (Bala Air Base)
    • Camp Basilone (Qalat Sikar Air Base)
    • Camp Basrah
    • Camp Bastard / Camp Ellis (near Haqlaniyah / Barwanah ?)
    • Camp Black Jack
    • Camp Blackjack (Abu Ghurayb)
    • Camp Blue Diamond (Ar Ramadi)
    • Camp Bonzai (Kadhamiyah / Baghdad)
    • Camp Boom (Baqubah)
    • Camp Brassfield Mora (Samarra)
    • Camp Bristol (BIAP)
    • Camp Bucca, located near Umm Qasr
    • Camp Buffalo (Tikrit)
    • Camp Bulldog (Baghdad)
    • Camp Bushmaster (Najaf)
    • Camp Bushwaker
    • Camp Buzz
    • Camp Caldwell (Kirkush)

    … This is just through the letter C – clearly there are many, many more. Click here for the full list.

    In any event, earlier, Axios reported that The Trump administration tried to stop an Iraqi vote to expel the U.S. military from the country and citing unnamed sources, said that the Trump administration tried to persuade top Iraqi officials to kill the parliamentary effort. As a reminder, earlier on Sunday, Iraq’s parliament voted to approve of the expulsion of the U.S. military following last week’s attack that killed Soleimani.

    A US official told Axios that expelling the U.S. military from Iraq “would be inconvenient for us, but it would be catastrophic for Iraq”, adding that “it’s our concern that Iraq would take a short-term decision that would have catastrophic long-term implications for the country and its security.”

    “But it’s also what would happen to them financially if they allowed Iran to take advantage of their economy to such an extent that they would fall under the sanctions that are on Iran,” the official added. “We don’t want to see that. We’re trying very hard to work to have that not happen.”

    A senior Iraqi official told Axios that many Kurdish and Sunni members of parliament, who tend to be more supportive of the U.S. presence in Iraq, did not attend the vote to expel the U.S. presence.

    “This is a temporary victory for the parties which are pro-Iranian,” the official told Axios. “But it’s also a clear message from the Sunnis and from the Kurds [who didn’t vote] and from some Iraqi Shia for the Americans to tell them we want you to stay in Iraq.


    Tyler Durden

    Sun, 01/05/2020 – 19:49

  • Iran's Deep Distrust Of America Is Rooted In History
    Iran’s Deep Distrust Of America Is Rooted In History

    Authored by Bruce Wilds via Advancing Time blog,

    Our agreement with Iran reached under the Obama administration and canceled by President Trump was viewed, by many, as an alternative to the unsavory option of taking military action to halt Iran from developing a nuclear bomb. John Kerry crafting the agreement with Iran always stressed that if Iran fails to meet the requirements of the current deal, all options remain on the table. With this in mind, we should not give the Obama administration too much credit for bringing us a great or even good agreement.

    Remember that during the Obama years many people considered Middle-east policy a mess as he flip-flopped ignoring the red lines he boldly drew in the sand. At the time, Iran held more cards than we were told because ISIS was a growing threat. In many ways, Iran held the fate of Baghdad in their hands. If the Shia militias from Iran that were defending Baghdad wavered both the Iraqi capital and the American Green Zone could have come under fire from ISIS, this would have been very embarrassing for Obama and our government. When Kerry talked about offsetting the one hundred and fifty billion dollars Iran was to receive when the sanctions were lifted by “upping our game in the area” questions arise as to the cost and how Washington intended to pay for this gambit.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Iran Has Little Reason To Trust America

    While officials claimed the agreement would halt much of Iran’s nuclear program and ratchet back other elements, several U.S. senators, both Democrat and Republican, voiced displeasure with the agreement. They argued that the U.S. and its partners offered too much for something short of a full freeze on uranium enrichment. Also, if part of the boatload of money released at the signing of the agreement was used to fund Iran’s many proxy wars it would create chaos. If  Iran does not halt and reverse its course it can always ramp up its plans to develop a nuclear bomb at off-site locations.

    Much of the problem America has with Iran stems from the perception that we have created over the years by portraying Iran as a larger than life boogeyman that threatens our very way of life and existence. Iran was elevated to this level when President George W. Bush included Iran as a member of the “Axis Of Evil” in his State of the Union Address in 2002. Unfortunately, Washington and the politicians who reside there often mislead us as they allow agendas of special interest to influence policy. When it comes to Iran’s official stance towards America anyone saying that Iran has good reason not to trust the American government is making an understatement. America through its foreign policy has wreaked havoc upon many countries few have been affected or suffered from our meddling as much as Iran.

    A somewhat neutral source for information on the history of Iran post-World War II is Wikipedia. It shows America has constantly interfered in their internal politics. In 1953 the British M16 and the American CIA organized a military coup d’etat to oust the nationalist and democratically elected Prime Minister and put in power Mohammad-Reza Shah Pahlavi, the man we all know as the Shah of Iran, in Persian Shah means king. It is only fair to call attention to some very damning declassified documents released recently, the approximately 1,000 pages of documents, shed light on the Central Intelligence Agency’s central role in the 1953 coup that brought down Iranian Prime Minister Muhammad Mossadegh.

    The documents conflict with the U.S government’s long denied involvement in the coup. The State Department first released coup-related documents in 1989 but edited out any reference to CIA involvement. Public outrage coaxed a government promise to release a more complete edition, and some material came out in 2013. Two years later, the full installment of declassified material was scheduled but the release was delayed fearing it might interfere with the Iran nuclear talks that were taking place. Now they have finally been released, it should be noted they are not complete because numerous original CIA telegrams from that period are known to have disappeared or were destroyed long ago.

    What is clear and finally brought to light is the CIA plot known as Operation Ajax, was about oil. In early 1951, amid great popular acclaim, Mossadegh nationalized Iran’s oil industry. A fuming Great Britain began conspiring with U.S. intelligence services to overthrow Mossadegh and restore the monarchy under the Shah. While some of the U.S. State Department, the newly-released cables attempt to blame the British for the tensions and indicate efforts to work with Mossadegh plans were made for a coup. The coup attempt began on August 15th but was swiftly thwarted. Mossadegh made dozens of arrests. General Fazlollah Zahedi, a top conspirator, went into hiding, and the Shah fled Iran. At that point according to a newly declassified cable sent on August 18, 1953, the CIA under the impression the coup had failed decided to end their role. The message read, “Operations against Mossadegh should be discontinued.”

    Washington wanted to make sure nothing “could be traced back to the U.S,” however, this cable was ignored by Kermit Roosevelt, the top CIA officer in Iran. What unfolded next is pivotal, on August 19, 1953, with the aid of “rented” crowds widely believed to have been arranged with CIA assistance, the coup succeeded and Iran’s nationalist hero jailed and the Western-friendly Shah placed in power. The existence and extent of Operation Ajax have long been a major point of contention for many Iranians from which the flames of anti-Western sentiment grew fueling a surge of nationalism. In 1979 this culminated in the U.S. hostage crisis, the Shah being overthrown and the creation of the Islamic Republic.

    During his time in power, the Shah maintained a close relationship with America and shared our views towards the Soviet Union its northern neighbor. Iran was a strong ally in efforts to keep the Russians contained during the cold war. While the Shah westernized and modernized Iran arbitrary arrests and torture by the Shah’s secret police were used to crush all forms of political opposition. Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini an active critic of the Shah publicly denounced the government and was arrested and imprisoned for 18 months. After his release when Khomeini publicly criticized the United States government he was sent into exile. When oil prices spiked in 1973 due to an oil embargo declared by OPEC and several other countries a flood of foreign currency into Iran caused double-digit inflation;

    Social unrest from waste, corruption and a recession resulted in protests and strikes that spread until they reached a point where the Shah fled the country. Ayatollah Khomeini returned in 1979 and formed a new government. Over the next several years uprisings were violently subdued as the new government went about purging itself of the non-Islamist political opposition that had joined with them to overthrow the Shah. Tens of thousands of Iranians were executed by the Islamic regime.

    A part of history that lingers strongly in the minds of many Americans is that in November 1979, a group of Iranian students seized the U.S. embassy taking  52 U.S. citizens and embassy personnel hostage after the U.S. refused to return the former Shah to Iran to face trial and execution.

    The hostages were finally set free but many Americans continue to view this as a slap in the face.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    America Supported Iraq Which Attacked Iran

    A serious point of discord among Iranians is what happened next. On September 22, 1980, the Iraqi army invaded Iranian Khuzestan which signaled the start of the Iran–Iraq War. The United States, alongside regional and international powers, supported Iraq and Saddam Hussein with loans, military equipment, and satellite imagery during Iraqi attacks against Iranian targets. Although Saddam Hussein’s forces made several early advances, by mid-1982 the Iranian forces successfully managed to drive the Iraqi army back into Iraq and Iran decided to invade Iraq in a bid to conquer Iraqi territory. The war continued until 1988 when the Iraqi army defeated the Iranian forces inside Iraq and pushed the remaining Iranian troops back across the border.

    Subsequently, Khomeini accepted a truce mediated by the UN, but the war cost Iran many lives and huge economic damage. Half a million Iraqi and Iranian soldiers, with an equivalent number of civilians, are believed to have died and many more injured. It must be noted that during the conflict America and the international community remained silent as Iraq used chemical weapons of mass destruction against Iran as well as the Kurds in northern Iraq. Following the war, Iran concentrated on a pragmatic pro-business policy of rebuilding and strengthening the economy without making any dramatic break with the ideology of the revolution.

    Tensions with the United States dramatically increased after the 2005 presidential election brought the conservative populist candidate, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, to power. His over the top rhetoric galvanized the feeling Iran had no intention to take a peaceful place in the world community. In 2009 protests erupted in Iran after he was reported to have won nearly 60 percent of the vote despite voting irregularities. Despite the relatively peaceful nature of the protests, the police and the Basij (a paramilitary group) crushed the people by using batons, pepper spray, sticks and, in some cases, firearms. Images of Neda Agha-Soltan, who was shot and died were uploaded to mass media and broadcast around the world. It was reported that thousands were arrested and tortured in prisons around the country, with former inmates alleging mass rape of men, women, and children by the Iranian Revolutionary Guards. Relatives of those killed are forced to sign documents claiming they had died of heart attack or meningitis.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Many Iranians Want More Freedom

    In truth, few Americans know much about Iran or its 78 million inhabitants or have ever visited the country. Many people would have difficulty pinpointing its location on an unmarked map and the chief source of what knowledge they do have is usually from the evening news. The official name of the country is the Islamic Republic of Iran and it is an area that history called Persia with Persian being the official language and the rial is its currency. Iran’s unique political system based on its 1979 constitution combines elements of a parliamentary democracy with a theocracy governed by the country’s clergy. The country is made up of several ethnic and linguistic groups but most inhabitants are officially Shia.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Travel Documentary Shows Little Malice Towards America

    This recall of history is necessary to understand the real nature of the American-Iranian relationship and how we arrived at today. It should be noted that many Iranians have no malice towards America and are far more moderate than the political apparatus with its strong links to the country’s clergy. A few years ago Rick Steves produced a documentary that explored Iran in a one-hour, ground-breaking travel special. This is a good place to meet the people of this nation whose government so exasperates our own.

    On June 15, 2013, the electoral victory of new Iranian President Hassan Rouhani took place but the moderate has not had as much impact as hoped. The fact is if current trends continue in the future Iran looks to face a defanged and economically weakened America with less power in the region. Regardless the fact remains that one way or the other we must deal with Iran and war is not a great option.

    Two things are clear.

    • The first is that many Iranians want more freedom.

    • The second is that history shows war to be a poor option to bring about positive change. War brings about change but to what degree and for how long.


    Tyler Durden

    Sun, 01/05/2020 – 19:30

  • Durham Probes Early, Suspicious Contacts Between Obama State Dept And Papadopoulos
    Durham Probes Early, Suspicious Contacts Between Obama State Dept And Papadopoulos

    Rep. John Ratcliffe (R-TX) dropped some interesting tidbits regarding the ongoing investigation into the Obama-era intelligence community and its actions during the 2016 US election.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    In an appearance with Maria Bartiromo on Fox‘s Sunday Morning Futures, Ratcliffe said “Now we come up with evidence that’s recently been reported that one of the folks that John Durham talked to was an embassy official who reached out to George Papadopoulos three months before Crossfire Hurricane was ever opened,” adding “That’s a sign that John Durham is looking at the fact that this may include Obama administration officials beyond law enforcement, perhaps to include our intelligence community.”

    As the Daily Caller‘s Chuck Ross noted in September of 2018, Special Counsel Robert Mueller interviewed US embassy official Terrence Dudley about his contacts during the 2016 election with Papadopoulos – several months before the FBI launched operation Crossfire Hurricane to officially investigate the Trump campaign.

    Terrence Dudley, a former Navy commander who works with the Office of Defense Cooperation, told The Daily Caller News Foundation that Mueller’s office contacted him to discuss several meetings that he and a colleague had during the campaign with Papadopoulos.

    The former Trump aide recently identified Dudley and his colleague, Greg Baker, in a tweet alleging that the pair were sent to spy on him on behalf of the U.S. government. –Daily Caller

    (relevant portion starts at 7:15)

    Ratcliffe also said that Durham is looking into conflicting statements between former FBI Director James Comey and former CIA Director John Brennan regarding the Steele Dossier.

    “Brennan says Comey was pushing the Steele dossier to be included in the intelligence community assessment. Comey says that it was Brennan that was pushing it. They both testified under oath, before Congress and to investigators, to that fact,” said Ratcliffe, who sits on the House Intelligence Committee.

    They both can’t be telling the truth.”

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js


    Tyler Durden

    Sun, 01/05/2020 – 19:00

    Tags

  • Trump Derangement Syndrome Skyrockets Over Soleimani
    Trump Derangement Syndrome Skyrockets Over Soleimani

    Authored by Roger Simon via The Epoch Times,

    Remember “politics ends at the water’s edge”?

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    In the Trump era, that patriotic phrase is not only dead, it’s decomposed.

    And ironically so, since the latest manifestation of this decomposition is over the termination of Qasem Soleimani, the terror mastermind who was, on analysis, even more dangerous to the United States and the world than bin Laden and al-Baghdadi, monumentally evil as they were.

    Neither bin Laden, nor al-Baghdadi ever had remotely the power at their disposals – even when the latter controlled his caliphate – Soleimani did as the military leader of by far the greatest state sponsor of terrorism. They were not even close to him who was head of Iran’s Quds force and the second most powerful person in that country of eighty plus million, with all its attendant weaponry and technology and ties to China and Russia.

    Besides the thousands of Americans who either died or were maimed for life because of Soleimani, hundreds of thousands across the Middle East have met their fates at least in part through this man’s ministrations.

    The once shining state of Lebanon is practically decimated through the rise of his Hezbollah, a fate he was replicating in Iraq. And then there’s Yemen and his Houthi and their simultaneous war against Saudi Arabia and their own people. And of course Israel where he kept the Jewish state in a crossfire between his clients Hamas, Islamic Jihad and, again Hezbollah (when Hezbollah was not busy exporting drugs into the United States).

    It’s worth remembering Soleimani was in charge of all these operations at once, a veritable superstar of terror.

    On top of all this, he had as much influence as anyone in keeping the Syrian Civil War alive. Current death (under)count: 400,000. Number of refugees: 5.7 million. He may have changed Europe as we knew it forever.

    And let’s not forget Iran itself where only in the last few weeks Soleimani’s footprints were all over the deaths of thousands of peaceful anti-regime demonstrators. Nobody knows how many. And torture as well—something the Islamic Republic has made a specialty since 1979. Only the other day, they once again executed a man for homosexuality.

    Yet the supposedly liberal and progressive Democrats are all in a dither about the assassination of Soleimani. After all, Trump did it. It has to be wrong.

    Not only would these same Democrats obviously have applauded the action if it had been done by one of their own, equally obviously many of them would have attacked Trump even if had he assassinated Hitler in 1940, blaming the president for escalating the conflict.

    It’s that simple—and nauseating—and every honest person in America knows it, especially the vets almost all of whom have friends incinerated by one of Soleimani’s roadside bombs, if they are not themselves walking around on prosthetic devices.

    And this leaves aside whatever Qasem’s plans were that constituted the proximate cause of the assassination. If past performance is any indication, he had many.

    Meanwhile the Democratic candidates are demonstrating uniform cowardice in the face of the action. Is there one of them you would want to have beside you in a foxhole?

    It would seem to have been impossible, but as bad as it has been for the last three years, Trump Derangement Syndrome has reached unforeseen levels.

    But a deeper cause of this increased derangement may stem from events that began September 11, 2012 – the Obama administration’s behavior in the aftermath of the deaths of four Americans in Benghazi, Libya.

    As most will recall, the administration sent Susan Rice to inform the nation that the lethal terror attack occurred because of a spontaneous emotional reaction to an amateur anti-Islamic video that barely anyone had ever watched. It was not a planned attack by a terror group, Rice said. That was a despicable lie.

    Kenneth Timmerman wrote in the NY Post in June 2014: “My sources, meanwhile, say Suleymani [sic] was involved in an even more direct attack on the U.S.—the killing of Ambassador Christopher Stevens in Benghazi, Libya.”

    Timmerman goes on to detail a complicated and clever plot behind Benghazi worthy of the evil mastermind Qasem Soleimani. (Read it here.)

    If this is true – and it seems vastly more likely than Susan Rice’s “explanation” – then what just occurred at Baghdad Airport is a prime, and highly-justified, example of that old saw: what goes around comes around.

    *  *  *

    Senior Political Analyst Roger L. Simon’s new novel “The GOAT” is available on Amazon.


    Tyler Durden

    Sun, 01/05/2020 – 18:30

  • Gold Spikes To 6-Year High, Oil Jumps, Stocks Dump As Asia Opens
    Gold Spikes To 6-Year High, Oil Jumps, Stocks Dump As Asia Opens

    Amid the weekend’s escalating tensions, threats, and retaliations in the middle east, futures trading has opened with some significant market moves…

    Spot gold is at its highest since April 2013…

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Source: Bloomberg

    Gold futures are up around 2%…up near $1600

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    WTI Crude futures are also up notably, tagging $64 and taking out last week’s highs…

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Dow futures are down around 150 points, taking out Friday’s lows…

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    And bond futures are higher…

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    2020 has not been kind to risk assets…so far.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    How many more points down will The Dow be allowed before somebody gets on the phone!??

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

     


    Tyler Durden

    Sun, 01/05/2020 – 18:15

  • Bernanke Hints At Negative Rates, "Purchases Of Private Securities" To Fight Next Recession
    Bernanke Hints At Negative Rates, “Purchases Of Private Securities” To Fight Next Recession

    Nearly a decade after his now laughably idiotic prediction that the Fed could hike rates in “15 minutes if we have to” – which of course it could and it would then promptly crash markets as late 2018 showed which is also why the Fed will never be able to normalize monetary policy ever again – former Fed Chairman, who together with Alan Greenspan will be responsible for blowing the three biggest asset bubbles in history of which the current one may well be last one as it will mark the end of central banking as we know it, Ben Bernanke delivered what he called “a relatively upbeat” assessment of the U.S. central bank’s ability to fight the next recession.

    Ahead of his address to the American Economic Association’s annual meeting on Saturday, Bernanke wrote in a blog post that “the new policy tools are effective,” perhaps seeking to reassure himself and other central bankers rather than the population and commercial banks around the globe, which is reeling form an onslaught of populism in response to the historic wealth transfer programs initiated by central banks whose negative rate policies have brought the European financial sector to the edge of the abyss.

    “Central bank purchases of longer-term financial assets, popularly known as quantitative easing or QE, have proved an effective tool for easing financial conditions and providing economic stimulus when short rates are at their lower bound. The effectiveness of QE does not depend on its being deployed during a period of market turbulence.”

    “Quantitative easing and forward guidance can provide the equivalent of about 3 additional percentage points of short-term rate cuts.” By which he meant that the Fed, which is currently engaging in QE4, can boost markets to even recorded highs, at which point trickle down may finally happen… although it won’t, and instead the rich will get even richer as the US becomes an even greater Banana republic thanks to people like Bernanke.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    While the Fed has limited room to cut short-term interest rates because they’re already so low – and negative across Europe and Japan – Bernanke argued that quantitative easing and forward guidance could provide enough extra punch to combat a future economic contraction.

    Anticipating that the next market crash will test the central bank’s liquidity injecting skills (and reputation) like never before, Bernanke said the Fed should also consider adopting the same “tools” employed by other central banks, including purchases of private securities, negative interest rates, funding for lending programs, and yield curve control. More importantly, the man who in 2005 said on TV he did not think US housing could ever decline, urged the Fed against ruling out the possibility of pushing short-term interest rates below zero, a very clear hint of what awaits the US during the next recession.

    “The Fed should also consider maintaining constructive ambiguity about the future use of negative short-term rates, both because situations could arise in which negative short-term rates would provide useful policy space; and because entirely ruling out negative short rates, by creating an effective floor for long-term rates as well, could limit the Fed’s future ability to reduce longer-term rates by QE or other means.”

    And yes, Bernanke did also commend banks such as the ECB for purchasing corporate bonds, just so everyone is on the same page as to what happens when corporate bonds sporing record leverage, finally crater in the next recession.

    Then there was an amusing tangent on helicopter money and MMT, which as Bernanke explained, has been going on for quite a while now: “the risk of capital losses on the Fed’s portfolio was never high, but in the event, over the past decade the Fed has remitted more than $800 billion in profits to the Treasury, triple the pre-crisis rate.”

    Just in case it wasn’t clear why the Fed is a socialist’s best friend…

    That said, no matter if the Fed has to buy equities first, or cut rates to, say, -10% and threaten to make all paper currency illegal in order to fight future market drops, pardon recessions, longer-term yields will probably spend extended periods of time at zero or below, according to Bernanke, now a Distinguished Fellow at the Brookings Institution in Washington, who appears to realize that reliance on the Fed’s monetary policy has pushed the entire world into a twilight zone of negative real rates, from which there is no escape, but at least forces even more disastrous monetary policy which makes the rich even richer, at least until the next civil war erupts and the poor masses retake what they believe is theirs.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    There was one moment when the prevailing idiocy of Bernanke’s blog actually gave way to fact, namely when he admitted that pervasive negative rates pose risks to financial stability. “Monetary easing does work in part by increasing the propensity of investors and lenders to take risks,” Bernanke said, perhaps eyeing the fact that the Fed had no choice but to inject $100 billion per month in the last quarter of 2019 just to push stocks to new all time highs.

    “Vigilance and appropriate policies, including macro-prudential and regulatory policies, are essential”, he added without a dose of sarcasm, perhaps hoping that none of those who read his steaming pile of dogshit were alive when he said that “subprime is contained.”

    Bernanke was also kind enough to point out that the Fed’s grossly erroneous inflation metric will never be fixed to accurately capture true inflation, which is not just within the economy but also among asset prices. Because to the Fed, the latter is mysteriously a non-issue.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    While Bernanke’s blog post was unfortunately devoid of any moments of factual or truthful insight unlike his oddly honest and accurate May 2014 prediction that “there would be no rate normalization” in his lifetime, Bernanke did admit that his entire monetary policy dogma is predicated on a crucial hypothesis: that the neutral level of short-term rates which neither spurs nor restricts economic growth is between 2% and 3%. According to Bernanke, if the equilibrium rate is much below that then QE and forward guidance won’t be sufficient to fight off a downturn. “In that case, other measures to increase policy space, including raising the inflation target, might be necessary,” he said.

    Of course, as we first warned back in December 2015 when the Fed’s QT was just starting, the Fed’s balance sheet shrinkage would prove to be a giant mistake precisely because soaring US debt and slowing US growth meant precisely that: the equilibrium rate is now roughly zero.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Of course, four year later, we know that this was also spot on: the Fed’s attempt to “normalize” rates resulted in the first and only mini bear market of the post-crisis era, and the central bank had to quickly cut rates while launching “NOT QE.”

    So besides negative rates and purchases of bonds, and eventually stocks, what does Bernanke believe will happen in the next downturn? His first policy prescription should come as no surprise: echoing virtually every other talking head over the past year, Bernanke said that fiscal policy may also have to play a more central role in countering a contraction. This is better known as the “it takes debt to undo the consequences of record debt and a debt crisis.” How it actually works out and leads to a happy ending is anyone’s guess.

    That’s not all: going back to his famous November 2002 speech in which he first hinted at helicopter money, Bernanke said that central banks in Europe and Japan face even greater difficulties, largely because inflation expectations there have fallen too far. “In those jurisdictions, fiscal as well as monetary policy may be needed to get inflation expectations up. If that can be done, then monetary policy, augmented by the new policy tools, should regain much of its potency.”

    Naturally, such a JV between fiscal and monetary policy, which is where the central bank officially monetizes the government’s debt, is also known as helicopter money, and it’s only a matter of time before it arrives.

    In parting, Bernanke reminded everyone of the farce that defined his entire tenture, saying that unlike Volcker’s days, the problem is not that inflation is too high, “it’s the risk that it’s too low.”

    “Low inflation can be dangerous,” Bernanke wrote in his blog. “Consistent with their declared ‘symmetric’ inflation targets, the Federal Reserve and other central banks should defend against inflation that is too low as least as vigorously as they resist inflation that is modestly too high.”

    While we would challenge Bernanke (or his acolyte Neel Kashkari) to show up at anywhere in public and tell the struggling consumers drowning in credit card debt that inflation is not too high, it is in fact too low, we know this will never happen, and instead we urge the former Fed Chair to highlight to us which asset class he deems as having “too low” inflation ever since he launched QE1… and QE2… and QE3.


    Tyler Durden

    Sun, 01/05/2020 – 18:00

  • Iraq Votes To Expel US Troops As Iranian MPs Chant "Death To America"
    Iraq Votes To Expel US Troops As Iranian MPs Chant “Death To America”

    Update (1545ET): The US State Department has expressed its “disappointment” at the Iraqi parliament’s vote to expel US forces. However, as Axios’ Jonathan Swan notes in a tweet, that he just spoke with a senior Iraqi government official, who explained that people should be very cautious about drawing certain conclusions from Iraq’s parliamentary vote to expel the U.S.

    This is a far from certain outcome. It’s a resolution & the PM who must sign it has already resigned.

    “This is a temporary victory for the parties which are pro-Iranian,” the senior Iraqi govt official told me.

    “But it’s also a clear message from the Sunnis and from the Kurds [who didn’t vote] and from some Iraqi Shia for the Americans to tell them we want you to stay in Iraq.”

    *  *  *

    If President Trump wanted to reduce America’s troop presence in the Middle East, he may have just got his wish, albeit not at his orders.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    During an emergency parliamentary session this morning, the Iraqi government just voted to have foreign troops removed from the country.

    Interim Iraqi prime minister, Adil Abdul Mahdi, stressed during the session, that while the US government notified the Iraqi military of the planned strike on Soleimani, his government denied Washington permission to continue with the operation.

    As RT reports, Mahdi said after the incident that it was clear it was in the interest of both the US and Iraq to end the presence of foreign forces on Iraqi soil.

    “Despite the internal and external difficulties that we might face, it remains best for Iraq on principle and practically.”

    Still there are plenty more US bases around…

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Meanwhile, as the Iraqi government voted, the Iranian parliament took to the Parliament podium to chant “death to America.”

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    After a speech by parliamentary Speaker Ali Larjani, who exclaimed “Mr. Trump, this is the voice of the Iranian nation,” MPs surged united to the podium…

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    The Iranian MPs echoed a popular sentiment heard on the streets as 1000s mourned the death of Qasem Soleimani.


    Tyler Durden

    Sun, 01/05/2020 – 17:55

  • Chris Hedges: The American Empire Will Not Die With A Whimper, But A Bang
    Chris Hedges: The American Empire Will Not Die With A Whimper, But A Bang

    Authored by Chrius Hedges via TruthDig.com,

    The assassination by the United States of Gen. Qassem Soleimani, the head of Iran’s elite Quds Force, near Baghdad’s airport will ignite widespread retaliatory attacks against U.S. targets from Shiites, who form the majority in Iraq. It will activate Iranian-backed militias and insurgents in Lebanon and Syria and throughout the Middle East. The existing mayhem, violence, failed states and war, the result of nearly two decades of U.S. blunders and miscalculations in the region, will become an even wider and more dangerous conflagration. The consequences are ominous. Not only will the U.S. swiftly find itself under siege in Iraq and perhaps driven out of the country—there is only a paltry force of 5,200 U.S. troops in Iraq, all U.S. citizens in Iraq have been told to leave the country “immediately” and the embassy and consular services have been closed—but the situation could also draw us into a war directly with Iran. The American Empire, it seems, will die not with a whimper but a bang.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The targeting of Soleimani, who was killed by a MQ-9 Reaper drone that fired missiles into his convoy as he was leaving the Baghdad airport, also took the life of Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, the deputy commander of Iran-backed militias in Iraq known as the Popular Mobilization Forces, along with other Iraqi Shiite militia leaders. The strike may temporarily bolster the political fortunes of the two beleaguered architects of the assassination, Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, but it is an act of imperial suicide by the United States. There can be no positive outcome. It opens up the possibility of an Armageddon-type scenario relished by the lunatic fringes of the Christian right.

    A war with Iran would see it use its Chinese-supplied anti-ship missiles, mines and coastal artillery to shut down the Strait of Hormuz, which is the corridor for 20% of the world’s oil supply. Oil prices would double, perhaps triple, devastating the global economy. The retaliatory strikes by Iran on Israel, as well as on American military installations in Iraq, would leave hundreds, maybe thousands, of dead. The Shiites in the region, from Saudi Arabia to Pakistan, would see an attack on Iran as a religious war against Shiism. The 2 million Shiites in Saudi Arabia, concentrated in the oil-rich Eastern province, the Shiite majority in Iraq and the Shiite communities in Bahrain, Pakistan and Turkey would turn in fury on us and our dwindling allies. There would be an increase in terrorist attacks, including on American soil, and widespread sabotage of oil production in the Persian Gulf. Hezbollah in southern Lebanon would renew attacks on northern Israel. War with Iran would trigger a long and widening regional conflict that, by the time it was done, would terminate the American Empire and leave in its wake mounds of corpses and smoldering ruins. Let us hope for a miracle to pull us back from this Dr. Strangelove self-immolation.

    Iran, which has vowed “harsh retaliation,” is already reeling under the crippling economic sanctions imposed by the Trump administration when it unilaterally withdrew in 2018 from the Iranian nuclear arms deal. Tensions in Iraq between the U.S. and the Shiite majority, at the same time, have been escalating. On Dec. 27 Katyusha rockets were fired at a military base in Kirkuk where U.S. forces are stationed. An American civilian contractor was killed and several U.S. military personnel were wounded. The U.S. responded on Dec. 29 by bombing sites belonging to the Iranian-backed Kataib Hezbollah militia. Two days later Iranian-backed militias attacked the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad, vandalizing and destroying parts of the building and causing its closure. But this attack will soon look like child’s play.

    Iraq after our 2003 invasion and occupation has been destroyed as a unified country. Its once-modern infrastructure is in ruins. Electrical and water services are, at best, erratic. There is high unemployment and discontent over widespread government corruption that has led to bloody street protests. Warring militias and ethnic factions have carved out competing and antagonistic enclaves. At the same time, the war in Afghanistan is lost, as the Afghanistan Papers published by The Washington Post detail. Libya is a failed state. Yemen after five years of unrelenting Saudi airstrikes and a blockade is enduring one of the world’s worst humanitarian disasters. The “moderate” rebels we funded and armed in Syria at a cost of $500 million, after instigating a lawless reign of terror, have been beaten and driven out of the country. The monetary cost for this military folly, the greatest strategic blunder in American history, is between $5 trillion and $7 trillion.

    So why go to war with Iran? Why walk away from a nuclear agreement that Iran did not violate? Why demonize a government that is the mortal enemy of the Taliban, along with other jihadist groups, including al-Qaida and Islamic State? Why shatter the de facto alliance we have with Iran in Iraq and Afghanistan? Why further destabilize a region already dangerously volatile?

    The generals and politicians who launched and prosecuted these wars are not about to take the blame for the quagmires they created. They need a scapegoat. It is Iran. The hundreds of thousands of dead and maimed, including at least 200,000 civilians, and the millions driven from their homes into displacement and refugee camps cannot, they insist, be the result of our failed and misguided policies. The proliferation of radical jihadist groups and militias, many of which we initially trained and armed, along with the continued worldwide terrorist attacks, have to be someone else’s fault. The generals, the CIA, the private contractors and weapons manufacturers who have grown rich off these conflicts, the politicians such as George W. Bush, Barack Obama and Donald Trump, along with all the “experts” and celebrity pundits who serve as cheerleaders for endless war, have convinced themselves, and want to convince us, that Iran is responsible for our catastrophe.

    The chaos and instability we unleashed in the Middle East, especially in Iraq and Afghanistan, left Iran as the dominant country in the region. Washington empowered its nemesis. It has no idea how to reverse its mistake other than to attack Iran.

    Trump and Netanyahu, as well as Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, are mired in scandal. They believe a new war would divert attention from their foreign and domestic crises. But they have no more rational strategy for war with Iran than they did for the wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Yemen and Syria. European allies, whom Trump alienated when he walked away from the Iranian nuclear agreement, will not cooperate with Washington if the U.S. goes to war with Iran. The Pentagon lacks the hundreds of thousands of troops it would need to attack and occupy Iran. And the Trump administration’s view that the marginal and discredited Iranian resistance group Mujahedeen-e-Khalq (MEK), which fought alongside Saddam Hussein in the war against Iran and is seen by most Iranians as composed of traitors, is a viable counterforce to the Iranian government is ludicrous.

    International law, along with the rights of 80 million people in Iran, is ignored just as the rights of the peoples of Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Yemen and Syria were ignored. The Iranians, whatever they feel about their despotic regime, would not see the United States as allies or liberators. They do not want to be occupied. They would resist.

    A war with Iran would be seen throughout the region as a war against Shiism. But these are calculations that the ideologues, who know little about the instrument of war and even less about the cultures or peoples they seek to dominate, cannot fathom. Attacking Iran would be no more successful than the Israeli airstrikes on Lebanon in 2006, which failed to break Hezbollah and united most Lebanese behind that militant group. The Israeli bombing did not pacify 4 million Lebanese. What will happen if we begin to pound a country of 80 million people whose land mass is three times the size of France?

    The United States, like Israel, has become a pariah that shreds, violates or absents itself from international law. We launch preemptive wars, which under international law is defined as a “crime of aggression,” based on fabricated evidence. We, as citizens, must hold our government accountable for these crimes. If we do not, we will be complicit in the codification of a new world order, one that would have terrifying consequences. It would be a world without treaties, statutes and laws. It would be a world where any nation, from a rogue nuclear state to a great imperial power, would be able to invoke its domestic laws to annul its obligations to others. Such a new order would undo five decades of international cooperation—largely put in place by the United States—and thrust us into a Hobbesian nightmare. Diplomacy, broad cooperation, treaties and law, all the mechanisms designed to civilize the global community, would be replaced by savagery.

    *  *  *

    Chris Hedges, an Arabic speaker, is a former Middle East bureau chief for The New York Times. He spent seven years covering the region, including Iran. 


    Tyler Durden

    Sun, 01/05/2020 – 17:30

  • Is Global Manufacturing Staging A Comeback?
    Is Global Manufacturing Staging A Comeback?

    Authored by Chetan Ahya, chief economist and global head of economics at Morgan Stanley

    What was your defining moment of 2019? For the global economy, it would have to be the recessionary conditions in the manufacturing and trade sectors and their drag to global growth. The good news? As we enter 2020, these sectors are staging a comeback.

    Consider the recent run of both soft and hard data. In November, the soft data, most notably the manufacturing PMIs, improved for the first time in seven months. In December, both the headline and new orders index held on to their previous month’s values, as the further improvement in PMIs in EM was offset by weaker PMIs in DMs, particularly the US.

    Encouragingly, the bounce in the soft data in November has translated to an uptick in the hard data for December. Korea’s exports volume – the first real-time indicator for global trade – returned to a positive growth rate of 6.9%Y in December, after contracting for the past seven months. Similarly, we estimate that global trade, as per our trade indicator, is likely to post 1.3%Y growth in December, the first month of positive growth after seven months of contraction.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    We have reasons to believe that this improvement in manufacturing and trade can be sustained.

    • First, trade tensions are easing. On current indications, a phase 1 deal between the US and China is likely to be signed on January 15. As further escalation is averted, this reduces the drag from a key overhang on corporate confidence. Moreover, the global economy received a substantial amount of monetary and fiscal stimulus and its effects are kicking in now to support end demand.
    • Second, the weakness in global manufacturing and trade was exacerbated by the inevitable inventory adjustment that corporates had to undertake in response to weak demand conditions. However, judging by the current low levels of inventory, we believe that the inventory adjustment cycle is nearly complete in China and Europe (the two big manufacturing hubs). Globally, the new orders to inventory ratio for the manufacturing PMIs has rebounded sharply over the last four months.

    At a micro level, the turnaround in the Asia tech cycle provides another avenue of optimism. The tech sector accounts for a sizeable share in Asia excluding Japan manufacturing, and Asia excluding Japan accounts for ~40% of global manufacturing. Shawn Kim, our head of Asia technology research, is highlighting that many tech verticals, including global semis, DRAM, display panels and smartphones to name a few, are inflecting higher in terms of their year-on-year rate of change, which Shawn believes marks a fundamental cyclical upturn. As tech is a big part of global manufacturing, its improvement, even if it is driven by sector-specific reasons, will support a recovery in global manufacturing.

    To be sure, this rising tide of better growth in manufacturing and trade will help to lift global growth, but not all economies will benefit to the same extent. Compared with the rest of the world, the US has a smaller exposure to these sectors. Hence, we expect a more robust growth recovery in the world excluding the US. The US economy is also constrained by late-cycle dynamics while resources are less stretched elsewhere.

    At the same time, the effects of policy support are fading in the US but policy easing is gaining momentum elsewhere. Fiscal policy is turning more supportive of growth in the euro area, Japan and the UK. In China, as trade tensions ease and corporate confidence improves, it will increase the effectiveness of the tax cuts. Moreover, policy-makers are continuing their push to support growth with the increase in the annual quota of local government special bond issuance for 2020, which is likely to be front-loaded.

    As the upturn in trade and manufacturing continues, it should provide an upswing to the global economy. We expect global GDP growth to improve from a trough of 2.9%Y in 4Q19 to 3.4%Y in 4Q20, driven by a more robust improvement in the rest of the world. The risks to the recovery will be if trade tensions between the US and China escalate again, a rise in geopolitical tensions in the Middle East or if late-cycle challenges in the US – for instance, if financial stability risks rise or there is a much sharper acceleration of wage growth relative to capex and productivity growth – result in a more pronounced rise in inflation. In this context, the Fed’s reaction to these scenarios playing out would be key, as it could prompt an earlier-than-expected rate hike by the Fed (relative to our expectation of an extended hold in 2020).

    Enjoy your Sunday. On behalf of all my colleagues at Morgan Stanley Research, we wish you a happy new year.


    Tyler Durden

    Sun, 01/05/2020 – 17:00

  • Scientific Models Too Often Prove Whatever The Grant-Provider Wants Proven
    Scientific Models Too Often Prove Whatever The Grant-Provider Wants Proven

    Authored by Gail Tverberg via Our Finite World blog,

    Most people seem to think, “The difference between models and myths is that models are scientific, and myths are the conjectures of primitive people who do not have access to scientific thinking and computers. With scientific models, we have moved far beyond myths.” It seems to me that the truth is quite different from this.

    History shows a repeated pattern of overshoot and collapse. William Catton wrote about this issue in his highly acclaimed 1980 book, Overshoot.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Figure 1. Depiction of Overshoot and Collapse by Paul Chefurka

    What politicians, economists, and academic book publishers would like us to believe is that the world is full of limitless possibilities. World population can continue to rise. World leaders are in charge. Our big problem, if we believe today’s models, is that humans are consuming fossil fuel at too high a rate. If we cannot quickly transition to a low carbon economy, perhaps based on wind, solar and hydroelectric, the climate will change uncontrollably. The problem will then be all our fault. The story, supposedly based on scientific models, has almost become a new religion.

    Recent Attempted Shifts to Wind, Solar and Hydroelectric Are Working Poorly

    Of course, if we check to see what has happened when economies have actually attempted to switch to wind, water and hydroelectric, we see one bad outcome after another.

    [1] Australia’s attempt to put renewable electricity on the grid has sent electricity prices skyrocketing and resulted in increased blackouts. It has been said that intermittent electricity has “wrecked the grid” in Australia.

    [2] California, with all of its renewables, has badly neglected its grid, leading to many damaging wildfires. Renewables need disproportionately more long distance transmission, partly because they tend to be located away from population centers and partly because transmission must be scaled for peak use. It is evident that California has not been collecting a high enough price for electricity to cover the full cost of grid maintenance and upgrades.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Figure 2. California electricity consumption including amounts imported from out of state, based on EIA data. Amounts shown are average daily amounts, by month.

    [3] The International Rivers Organization writes that Large Dams Just Aren’t Worth the Cost. Part of the problem is the huge number of people who must be moved from their ancestral homeland and their inability to adapt well to their new location. Part of the problem is the environmental damage caused by the dams. To make matters worse, a study of 245 large dams built between 1934 and 2007 showed that without even taking into account social and environmental impacts, the actual construction costs were too high to yield a positive return.

    Developed economies have made hydroelectric power work adequately in areas with significant snow melt. At this point, evidence is lacking that large hydroelectric dams work well elsewhere. Significant variation in rainfall (year-to-year or seasonally) seems to be particularly problematic, because without fossil fuel backup, businesses cannot rely on year-around electricity supply.

    The Pattern of Overshoot and Collapse Is Well-Established

    Back in 1974, Henry Kissinger said in an interview:

    I think of myself as a historian more than as a statesman. As a historian, you have to be conscious of the fact that every civilization that has ever existed has ultimately collapsed. [Emphasis added.]

    History is a tale of efforts that failed, of aspirations that weren’t realized, of wishes that were fulfilled and then turned out to be different from what one expected. So, as a historian, one has to live with a sense of the inevitability of tragedy. As a statesman, one has to act on the assumption that problems must be solved.

    Historians tend to define collapse more broadly than “the top level of government disappearing.” Collapse includes many ways of an economy failing. It includes losing at war, population decline because of epidemics, governments overthrown by internal dissent, and governments that cannot repay debt with interest, and failing for this reason.

    A basic issue that often underlies collapse is falling average resources per person. These falling average resources per person can take several forms:

    • Population rises, but land available for farming doesn’t rise.

    • Mines and wells deplete, requiring more effort for extraction.

    • Soil erodes or becomes polluted with salt, reducing crop yields.

    One of the other issues is that as resources per capita become stretched, it becomes harder and harder to set aside a margin for a “rainy day” or a drought. Thus, weather or climate variations may push an economy over the edge, as resources per person become more stretched.

    Scientific Models Too Often Prove Whatever the Grant Provider Wants Proven

    It is incredibly difficult to figure out what the future will hold. Our experience is almost entirely with a growing economy. It is easy to accidentally build this past experience into a model of the future, even when we are trying to make realistic assumptions. For example, when making pension models in the early 1980s, actuaries would see interest rates of 10% and assume that interest rates could remain this high indefinitely.

    The question of whether prices will rise to allow future energy extraction is another problematic area. If we believe standard economic theory, prices can be expected to rise when resources are in short supply. But if we look at Revelation 18: 11-17, we find that when Babylon collapsed, the problem was low prices and lack of demand. There were not even buyers for slaves, and these were the energy product of the day. The Great Depression of the 1930s showed a similar low-price pattern. Today’s economic model seems to need refinement, if it is to account for how prices really seem to behave in collapses.

    If there is an issue that is difficult to evaluate in making a forecast, the easiest approach for researchers to take is to omit it. For example, the intermittency of wind and solar can effectively be left out by assuming that (a) the different types of intermittency will cancel out, or (b) intermittency will be inexpensive to fix or (c) intermittency will be handled by a different part of the research project.

    To further complicate matters, researchers often find that their compensation is tied to their ability to get grants to fund their research. These research grants have been put together by organizations that are concerned about the future. These organizations are looking for research that will match their understanding of today’s problems and their proposed solutions for the future.

    A person can guess how this arrangement tends to work out. Any researcher who points out endless problems, or says that the proposed solution is impossible, won’t get funding. To get funding, at least some partial solution must be provided along the lines outlined in the Request for Proposal, regardless of how unlikely the proposed solution is. Research showing that the grant-writer’s view of the future is not really correct is left to retired researchers and others willing to work for little compensation. All too often, published research tends to say whatever the groups funding the research studies want the studies to say.

    Myths Are of Many Types; Many Are Aimed at Giving Good Advice

    The fact that myths have survived through the ages lets us know that at least some people found the insights that they provided were worthwhile.

    If an ancient people did not know how the earth and the people on it came into being, they would likely come up with a myth explaining the situation. Most of us today would not believe myths about Thor, for example, but (as far as we know), no one was being paid to put together stories about Thor and how powerful he was. The myths were stories that people found sufficiently useful and entertaining to pass along. In some sense, this background gives these stories more value than a paper written in order to obtain funds provided by a research grant.

    Some myths relate to what types of activities by humans were desirable or undesirable. For example, the people in Uganda have traditional folklore about a moral monster that is used to teach children the dangers of craftiness and deceit. My sister who visited Uganda reported that where she visited, people believed that people who stole someone else’s crops were likely to get sick. Most of us wouldn’t think that this story was really right, but it has a moral purpose behind it. There are no doubt many myths of this type. They have been passed on because passing them on seemed to serve a purpose.

    Clearly, which actions are desirable or undesirable changes over time. For example, Leviticus 19:19 and Deuteronomy 22:11 seem to condemn wearing fabrics that are a mix of linen and wool. Today, we use many fabrics that are mixes of two types of yarns. Perhaps there was a problem with different amounts of shrinkage. Today, our issues are different. Perhaps, myths associated with issues such as these need to be discarded, because they are not relevant any more.

    How about myths of an afterlife? Things on earth don’t necessarily go well. The promise of a favorable afterlife has a definite appeal. Some people would even like a story in which people who don’t act in the desired manner are punished. Some religions seem to provide such an ending as well.

    Follow a Religion Based on Scientific Models, or Based on Myth, or Neither?

    Nature’s solutions and mankind’s solutions in a finite world both involve complexity, but the two types of complexity are very different.

    Mankind’s solutions seem to involve more and more devices using an increased amount of resources and debt. The overhead of the system becomes greater and greater as the economy increasingly shifts toward robots and owners/overseers of the robots. The big problem that can be expected to develop comes from not having enough purchasers who can afford to purchase the end products created by this system. In fact, we seem to already be reaching an era of too much wage disparity and too much wealth disparity. Eventually, such a system can be expected to collapse under its own weight.

    We can already see signs that wind and solar are not scalable to the extent that people would like them to be. Together, they currently comprise only 3% of the world’s energy supply. We need very large supplies of energy to provide food, housing, and transportation for 7.7 billion people.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Figure 3. World Energy Consumption by Fuel, based on data of 2019 BP Statistical Review of World Energy.

    Regardless of what politicians would like proven, nature doesn’t move in a constant path upward. Instead, nature provides a self-organizing system of individual parts, none of which is permanent. Humans are temporary residents of this earth. Businesses are temporary, and the products they sell are constantly changing and adapting. Governments are temporary. Weather patterns are also temporary. Religions are constantly changing and adapting, and new ones are formed.

    Nature’s way doesn’t seem to require much overhead. Over the long run, it seems to be much more permanent than mankind’s attempts at solutions. As the system changes, each replacement differs in random ways from previous systems of a particular type. The best adapted replacements survive, without the need for excessive overhead to the system.

    We may or may not agree with the religions that have formed over the years in the self-organizing way that nature provides. The fact that religions have stayed around indicates that at least for some people, they continue to play a significant role. If nothing else, religious groups often provide social gatherings with others in the area. This provides an opportunity for friendship. In some cases, it will allow people to find potential marriage partners who are not closely related.

    One of the roles of religions is to pass down “best practices.” These will change over time so some will need to be discarded and changed. For example, in some eras, it will be optimal for women to have several children. In others, it will make sense to have only one or two.

    The book, Oneness: Great Principles Shared by All Religions by Jeffrey Moses, lists 64 principles shared by several religions. Of course, not all religions agree on all of these 64 principles. Instead, there seems to be a great deal of overlap in what religions of the world teach. Some sample truths include “The Golden Rule,” it is “Blessed to Forgive,” “Seek and Ye Shall Find,” and “There Are Many Paths to God.” This type of advice can be helpful for people.

    People will differ on whether it makes sense to believe that there really is an afterlife. There may very well be; we can’t know for certain. At least this is better odds than the knowledge that all earthly civilizations have eventually failed.

    I personally have found belonging to and attending an ELCA Lutheran Church to be helpful. I find its earthly benefits to be sufficient, whether or not there is an afterlife. I will, of course, be attending around Christmas time. I will also be getting together with family.

    I recognize, too, that not everyone is interested in one of the traditional religions. Some would even like to believe that with our advanced science, we can now find a way around every problem that confronts us. Perhaps this time is different. Perhaps this time, world leaders, with their love for overhead-heavy solutions, will finally discover a solution that can produce long-term growth on a finite earth. Perhaps energy from fusion is around the corner. Wish! Wish!


    Tyler Durden

    Sun, 01/05/2020 – 16:30

  • 3 Dead, 2 Wounded After Terrorist Attack On US Base In Kenya 
    3 Dead, 2 Wounded After Terrorist Attack On US Base In Kenya 

    Update (1615ET): The U.S. military’s Africa Command confirmed that one American serviceman and two Department of Defense (DOD) contractors were killed on Sunday when the al-Shabaab terrorist group attacked the Manda Bay Airfield in Kenya.

    Two additional DOD members were also wounded in the assault, according to a Sunday afternoon statement from Africa Command, adding that they are being evacuated and are in stable condition.

    “Our thoughts and prayers are with the families and friends of our teammates who lost their lives today,” said U.S. Army General Stephen Townsend, the chief of Africa Command.

    As we honor their sacrifice, let’s also harden our resolve. Alongside our African and international partners, we will pursue those responsible for this attack and al-Shabaab who seeks to harm Americans and U.S. interests. We remain committed to preventing al-Shabaab from maintaining a safe haven to plan deadly attacks against the U.S. homeland, East African, and international partners.”

    *  *  *

    U.S. Africa Command has confirmed militants attacked a base used by U.S. forces in Kenya on Sunday.  The Sunday attack was led by terrorist organization al-Shabaab at Manda Bay Airfield. 

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    U.S. Africa Command said, “Working alongside our Kenyan partners, the airfield is cleared and still in the process of being fully secured” adding that the security situation at Manda Bay is “fluid.”

    “Al-Shabaab is a brutal terrorist organization,” said U.S. Army Maj. Gen. William Gayler, U.S. Africa Command director of operations. “It is an al-Qaeda affiliate seeking to establish a self-governed Islamic territory in East Africa, to remove Western influence and ideals from the region, and to further its jihadist agenda. U.S. presence in Africa is critically important to counter-terrorism efforts.” 

    There was no report of U.S. or Kenyan deaths. U.S. Africa Command said, “accountability of personnel assessment is underway.” There were reports on Twitter that infrastructure and equipment on the base were heavily damaged during the intense firefight. 

    Twitter handle Intel Air & Sea provided several pictures of a commercial twin-engine passenger aircraft engulfed in flames. 

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Hot 96 FM Kenya tweeted pictures of dense black smoke rising from “Camp Simba army bases that hosts U.S. & Kenya soldiers in Lamu’s Manda Bay.” 

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Here’s a closer view of the destruction, where a broadcast journalist with BBC News Swahili tweeted: “Al-Shabaab say they have launched a dawn attack on Kenya/U.S. military base in Lamu County. A suicide car bomb reportedly breached the entry to Camp Simba, Manda Bay. The explosion sent plume of dark smoke into the sky.”

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Al Shabaab claims it destroyed seven planes and three vehicles during the attack. 

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    The organization released a statement indicating there were “severe casualties on both # U.S. and #Kenya troops.” 

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    “Imagery from Manda Bay #Keynya suggests at least two aircraft destroyed in #AlShabaab attack – one (#US Dash-8?) on apron [A] and one on taxiway/runway [B],” said Joseph Dempsey, a research analyst at the International Institute for Strategic Studies.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js


    Tyler Durden

    Sun, 01/05/2020 – 16:25

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Today’s News 5th January 2020

  • With Iran War Looming, Congress Has Been Left Out
    With Iran War Looming, Congress Has Been Left Out

    Authored by Jason Ditz via AntiWar.com,

    Congress has never authorized the use of military force against Iran, and in the initial House version of the 2020 NDAA, it was explicitly noted that there is no authorization for that war. But Thursday night rolled around, and the Trump Administration attacked and killed Iran’s top general in a strike on Baghdad International Airport.

    An unauthorized attack, but it’s more than that, as Congress was neither consulted about nor informed of Thursday’s attack. That’s par for the course for an administration that has scorned the very idea of Congressional authority in war-making time and again.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Image source: AFP via Getty

    Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) is saying he’s trying to set up a classified, closed-door briefing about the attack. That’s well after the fact, and McConnell already followed the Senate hawks in endorsing the killing before even getting such a briefing. It’s not clear, then, what the point would even be.

    More to the point, Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA) is introducing a resolution aimed at blocking the war, saying that the administration must not attack Iran without an Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF). There is no sign an AUMF is being considered.

    The Kaine resolution would require a two-thirds majority in both the House and Senate in practice, otherwise it would face the fate of similar resolutions on the unauthorized Yemen War, being vetoed by Trump.

    And while it may be an uphill battle to muster a two-thirds majority in the Senate to oppose the Iran War, the fact that they’re trying at all is at least indication that there is some debate that will be had on the new war. America may not have gotten this debate before the US attacked, but there will be a chance to express disapproval for the conflict.

    The Trump Administration likely appreciates that this war they’re careening toward would be unpopular, which is why officials have styled their killings as “defensive” actions, and why President Trump’s statement claimed he attacked the Baghdad Airport to “stop a war.”

    This will allow them to pretend this was something other than a plain war of choice.


    Tyler Durden

    Sat, 01/04/2020 – 23:30

  • Very Few US Adults Oppose Marijuana Legalization
    Very Few US Adults Oppose Marijuana Legalization

    Nearly 90 percent of Americans are in favor of legalizing marijuana, according to a September study conducted by Pew Research. As Statista’s Maria Vultaggio notes, at 69 percent of approval, marijuana legalization was most common among 18 to 29-year-olds. At 12 percent, it was least common among Republicans.

    Infographic: Few U.S. Adults Oppose Marijuana Legalization | Statista

    You will find more infographics at Statista

    On January 2, the governor of Kansas said she would likely sign a bill to legalize marijuana. Though Governor Laura Kelly wouldn’t advocate for the bill, she’s not opposed to it.

    “I haven’t really decided what I would do. This is something where what the people want is probably more what I will want on something like that,” Kelly told WIBW.

    “I don’t have a personal ideology regarding it. If the folks want it and the legislature passes it, would I sign it? Probably.”

    Currently, recreational marijuana is legal in Alaska, California, Colorado, Illinois, Massachusetts, Maine, Michigan, Nevada, Oregon, Vermont, Washington and the District of Columbia.


    Tyler Durden

    Sat, 01/04/2020 – 23:00

  • CFR President Says "The World Will Be The Battlefield" After Iran Escalation
    CFR President Says “The World Will Be The Battlefield” After Iran Escalation

    Authored by Paul Joseph Watson via Summit News,

    The President of the Council on Foreign Relations Richard N. Haass says that “the world will be the battlefield” following a dramatic escalation in tensions between the United States and Iran.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Fears of a wider war are rising after Iran’s Quds Force General Qasem Soleimani was killed during an airstrike near Baghdad’s airport.

    Haass warned that those who thought any war with Iran would look similar to previous military campaigns were being incredibly naive.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    “Make no mistake: any war with Iran will not look like the 1990 Gulf war or the 2003 Iraq wars. It will be fought throughout the region w a wide range of tools vs a wide range of civilian, economic, & military targets. The region (and possibly the world) will be the battlefield,” tweeted Haass.

    He went on to assert that developments would lead to Iraqi authorities exerting great pressure on the U.S. to leave their country.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    “One sure result of the US strike is that the era of US-Iraq cooperation is over. The US diplomatic & mil presence will end b/c Iraq asks us to depart or our presence is just a target or both. The result will be greater Iranian influence, terrorism, and Iraqi infighting,” said Haas.

    Meanwhile, a source described as being in “close contact” with senior security officials in the Trump Administration said that Iran could respond to the killing of Soleimani by launching a massive cyberattack.

    A cyberattack inside the U.S. is “the most likely way that Iran could retaliate stateside,” according to Axios.

    https://www.infowarsmedia.com/js/player.js

    *  *  *

    My voice is being silenced by free speech-hating Silicon Valley behemoths who want me disappeared forever. It is CRUCIAL that you support me. Please sign up for the free newsletter here. Donate to me on SubscribeStar here. Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.


    Tyler Durden

    Sat, 01/04/2020 – 22:30

  • Baltimore County Homicides Jump 85% To Record High Amid Spillover In City Murder Crisis 
    Baltimore County Homicides Jump 85% To Record High Amid Spillover In City Murder Crisis 

    The evolution of the Baltimore City murder crisis is now pushing out into Baltimore County, according to a new report from The Baltimore Sun.

    About 50 homicides were recorded in 2019, surpassing the previous high of 42, set during the crack epidemic of the early 1990s, according to FBI statistics. On a yearly change, homicides in the county are up 85%. 

    Baltimore County homicides usually fluctuate in the low 20s. It wasn’t until the 2015 Baltimore City Riots when homicides in the county have jumped ever since. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The Sun also cited police data that recorded 54 nonfatal shootings in the county in 2019 and 56 in 2018.

    There was even a mass stabbing in late September at a luxurious shopping center in Hunt Valley, where four people were randomly stabbed, and police eventually killed the attacker.

    The primary reason for the explosion in homicides and violent crime in the county is due in part to the murder crisis in the city. Violent crime is being pushed out and is now spilling over in the communities five to ten miles from city limits. 

    Baltimore City ended 2019 with record homicides, recorded 348 deaths, and a per capita homicide rate of 57 per 100,000 – one of the highest in the US.

    “Any homicide is completely unacceptable to me and I’m devastated for every single family that lost a loved one to a murder in Baltimore County this past year,” Baltimore County Executive Johnny Olszewski Jr. said Thursday, citing domestic violence and drug-related crimes contributed to the wave of deaths in 2019. 

    Olszewski said to “keep things in context,” the county remains “a safe place to live, work and raise a family.”

    He added, “any loss of life is one too many, and any increase in our rate is deeply concerning.”

    The murder crisis in Baltimore City is spreading, now moving into the county, contributing to record amounts of homicides. 

    The Baltimore Metropolitan Area is descending into chaos – stay away if you value your life. 


    Tyler Durden

    Sat, 01/04/2020 – 22:00

    Tags

  • China Just Escalated Their Brutal Persecution Of Christians To An Entirely New Level
    China Just Escalated Their Brutal Persecution Of Christians To An Entirely New Level

    Authored by Michael Snyder via The End of The American Dream blog,

    Be very thankful that you don’t live in China.  Approximately one out of every seven people on the entire planet lives in China, and it has become one of the most dystopian societies that the world has ever seen.  Surveillance cameras, government spies and facial recognition scanners are everywhere, and the totalitarian “social credit score” system that is currently being rolled out is an absolute nightmare.  And the Chinese government is not content to simply control how people behave.  They also want to literally control what people believe, and the ongoing crackdown on the Christian faith has been absolutely brutal. 

    Over the past several years, scores of pastors have been arrested, countless underground churches have been shut down, and thousands of Bibles have been burned.  Unfortunately, that wasn’t enough for Chinese officials, and so they have now taken things to an entirely new level.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    When the communists first came to power in China, it was a very dark time for Christians.  But underground churches started blossoming even in the midst of the persecution, and eventually there were a few decades where the national government more or less tolerated unsanctioned gatherings.  Today, it has been estimated that there are more than 100 million Christians in China, and it is being projected that China may actually have more Christians that any other nation on the planet by the year 2030.

    Needless to say, the communists don’t like any threats to their power, and they see this underground movement as a very serious threat.

    Under the leadership of Chinese President Xi Jinping, the persecution of unofficial churches has steadily escalated.  This year they actually tried to ban Christians from gathering on Christmas, and a series of new regulations has just been introduced that requires “total submission to the Chinese Communist Party at all times”

    A new mandate entitled “Administrative Measures for Religious Groups” has been approved by the CPC and is comprised of six chapters and 41 articles dealing with the organization, functions, offices, supervision, projects and economic administration of religious communities.

    The new rules also seek to ensure that religious leaders support, promote and implement total submission to the Chinese Communist Party at all times.

    So what does that sort of “submission” look like?

    Well, in some cases officials have required churches to take down pictures of Jesus and replace them with pictures of President Xi Jinping.

    Yes, this is how twisted things have become in China.

    The new regulations also require all churches to “spread the principles and policies of the Chinese Communist Party” in all of their activities…

    According to International Christian Concern, Article 5 of the new ordinance reads that “religious organizations must adhere to the leadership of the Chinese Communist Party, observe the constitution, laws, regulations, ordinances and policies, adhere to the principle of independence and self-government, adhere to the directives on religions in China, implementing the values ​​of socialism …”

    In addition, Article 17 specifies that all religious organizations “must spread the principles and policies of the Chinese Communist Party” in everything they do.

    Any church that does not go along is likely to be raided and shut down at any time.

    For example, Pastor Wang Yi once led one of the most important underground churches in all of China, but his church was raided and he was arrested.

    And now we have learned that he has just been sentenced to nine years in prison

    Wang Yi, a leader in one of the most well-known Christian congregations in China, has been quietly sentenced to nine years in prison, according to a statement on the website of the Intermediate People’s Court of Chengdu Municipality.

    The sentencing is the latest incident in an ongoing crackdown on organized religion in China. Early Rain Covenant Church, which Wang founded in 2008, attracted about 500 followers and was considered one of the most influential “underground churches” in China, operating independently of the state.

    According to Chinese officials, Pastor Yi received such a harsh sentence for “subverting state power”.

    Of course it isn’t just pastors that are being arrested.  Countless numbers of ordinary Chinese citizens have been swept up during the raids, and many are never seen or heard from again.

    One Chinese Christian woman told the Los Angeles Times what happened to her when she was interrogated…

    Li Chengju glared at her prison interrogator as he pressed her to renounce her Christian church and condemn her pastor.

    Her captor warned she would not be so lucky as the pastor, who was locked in secret detention but at least might get a day in court.

    “Look at you. You sweep the floors at church,” the interrogator said. “You think you’re getting a trial like your pastor? You don’t qualify.”

    The way that the Chinese are treating their citizens is absolutely reprehensible, and unless they completely change course we should not be conducting any trade with them at all.

    Sadly, the “five-year plan” that was launched in 2018 to indoctrinate churches all over China is not even halfway done

    The government calls its campaign “Sinicization” — a euphemism for turning faith into a tool for indoctrination in Chinese Communist Party ideology. The official five-year plan, issued in 2018, calls for inserting “patriotic education” and “socialist core values” into churches, revising the Bible and using church sermons to enforce party leadership and reject foreign influences.

    The persecution of Christians is likely to get even worse in China, and this comes at a time when Christian persecution is on the rise all over the world.  This is something that many of us have been anticipating because of the times in which we live, but it is still horrifying to actually watch it happen.

    As I close this article, I would like to share a message from Pastor Wang Yi that was posted on Facebook after he was arrested.  May his words inspire all of us to live every moment and to be the people that we were created to be…

    “I hope God uses me, by means of first losing my personal freedom, to tell those who have deprived me of my personal freedom that there is an authority higher than their authority, and that there is a freedom that they cannot restrain, a freedom that fills the church of the crucified and risen Jesus Christ.”

    “Regardless of what crime the government charges me with, whatever filth they fling at me, as long as this charge is related to my faith, my writings, my comments, and my teachings, it is merely a lie and temptation of demons. I categorically deny it. I will serve my sentence, but I will not serve the law. I will be executed, but I will not plead guilty.”

    “Those who lock me up will one day be locked up by angels. Those who interrogate me will finally be questioned and judged by Christ. When I think of this, the Lord fills me with a natural compassion and grief toward those who are attempting to and actively imprisoning me. Pray that the Lord would use me, that he would grant me patience and wisdom, that I might take the gospel to them.”

    “Separate me from my wife and children, ruin my reputation, destroy my life and my family – the authorities are capable of doing all of these things. However, no one in this world can force me to renounce my faith; no one can make me change my life; and no one can raise me from the dead.”

    “Jesus is the Christ, son of the eternal, living God. He died for sinners and rose to life for us. He is my king and the king of the whole earth yesterday, today, and forever. I am his servant, and I am imprisoned because of this. I will resist in meekness those who resist God, and I will joyfully violate all laws that violate God’s laws.”

    – Pastor Wang Yi, “My Declaration of Faithful Disobedience”


    Tyler Durden

    Sat, 01/04/2020 – 21:30

  • Colin Kaepernick Slams Trump's Racist "Terrorist Attack On Brown People" In Iran, Twitter Users Respond
    Colin Kaepernick Slams Trump’s Racist “Terrorist Attack On Brown People” In Iran, Twitter Users Respond

    Former NFL quarterback and clearly current desperate-for-attention social justice warrior Colin Kaepernick just had his ‘Rose McGowan’ moment, somehow managing to play the race-card against President Trump’s decision to assassinate Qasem Soleimani.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    In a double-tweet of utter ignorance, the sports-shoe-designer gushed forth the following words on to his Twitter feed…

    America has always sanctioned and besieged Black and Brown bodies both at home and abroad.

    America militarism is the weapon wielded by American imperialism, to enforce its policing and plundering of the non white world.

    There is nothing new about American terrorist attacks against Black and Brown people for the expansion of American imperialism.”

    It appears the former football player may have taken one too many shots to the head as he seems unaware that the “brown” person he is defending killed many “black and brown” people all over the world.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Social media erupted over Kaepernick’s comments (and not in a good, progressive, supportive way)…

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Given all of that, we wonder how long (actually, if ever), it will be before Kaepernick follows McGowan’s lead and apologizes.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Or is Nike happy to support a man who is implicitly supporting a terrorist-funding, American-killing military string-puller… just because he is ‘not an old white man’…

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Awkward!


    Tyler Durden

    Sat, 01/04/2020 – 21:00

  • Alasdair Macleod's Gold Outlook For 2020
    Alasdair Macleod’s Gold Outlook For 2020

    Authored by Alasdair Macleod via GoldMoney.com,

    This article is an overview of the economic conditions that will drive the gold price in 2020 and beyond. The turn of the credit cycle, the effect on government deficits and how they are to be financed are addressed.

    In the absence of foreign demand for new US Treasuries and of a rise in the savings rate the US budget deficit can only be financed by monetary inflation. This is bound to lead to higher bond yields as the dollar’s falling purchasing power accelerates due to the sheer quantity of new dollars entering circulation. The relationship between rising bond yields and the gold price is also discussed.

    It may turn out that the recent extraordinary events on Comex, with the expansion of open interest failing to suppress the gold price, are an early recognition in some quarters of the US Government’s debt trap.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The strains leading to a crisis for fiat currencies are emerging into plain sight.

    Introduction

    In 2019, priced in dollars gold rose 18.3% and silver by 15.1%. Or rather, and this is the more relevant way of putting it, priced in gold the dollar fell 15.5% and in silver 13%.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    This is because the story of 2019, as it will be in 2020, was of the re-emergence of fiat currency debasement. Particularly in the last quarter, the Fed began aggressively injecting new money into a surprisingly illiquid banking system through repurchase agreements, whereby banks’ reserves at the Fed are credited with cash loaned in return for T-bills and coupon-bearing Treasuries as collateral. Furthermore, the ECB restarted quantitative easing in November, and the Bank of Japan stands ready to ease policy further “if the momentum towards its 2% inflation target comes under threat” (Kuroda – 26 December).

    The Bank of Japan is still buying bonds, but at a pace which is expected to fall beneath redemptions of its existing holdings. Therefore, we enter 2020 with money supply being expanded by two, possibly all three of the major western central banks. Besides liquidity problems, the central bankers’ nightmare is the threat that the global economy will slide into recession, though no one will confess it openly because it would be an admission of policy failure. And policy makers are also terrified that if bankers get wind of a declining economy, they will withdraw loan facilities from businesses and make things much worse.

    Of the latter concern central banks have good cause. A combination of the turn of the credit cycle towards its regular crisis phase and Trump’s tariff war has already hit international trade badly, with exporting economies such as Germany already in recession and important trade indicators, such as the Baltic dry index collapsing. No doubt, President Trump’s most recent announcement that a trade deal with China is ready for signing is driven by an understanding in some quarters of the White House that over trade policy, Trump is turning out to be the turkey who voted for Christmas. But we have heard this story several times before: a forthcoming agreement announced only to be scrapped or suspended at the last moment.

    The subject which will begin to dominate monetary policy in 2020 is who will fund escalating government deficits. At the moment it is on few investors’ radar, but it is bound to dawn on markets that a growing budget deficit in America will be financed almost entirely by monetary inflation, a funding policy equally adopted in other jurisdictions. Furthermore, Christine Lagarde, the new ECB president, has stated her desire for the ECB’s quantitative easing to be extended from government financing to financing environmental projects as well.

    2020 is shaping up to be the year that all pretence of respect for money’s role as a store of value is abandoned in favour of using it as a means of government funding without raising taxes. 2020 will then be the year when currencies begin to be visibly trashed in the hands of their long-suffering users.

    Gold in the context of distorted markets

    At the core of current market distortions is a combination of interest rate suppression and banking regulation. It is unnecessary to belabour the point about interest rates, because minimal and even negative rates have demonstrably failed to stimulate anything other than asset prices into bubble territory. But there is a woeful lack of appreciation about the general direction of monetary policy and where it is headed.

    The stated intention is the opposite of reality, which is not to rescue the economy: while important, from a bureaucrat’s point of view that is not the greatest priority. It is to ensure that governments are never short of funds. Inflationary financing guarantees the government will always be able to spend, and government-licenced banks exist to ensure the government always has access to credit.

    Unbeknown to the public, the government licences the banks to conduct their business in a way which for an unlicensed organisation is legally fraudulent. The banks create credit or through their participation in QE they facilitate the creation of base money out of thin air which is added to their reserves. It transfers wealth from unsuspecting members of the public to the government, crony capitalists, financial speculators and consumers living beyond their means. The government conspires with its macroeconomists to supress the evidence of rising prices by manipulating the inflation statistics. So successful has this scheme of deception been, that by fuelling GDP, monetary debasement is presented as economic growth, with very few in financial mainstream understanding the deceit.

    The government monopoly of issuing money, and through their regulators controlling the expansion of credit, was bound to lead to progressively greater abuse of monetary trust. And now, in this last credit cycle, the consumer who is also the producer has had his income and savings so depleted by continuing monetary debasement that he can no longer generate the taxes to balance his government’s books later in the credit cycle.

    The problem is not new. America has not had a budget surplus since 2001. The last credit cycle in the run up to the Lehman crisis did not deliver a budget surplus, nor has the current cycle. Instead, following the Lehman crisis we saw a marked acceleration of monetary inflation, and Figure 2 shows how dollar fiat money has expanded above its long-term trend since then.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    In recent years, the Fed’s attempt to return to monetary normality by reducing its balance sheet has failed miserably. After a brief pause, the fiat money quantity has begun to grow at a pace not seen since the immediate aftermath of the Lehman crisis itself and is back in record territory. Figure 1 is updated to 1 November, since when FMQ will have increased even more.

    In order to communicate effectively the background for the relationship between gold and fiat currencies in 2020 it is necessary to put the situation as plainly as possible. We enter the new decade with the highest levels of monetary ignorance imaginable. It is a systemic issue of not realising the emperor has no clothes. Consequently, markets have probably become more distorted than we have ever seen in the recorded history of money and credit, as widespread negative interest rates and negative-yielding bonds attest. In our attempt to divine the future, it leaves us with two problems: assessing when the tension between wishful thinking in financial markets and market reality will crash the system, and the degree of chaos that will ensue.

    The timing is impossible to predict with certainty because we cannot know the future. But, if the characteristics of past credit cycles are a guide, it will be marked with a financial and systemic crisis in one or more large banks. Liquidity strains suggest that event is close, even within months and possibly weeks. If so, banks will be bailed, of that we can be certain. It will require central banks to create yet more money, additional to that required to finance escalating government budget deficits. Monetary chaos promises to be greater than anything seen heretofore, and it will engulf all western welfare-dependent economies and those that trade with them.

    We have established that between keeping governments financed, bailing out banks and perhaps investing in renewable green energy, the issuance of new money in 2020 will in all probability be unprecedented, greater than anything seen so far. It will lead to a feature of the crisis, which may have already started, and that is an increase in borrowing costs forced by markets onto central banks and their governments. The yield on 10-year US Treasuries is already on the rise, as shown in Figure 3.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Assuming no significant increase in the rate of savings and despite all attempts to suppress the evidence, the acceleration in the rate of monetary inflation will eventually lead to runaway increases in the general level of prices measured in dollars. As Milton Friedman put it, inflation [of prices] is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon.

    Through QE, central banks believe they can contain the cost of government funding by setting rates. What they do not seem to realise is that while to a borrower interest is a cost to set against income, to a lender it reflects time-preference, which is the difference between current possession, in this case of cash dollars, and possession at a future date. Unless and until the Fed realises and addresses the time preference problem, the dollar will lose purchasing power. Not only will it be sold in the foreign exchanges, but depositors will move to minimise their balances and creditors their ownership of debt.

    If, as it appears in Figure 3, dollar bond yields are beginning a rising trend, the inexorable pull of time preference is already beginning to apply and further rises in bond yields will imperil government financing. The Congressional Budget Office assumes the average interest rate on debt held by the public will be 2.5% for the next three years, and that net interest in fiscal 2020 will be $390bn, being about 38% of the projected deficit of $1,008bn. Combining the additional consequences for government finances of a recession with higher bond yields than the CBO expects will be disastrous.

    Clearly, in these circumstances the Fed will do everything in its power to stop markets setting the cost of government borrowing. But we have been here before. The similarities between the situation for the dollar today and the deterioration of British government finances in the early to mid-1970s are remarkable. They resulted in multiple funding crises and an eventual bail-out from the IMF. Except today there can be no IMF bail-out for the US and the dollar, because the bailor gets its currency from the bailee.

    Nearly fifty years ago, in the UK gold rose from under £15 per ounce in 1970 to £80 in December 1974. The peak of the credit cycle was at the end of 1971, when the 10-year gilt yield to maturity was 7%. By December 1974, the stock market had crashed, a banking crisis had followed, price inflation was well into double figures and the 10-year gilt yield to maturity had risen to over 16%.

    History rhymes, as they say. But for historians the parallels between the outlook for the dollar and US Treasury funding costs at the beginning of 2020, and what transpired for the British economy following the Barbour boom of 1970-71 are too close to ignore. It is the same background for the relationship between gold and fiat currencies for 2020 and the few years that follow.

    Gold and rising interest rates

    Received investment wisdom is that rising interest rates are bad for the gold price, because gold has no yield. Yet experience repeatedly contradicts it. Anyone who remembers investing in UK gilts at a 7% yield in December 1971 only to see prices collapse to a yield of over 16%, while gold rose from under £15 to £80 to the ounce over the three years following should attest otherwise.

    Part of the error is to believe that gold has no yield. This is only true of gold held as cash and for non-monetary usage. As money, it is loaned and borrowed, just like any other form of money. Monetary gold has its own time preference, as do government currencies. In the absence of state intervention, time preferences for gold and government currencies are set by their respective users, bearing in mind the characteristics special to each. It is not a subject for simple arbitrage, selling gold and buying government money to gain the interest differential, because the spread reflects important differences which cannot be ignored. It is like shorting Swiss francs and buying dollars in the belief there is no currency risk.

    The principal variable between the time preferences of gold and a government currency is the difference between an established form of money derived from the collective preferences of its users, for which there is no issuer risk, and state-issued currency which becomes an instrument of funding by means of its debasement.

    The time preference of gold will obviously vary depending on lending risk, which is in addition to an originary rate, but it is considerably more stable than the time preference of a fiat currency. Gold’s interest rate stability is illustrated in Figure 4, which covers the period of the gold standard from the Bank Charter Act of 1844 to before the First World War, during which time the gold standard was properly implemented. With the exception of uncontrolled bank credit, sterling operated as a gold substitute.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Admittedly, due to problems created by the cycle of bank credit, these year-end values conceal some significant fluctuations, such as at the time of the Overend Gurney collapse in 1866 when borrowing rates spiked to 10%. The depression following the Barings crisis of 1890 stalled credit demand which is evident from the chart. However, wholesale borrowing rates, which were effectively the cost of borrowing in gold, were otherwise remarkably stable, varying between 2-3½%. Some of this variation can be ascribed to changing perceptions of general borrower risk and some to changes in industrial investment demand, related to the cycle of bank credit.

    Compare this with dollar interest rates since 1971, when the dollar had suspended the remaining fig-leaf of gold backing, which is shown in Figure 5 for the decade following.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    In February 1972 the Fed Funds rate was 3.29%, rising eventually to over 19% in January 1981. At the same time gold rose from $46 to a high of $843 at the morning fix on 21 January 1980. Taking gold’s originary interest rate as approximately 2% it required a 17% interest rate penalty to dissuade people from hoarding gold and to hold onto dollars instead.

    In 1971, US Government debt stood at 35% of GDP and in 1981 it stood at 31%. The US Government ran a budget surplus over the decade sufficient to absorb the rising interest cost on its T-bill obligations and any new Treasury funding. America enters 2020 with a debt to GDP ratio of over 100%. Higher interest rates are therefore not a policy option and the US Government, and the dollar, are ensnared in a debt trap from which the dollar is unlikely to recover.

    The seeds of the dollar’s destruction were sown over fifty years ago, when the London gold pool was formed, whereby central banks committed to help the US maintain the price at $35, being forced to do so because the US could no longer supress the gold price on its own. And with good reason: Figure 6 shows how the last fifty years have eroded the purchasing power of the four major currencies since the gold pool failed.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Over the last fifty years, the yen has lost over 92%, the dollar 97.6%, the euro (and its earlier components 98.2% and sterling the most at 98.7%. And now we are about to embark on the greatest increase of global monetary inflation ever seen.

    The market for physical gold

    In recent years, demand for physical gold has been strong. Chinese and Indian private sector buyers have to date respectively accumulated an estimated 17,000 tonnes (based on deliveries from Shanghai Gold Exchange vaults) and about 24,000 tonnes (according to WGC Director Somasundaram PR quoted in India’s Financial Express last May).

    It is generally thought that higher prices for gold will deter future demand from these sources, with the vast bulk of it being categorised as simply jewellery. But this is a western view based on a belief in objective values for government currencies and subjective prices for gold. It ignores the fact that for Asians, it is gold that has the objective value. In Asia gold jewellery is acquired as a store of value to avoid the depreciation of government currency, hoarded as a central component of a family’s long-term wealth accumulation.

    Therefore, there is no certainty higher prices will compromise Asian demand. Indeed, demand has not been undermined in India with the price rising from R300 to the ounce to over R100,000 today since the London gold pool failed, and that’s despite all the government disincentives and even bans from buying gold.

    Additionally, since 2008 central banks have accumulated over 4,400 tonnes to increase their official reserves to 34,500 tonnes. The central banks most active in the gold market are Asian, and increasingly the East and Central Europeans.

    There are two threads to this development. First there is a geopolitical element, with Russia replacing reserve dollars for gold, and China having deliberately moved to control global physical delivery markets. And second, there is evidence of concern amongst the Europeans that the dollar’s role as the reserve currency is either being compromised or no longer fit for a changed world. Furthermore, the rising power of Asia’s two hegemons continues to drive over two-thirds of the world’s population away from the dollar towards gold.

    Goldmoney estimates there are roughly 180,000 tonnes of gold above ground, much of which cannot be categorised as monetary: monetary not as defined for the purposes of customs reporting, but in the wider sense to include all bars, coins and pure gold jewellery accumulated for its long-term wealth benefits through good and bad times. Annual mine production adds 3,000-3,500 tonnes, giving a stock to flow ratio of over 50 times. Put another way, the annual increase in the gold quantity is similar to the growth in the world’s population, imparting great stability as a medium of exchange.

    These qualities stand in contrast to the increasingly certain acceleration of fiat currency debasement over the next few years. Anyone prepared to stand back from the financial coalface can easily see where the relationship between gold and fiat currencies is going. Most of the world’s population is moving away from the established fiat regime towards gold as a store of value, their own fiat currencies lacking sufficient credibility to act as a dollar alternative. And financial markets immersed in the fiat regime have very little physical gold in possession. Instead, where it is now perceived that there is a risk of missing out on a rise in the gold price, investors have begun accumulating in greater quantities the paper alternatives to physical gold: ETFs, futures, options, forward contracts and mining shares.

    Paper markets

    From the US Government’s point of view, gold as a rival to the dollar must be quashed, and the primary purpose of futures options and forwards is to expand artificial supply to keep the price from rising. In a wider context, the ability to print synthetic commodities out of thin air is a means of suppressing prices generally and we must not be distracted by claims that derivatives improve liquidity: they only improve liquidity at lower prices.

    When the dollar price of gold found a major turning point on 17 December 2015, open interest on Comex stood at 393,000 contacts. The year-end figure today is nearly double that at 786,422 contracts, representing an increase of paper supply equivalent to 1,224 tonnes. But that is not all. Not only are there other regulated derivative exchanges with gold contracts, but also there are unregulated over the counter markets. According to the Bank for International Settlements from end-2015 unregulated OTC contracts (principally London forward contracts) expanded by the equivalent of 2,450 tonnes by last June, taken at contemporary prices. And we must not forget the unknown quantity of bank liabilities to customers’ unallocated accounts which probably involve an additional few thousand tonnes.

    In recent months, the paper suppression regime has stepped up a gear, evidenced by Comex’s open interest rising. This is illustrated in Figure 7.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    There are two notable features in the chart. First, the rising gold price has seen increasing paper supply, which we would expect from a market designed to keep a lid on prices. Secondly instead of declining with the gold price, open interest continued to rise following the price peak in early September while the gold price declined by about $100. This tells us that the price suppression scheme has run into trouble, with large buyers taking the opportunity to increase their positions at lower prices.

    In the past, bullion banks have been able to put a lid on prices by creating Comex contracts out of thin air. The recent expansion of open interest has failed to achieve this objective, and it is worth noting that the quantity of gold in Comex vaults eligible for delivery and pledged is only 2% of the 2,446-tonne short position. In London, there are only 3,052 tonnes in LBMA vaults (excluding the Bank of England), which includes an unknown quantity of ETF and custodial gold. Physical liquidity for the forward market in London is therefore likely to be very small relative to forward deliveries. And of course, the bullion banks in London and elsewhere do not have the metal to cover their obligations to unallocated account holders, which is an additional consideration.

    Clearly, there is not the gold available in the system to legitimise derivative paper. It now appears that paper gold markets could be drifting into systemic difficulties with bullion banks squeezed by a rising gold price, short positions and unallocated accounts.

    There are mechanisms to counter these systemic risks, such as the ability to declare force majeure on Comex, and standard unallocated account contracts which permit a bullion bank to deliver cash equivalents to bullion obligations. But the triggering of any such escape from physical gold obligations could exacerbate a buying panic, driving prices even higher. It leads to the conclusion that any rescue of the bullion market system is destined to fail.

    A two-step future for the gold price

    It has been evident for some time that the world of fiat currencies has been drifting into ever greater difficulties of far greater magnitude than can be contained by spinning a few thousand tonnes of gold back and forth on Comex and in London. That appears to be the lesson to be drawn from the inability of a massive increase in open interest on Comex to contain a rising gold price.

    It will take a substantial upward shift in the gold price to appraise western financial markets of this reality. In combination with systemic strains increasing, a gold price of over $2,000 may do the trick. Professional investors will have found themselves wrongfooted; underinvested in ETFs, gold mines and regulated derivatives, in which case their gold demand is likely to drive one or more bullion houses into considerable difficulties. We might call this the first step in a two-step monetary future.

    The extent to which gold prices rise could be substantial, but assuming the immediate crisis itself passes, banks having been bailed in or out, and QE accelerated in an attempt to put a lid on government bond yields, then the gold price might be deemed to have risen too far, and due for a correction. But then there will be the prospect of an accelerating loss of purchasing power for fiat currencies as a result of the monetary inflation, and that will drive the second step as investors realise that what they are seeing is not a rising gold price but a fiat currency collapse.

    The high levels of government debt today in the three major jurisdictions appear to almost guarantee this outcome. The amounts involved are so large that today’s paper gold suppression scheme is likely to be too small in comparison and cannot stop it happening. The effect on currency purchasing powers will then be beyond question. Monetary authorities will be clueless in their response, because they have all bought into a form of economics that puts what will happen beyond their understanding.

    As noted above, the path to a final crisis for fiat currencies might have already started, with the failure by the establishment to suppress the gold price through the creation of an extra 100,000 Comex contracts. If not, then any success by the monetary authorities to reassert control is likely to be temporary.

    Perhaps we are already beginning to see the fiat currency system beginning to unravel, in which case those that insist gold is not money will find themselves impoverished.


    Tyler Durden

    Sat, 01/04/2020 – 20:30

  • It Would Have Been 'Utterly Irrational' For Trump To Notify Democrats Of Soleimani Strike: Dobbs
    It Would Have Been ‘Utterly Irrational’ For Trump To Notify Democrats Of Soleimani Strike: Dobbs

    President Trump would have been ‘utterly irrational’ to have shared plans to strike Iranian Gen. Qasem Soleimani, the country’s second-most powerful person, according to Fox Business Network host Lou Dobbs.

    The Friday comments come amid outrage from Congressional Democrats, including Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA).

    “I think Chuck Schumer was born complaining,” Dobbs told White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham on “Lou Dobbs Tonight,”…

    …adding “And I wouldn’t expect any quick change in his behavior. There is also, I think, a good case to be built that it would be utterly irrational of the Trump Administration to brief the very people who are trying to unseat him, remove him from power, to overthrow his presidency and to have done everything in their power to do so.”

    Watch (via the Daily Caller):

    Hilariously, on Saturday the White House delivered Congress notification of the Soleimani strike two days later.

    The notification, required by law within 48 hours of introducing American forces into armed conflict or a situation that could lead to war, has to be signed and then sent to Congress, according to the officials with knowledge of the plan.

    Lawmakers expected the document to publicly lay out the White House’s legal justification for the strike on General Suleimani, Iran’s top security commander, who officials have said has been behind hundreds of American deaths over the years. But the notification first sent to Congress late Saturday afternoon only contained classified information, according to a senior congressional aide, likely detailing the intelligence that led to the action. It is unclear whether the White House will send a separate, unclassified document. –NYT

    In response, Pelosi said in a Saturday evening statement that the notification “raises more questions than it answers,” such as “serious and urgent questions about the timing, manner and justification of the administration’s decision to engage in hostilities against Iran.”

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js


    Tyler Durden

    Sat, 01/04/2020 – 20:00

    Tags

  • Retaliation Begins: Multiple Mortar Attacks On US Presence In Iraq, Hezbollah Warns Security Forces "Stay Away"
    Retaliation Begins: Multiple Mortar Attacks On US Presence In Iraq, Hezbollah Warns Security Forces “Stay Away”

    Update: There are unconfirmed reports that US aircraft have attacked Iranian positions near the eastern Syrian city of Al-Bukamal.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Meanwhile, a US surveillance drone was reportedly shot down by Iran’s Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) in Anbar, however there has been no official confirmation.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    ***

    Summary:

    • Multiple ‘Katyusha’ unguided missiles/mortars fired into two regions near Baghdad.

    • Green Zone neighborhood in Baghdad, comes under mortar shell attack: 5 ppl wounded.

    • Balad airbase (hosts US troops) near Baghdad hit by missiles: 3 Iraqi soldiers wounded.

    • Explosion heard at Al-Kindi base in Mosul (which houses US troops): no details on injuries yet

    • Hezbollah warns Iraqi Security Forces to stay away from US bases.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    *  *  *

    As 1000s march in the streets of Baghdad to moutn the death of Soleimani, Al-Arabiya (and other local news sources) report rockets have landed in the heavily fortified Green Zone in Baghdad, where the US Embassy (among other things) is located.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Witnesses told Reuters that an explosion was heard in the Iraqi capital, Baghdad

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Sky News Arabia reports that the missile landed in the Green Zone in Baghdad and closed the entrance to the road leading to the American embassy.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    An unguided ‘Katyusha’ rocket was reportedly launched…

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Dozens of US Apache helicopters are now seen overhead…

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    President Rouhani reportedly threatened a “lightning strike” against America…

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Additionally, there are now reports that multiple rockets have struck Balad Airbase, located just north of Baghdad, that hosts US troops…

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    A third mortar attack is reportedly underway at the US military base at Al-Kindi in Mosul…

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Meanwhile, Iraqi police have opened fire at armed PMU militiamen during the funeral procession.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

     


    Tyler Durden

    Sat, 01/04/2020 – 19:59

  • Ruling Class Propaganda: Only Government-Approved Apps Allowed
    Ruling Class Propaganda: Only Government-Approved Apps Allowed

    Authored by Mac Slavo via SHTFplan.com,

    The United States Army has decided that soldiers can no longer access certain apps. They have banned soldiers from using TikTok over alleged Chinese “cyber threat”, but in reality, it’s just an app the U.S. government can’t control.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The U.S. Army is signaling that its soldiers should stick to platforms that march exclusively to Washington’s tune and do not deviate from the official narrative and government-approved propaganda.  An army spokeswoman confirmed on Monday that the Chinese app “is considered a cyber threat and will no longer be allowed on government phones and mobile devices. The military had previously used the popular social media platform to reach out to potential recruits, according to a report by RT. 

    The decision comes less than two weeks after the U.S. Navy banned the Chinese app from all government-issued mobile devices – citing the same alleged “cybersecurity threat.”  Anyone who’s been paying attention, however, should know that TikTok poses no cybersecurity threat.  It poses a threat to the American power structure that the establishment ruling class is desperately attempting to hold on to.

    The Pentagon issued a Cyber Awareness Message earlier in December, warming that using TikTok could come with potential security risks. The app had been targeted by two US senators, Tom Cotton (R-Arkansas), and Chuck Schumer (D-New York), who requested in October that US intelligence agencies probe the app. –RT

    TikTok parent company ByteDance has strongly denied any sinister motives, even as competing apps, Twitter, YouTube, and Facebook have been proven to collude openly with government agencies. In September, executives from all the major U.S. social media platforms met with U.S.S.A government officials to discuss how to secure the 2020 elections and crackdown on the spread of polarizing content.

    That can be translated to “the government wants social media and tech giants to remove any content that does not support their ruling class power structure.”


    Tyler Durden

    Sat, 01/04/2020 – 19:30

  • Hong Kong Activates "Serious Response" As Chinese Mystery Illness Prompts Hospital Lockdown
    Hong Kong Activates “Serious Response” As Chinese Mystery Illness Prompts Hospital Lockdown

    Authorities in Hong Kong have activated a recently created “serious response” threat level Saturday as a mysterious SARS-like respiratory illness begins to spread throughout central China, according to AP.

    While just 44 people have been admitted to the hospital with the unidentified virus – eleven of them in serious condition, authorities in Wuhan, China have put 121 people under observation who have been in close contact with the infected. Five cases, meanwhile, have been reported in Shanghai – around 570 miles north of Hong Kong.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    A Wuhan government official told SCMP that his wife, a nurse in the infectious disease unit at the Central Hospital, has been unable to go home for the past several days because her ward has been on “lockdown.”

    “My kids and I can still call her on her mobile,” he said, adding “[But] we are very worried for her, although she said all is fine.”

    Five possible cases have been reported of a viral pneumonia that has also infected at least 44 people in Wuhan, an inland city west of Shanghai, about 900 kilometers (570 miles) north of Hong Kong.

    The outbreak, which emerged last month, has revived memories of the 2002-2003 SARS epidemic that started in southern China and killed more than 700 people in the mainland, Hong Kong and elsewhere. –AP

    The most common symptom of the new disease is fever, shortness of breath and lung infections. Method of transmission / infection is unknown. Investigations have ruled out bird flu and the common flu, as well as adenovirus infection and other common respiratory diseases. Further laboratory tests are ongoing according to the Wuhan Municipal Health Commission.

    Hong Kong’s ‘serious response’ level is the second highest in a newly-launched three-tier system unveiled Saturday, designed to respond to infectious diseases of unknown origin.

    On Friday, the city’s health department activated a thermal imaging system at Hong Kong’s airport to check the body temperature of arriving passengers, while the staff at the West Kowloon high-speed rail station which connects Hong Kong and the mainland have been ordered to undergo temperature checks.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Wuhan Medical Treatment Centre, where some patients are reportedly in quarantine. Photo: Weibo  (via SCMP)

    During a Friday visit to the train station, city leader Carrie Lam urged any travelers with respiratory systems to don surgical masks and seek immediate medical attention – telling doctors where they’ve been.

    According to Oxford University visiting professor to the University of Hong Kong, Dr. Emily Chan Ying-yang, the sudden rise in cases in Wuhan is “not alarming,” but raises concerns that it may be a new strain.

    “If it were Sars [Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome], we are experienced in managing it,” she said. “But if it is a new strain, then we should pay attention.

    The scariest thing with Sars is its fatality rate, and that young people died. We don’t know whether the serious cases in Wuhan are young or old people – that deserves attention.”

    According to SCMP, Ying-yang says it’s important for authorities to be transparent with people, as large numbers of people will be traveling throughout China for the Lunar New Year in late January.

    Professor Jiang Rongmeng, of Ditan Hospital in Beijing, one of China’s top centres for treating infectious diseases, said the rise in infections was probably a consequence of active detection and reporting of unexplained pneumonia cases.

    “No apparent human-to-human transmission has been detected so far, otherwise there would have been a community outbreak with more infections,” he said. –SCMP

    The outbreak was first reported among stallholders at the city’s Hunan Seafood Wholesale Market – which also sells live animals including birds and rabbits.


    Tyler Durden

    Sat, 01/04/2020 – 19:00

  • "2020 Recession Is Not Off The Table" – Positive Jobs Report Doesn't Tell The Whole Story
    “2020 Recession Is Not Off The Table” – Positive Jobs Report Doesn’t Tell The Whole Story

    Via Real Vision,

    Despite a positive jobs report in December, the growth rate cycle slowdown will continue into early 2020 and include a weaker performance out of the jobs market, Lakshman Achuthan, COO and co-founder of ECRI told Real Vision’s The Interview.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Achuthan said the unemployment rate may have reached a record low at 3.5%, but in the construction sector – a key sector of the economy – unemployment is up almost 2%. And manufacturing has seen almost a 1 percentage point rise in the unemployment rate.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    He said these are among the indicators that the cycle is still moving to the downside, and said while he doesn’t think a recession is imminent, it’s also not an impossibility.

    “I think a recession is not off the table at all in 2020, and so there is no green light on that score,” he said. “We do have green lights in Europe, Asia ex Japan, maybe even global industrial growth getting its legs. But that does not mean the US can’t still cycle down between now and whenever it catches something on those cycles.”

    Achuthan said he sees a few upticks in long leaders and even in a few shorter leaders like financial services, but in order for it to be an objective upturn, it has to be pronounced in those leading indicators.

    “It has to be pronounced. It has to persist. And it has to be pervasive,” he said.

    “It has to be the majority of the drivers contributing to the rise. As of today, there’s no upturn. Until you see the three P’s to the upside, we just don’t have that.”

    Here’s the full interview of Achuthan and Real Vision’s Ed Harrison discussing ECRI’s indicators and what they are saying about the business cycle. 


    Tyler Durden

    Sat, 01/04/2020 – 18:30

  • "No More Threats" – Trump Warns Iran "52 Targets Will Be Hit Very Fast & Hard"
    “No More Threats” – Trump Warns Iran “52 Targets Will Be Hit Very Fast & Hard”

    Following today’s mortar attacks, and bellicosity from various Iranian (and Iran-backed) leaders, President Trump has responded in words (for now), warning Iran in three short words: “no more threats!”

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    In three short tweets, Trump explained he is done being threatened…

    “Iran is talking very boldly about targeting certain USA assets as revenge for our ridding the world of their terrorist leader”

    Then reminded his followers just exactly what Soleimani had done…

    [Soleimani] had just killed an American, & badly wounded many others, not to mention all of the people he had killed over his lifetime, including recently hundreds of Iranian protesters.

    He was already attacking our Embassy, and preparing for additional hits in other locations. Iran has been nothing but problems for many years.”

    Then came the warning:

    “Let this serve as a WARNING that if Iran strikes any Americans, or American assets, we have targeted 52 Iranian sites (representing the 52 American hostages taken by Iran many years ago), some at a very high level & important to Iran &  the Iranian culture, and those targets, and Iran itself, WILL BE HIT VERY FAST AND VERY HARD. The USA wants no more threats!

    Not quite as aggressive as the “fire and fury” tweet directed at North Korea, but with the red flag of jihad flying in Iran, we suspect they get the message from the US president.

    Of course, as Politico’s Rym Momtaz explained earlier, no one knows for sure what happens next, even those who will decide some of the next steps.

    The Iranian regime is not suicidal, it is strategic, calculating (even if it miscalculates sometimes), so likelihood of an all-out direct US-Iran war is low.

    Khamenei promised response, it must be strong enough to save face internally, for a regime already strained + facing popular dissent, and also be calibrated to avoid provoking a US response inside Iran.

    Iran’s response will show whether deterrence restored.

    The myth of invincibility that Iran built around Soleimani was a huge recruitment tool, it may also now turn out to be a double-edged sword.

    How does its most valiant warrior, its most effective US challenger, get picked off so precisely by the US?

    Concern for US military, diplo personnel, and citizens, in the region is legit. But allowing it to dictate policy plays into Iran’s hands which weaponises Western sensitivity to human loss, and war weariness, to further destabilise the region unchecked.

    There are many so-called anti-imperialists who always criticise Western intervention but justify Iranian/Russian intervention. Iran is not a legit actor in Iraq/Syria/Leb/Yemen. Its crimes there are no less reprehensible than those by the US or colonialists.

    Iran is set to announce its next violations of the JCPOA in next few days. That’s another thing to look out for, other than a military retaliation, in wake of the Soleimani killing. Will it escalate to the point of affecting break-out time or not?

    Trump’s warning follows Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah’s comments stressing that avenging Soleimani and the other martyrs is a duty of all resistance mujahidin around the world.


    Tyler Durden

    Sat, 01/04/2020 – 18:15

    Tags

  • Selective Service Website Crashes Amid WWIII Draft Fears
    Selective Service Website Crashes Amid WWIII Draft Fears

    President Trump’s drone strike that killed a top Iranian commander at Baghdad International Airport on Friday has sparked concern among many Americans that the government could reinstate the draft ahead of a possible military conflict with Iran.

    The Selective Service System website crashed on Friday after a surge in traffic was seen following the killing of Iranian General Qasem Suleimani.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Google searches for “military draft age,” “iran,” “world war 3,” “us draft,” “draft exemption,” “draft requirements,” and “is there a ww3” spiked around 10 am est. Friday and have been elevated ever since.

    Hashtags such as #WWIII, #WorldWarThree, #WW3Memes and #WorldWarThreeDraft have been trending on Twitter in the last 24-hours.

    The US sending upwards of 3,500 additional troops to military bases that surround Iran has also increased the hysteria – as many Americans now believe a war with Iran could be imminent.

    Bloomberg noted that the Selective Service System website went down on Friday after high traffic volumes were seen. The agency said, “Due to the spread of misinformation, our website is experiencing high traffic volumes at this time. If you are attempting to register or verify registration, please check back later today as we are working to resolve this issue. We appreciate your patience.”

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    In a separate tweet, the Selective Service System said, “In the event that a national emergency necessitates a draft, Congress and the President would need to pass official legislation to authorize a draft.”

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    The draft was abolished in 1973. However, all men ages 12 to 25 are required to provide their current information to the Selective Service System.

    A return of the draft is unlikely at the moment. But if tensions continue to escalate in the Middle East between the US and Iran, then it would be up to Congress and the President to reinstate the draft ahead of the next round of America’s forever wars.

     


    Tyler Durden

    Sat, 01/04/2020 – 18:00

    Tags

  • Pat Buchanan: Our Real Existential Crisis – Extinction
    Pat Buchanan: Our Real Existential Crisis – Extinction

    Authored by Pat Buchanan via Buchanan.org,

    If Western elites were asked to name the greatest crisis facing mankind, climate change would win in a walk.

    Thus did Time magazine pass over every world leader to name a Swedish teenage climate activist, Greta Thunberg, its person of the year.

    On New Year’s Day, the headline over yet another story in The Washington Post admonished us anew: “A Lost Decade for Climate Action: We Can’t Afford A Repeat, Scientists Warn.”

    “By the final year of the decade,” said the Post, “the planet had surpassed its 2010 temperature record five times.

    “Hurricanes devastated New Jersey and Puerto Rico, and floods damaged the Midwest and Bangladesh. Southern Africa was gripped by a deadly drought. Australia and the Amazon are ablaze.”

    On it went, echoing the endless reports on the perils of climate change to the planet we all inhabit.

    Yet, from the inaction of the carbon-emitting countries like India, China, Russia and the USA, the gravity with which Western elites view the crisis is not shared by the peoples for whom they profess to speak.

    For many First World countries, there are more compelling concerns.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    High among them is population decline, and, if birth rates do not rise, the near-extinction of many Western peoples by this century’s end.

    Consider…

    The number of births in Japan fell in 2019 to a level unseen since 1874, around 900,000. But there were 1.4 million deaths for a net loss of 512,000 Japanese. An even larger loss in Japan’s population is expected this year.

    Japan’s population has been shrinking since 2007, when deaths first exceeded births by 18,000. And with 28% of its population over 65, and fewer births every passing year, Japan is aging, shrinking and dying — with no respite in sight.

    Across Japan, writes The New York Times:

    “Whole villages are vanishing as young people choose not to have children or move to urban areas … The Government estimates that the population could shrink by about 16 million people — or nearly 13 percent — over the next 25 years.”

    South Korea has an even lower birth rate, and its population is expected to start diminishing this year.

    But it is Eastern Europe where the population crisis is most advanced.

    At the end of the Cold War, Bulgaria had 9 million people. By 2017, that had fallen to 7.1 million. In 2050, Bulgaria’s population is estimated at 5.4 million — a loss of 40% to death and migration since Bulgaria won its freedom from the Soviet Empire.

    By 2050, Ukraine and Poland are each projected to lose another 6 million people, and Hungary will lose 1.5 million.

    Lithuania and Latvia have seen serious population losses since the end of the Cold War and are in the front rank of European nations losing people at the fastest rate.

    U.N. demographers project Russia’s population may fall from 145 million today to 121 million by 2050. Such losses rival those that Russia suffered under Lenin, Stalin and World War II.

    The Far East is home to some 6 million Russians who dwell on that vast tract that is so full of natural resources like timber, oil and gas.

    “The population continues to decrease almost everywhere in the Far East,” lamented President Vladimir Putin at an investment conference in Vladivostok:

    “The inflow is increasing, but it does not cover the number of people leaving the region.”

    In the Far East, Siberia and the Lake Baikal region, investors and workers from China are appearing in growing numbers.

    The tribes of Europe, the peoples of almost every country of the Old Continent, are visibly aging, shrinking and dying. The population crisis of Europe is “existential,” says Croatian Prime Minister Andrej Plenkovic.

    Since this writer published “The Death of the West,” nothing has happened to alter my conclusion as to where the West was destined:

    “The Death of the West is not a prediction of what is going to happen. It is a depiction of what is happening now. First World nations are dying. They face a mortal crisis, not because of something happening in the Third World, but because of what is not happening at home and in the homes of the First World. Western fertility rates have been falling for decades. Outside of Muslim Albania, no European nation is producing enough babies to replace its population. … In a score of countries the old are already dying off faster than the young are being born. … There is no sign of a turnaround. Now the absolute numbers of Europeans have begun to fall.”

    We are talking here about what historians, a century hence, will call the Lost Tribes of Europe. And if a people has ceased to replace itself, and the national family is dying out, it is difficult to generate alarm over the slow sinking of the Maldives into the sea, the melting of the polar ice caps, or the fact that Greenland is getting greener every year.


    Tyler Durden

    Sat, 01/04/2020 – 17:30

  • Just Two Companies Accounted For Nearly 20% Of The Market's Entire 2019 Return
    Just Two Companies Accounted For Nearly 20% Of The Market’s Entire 2019 Return

    Two weeks ago, when looking back at 2019, Morgan Stanley concluded that the observed market action was indicative of one of the most bizarre years ever, because while the S&P ended up returning a whopping 29% in 2019, just shy of 2013’s 29.3% and the second best year for the market since 1997, earnings actually dropped, which means that all the market upside came from multiple expansion. There was another bizarre aspect to 2019: it was a year when despite the blockbuster overall return of the S&P, “bullish” strategies actually underperformed.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Now, in his year in review weekly, Goldman’s David Kostin makes some observations of his own, and reaches a similar conclusion to that from Morgan Stanley.

    For one the S&P 500, which soared started in early October, just around the time the Fed launched QE4, reached 35 new all-time highs last year, with 20 of those days coming in the last two months. US equities also bested other major global markets, outperforming Japan (15%), Europe (23%), and emerging markets (15%).

    So far so good, yet what is more notable is how the market reached its impressive returns, and here Goldman confirms what we already knew, namely that valuation expansion drove nearly all of the S&P 500 return in 2019. To wit, according to Goldman earnings growth explains just 8% of the S&P 500 return last year (others disagree, and Morgan Stanley for example observes that earnings were actually negative in 2019 meaning earnings growth subtracted from total returns). Instead, as Kostin notes, “three 25 bp Fed cuts helped lift company valuations. The S&P 500 forward P/E expanded from 14x to 19x and accounted for 92% of the index price gain.”

    But while it was largely known that the entire market gain was on the back of multiple expansion (and record buybacks), where things get far more interesting is the sectoral composition of the upside: here as Goldman notes, just one sector, Information Technology, posted a 50% total return and accounted for 32% of the S&P 500 index return. Financials contributed 14% to the index return, followed by Communication Services at 11%.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    As a reminder, we also know who the source of stock buying was for most of 2019: companies themselves, which in 2018 and 2019 unleashed a record buyback spree, with IT, until recently sporting the most debt flexibility, buying back the most stock of any market sector funded with a tidal wave of debt issuance.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Away from tech, while all sectors posted positive double-digit returns, Energy fared the worst (+12%) due to weak earnings and volatile oil prices, although spot Brent rose by 23% during the year.

    But what is most remarkable is just how skewed the market has become in representing the moves of just a handful of what Goldman calls large-cap “superstar” firms, which powered most of the S&P 500 return. While three Semiconductor companies – AMD (+148%), LCRX (+119%), and KLAC (+104%) – were the best-performing S&P 500 stocks, “superstar” firms AAPL (+89%) and MSFT (+58%) were the top two contributors to the S&P 500 index gain. In fact, combined the two firms accounted for nearly a fifth of the entire S&P 500 return, or 17% to be exact, in 2019. Extending that list, just the top 10 companies contributed over 10%, or exactly a third, of the S&P’s total 31% return.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Not all superstars soared: regulatory scrutiny and slowing growth weighed on other superstar firms, although it’s funny that Goldman says that GOOGL, which was up +28% and AMZN, up+23%, “lagged the index.” Because up 28% is just so disappointing. At the opposite end of the spectrum, ABIOMED (-48%), Macy’s (-38%), and Occidental Petroleum (-28%) were the worst performing S&P 500 constituents last year.

    What else? Well, as Kostin writes, “the 10th anniversary of the bull market has drawn parallels to the late 1990s.”
    Indeed, as discussed extensively here previously, in 1998, the Fed delivered 75 bp of “insurance cuts” and the S&P 500 rallied by 27%. And just like now, valuations exploded – from 18x to 23x – and accounted for nearly all of the index return. Furthermore, amid global economic turmoil – also just like now – investors flocked to US stocks. Back then, Russia defaulted on its sovereign debt and the hedge fund LTCM collapsed, as Treasury yields fell from 5.8% to 4.7%. And yes, just like now, Info Tech was also the best-performing sector (+77%) and accounted for 35% of index return.

    Looking ahead, Goldman writes that “given the parallels between 1998 and 2019, many investors are looking to history as a potential guide for the future.” Specifically, in 1999, the S&P 500 rallied by 20%, a number which Goldman thinks may actually be conservative because unlike late 1990’s, the current forward P/E of 19x is well below the 23x P/E at the start of 1999. Relative to interest rates, the current earnings yield of 5.3% is 341 bp above the 10-year yield of 1.9%. At the start of 1999, the earnings yield of 4.4% was 26 bp below the Treasury yield of 4.7%.

    In short, Goldman expects at least another year of superstar returns before the late 1990s comp ends… and everyone remembers what happened in 2000.

    What may catalyze the second tech bubble bursting? Perhaps it will be the key political event of 2020 – the November presidential elections. As Goldman concludes, “looking ahead to 2020, politics will be the key focus for investors.”

    Following the recent rally, we expect S&P 500 will hover around 3250 until November. Prediction markets currently imply that a divided government is the most likely election outcome. Democrats are expected to maintain control of the House (71%), and are slight favorites to win the presidency (52% probability), but appear unlikely to regain control of the Senate (30% likelihood). A divided government would limit the prospect that legislation is passed reversing the 2017 corporate tax cut.” 

    And while Goldman expects the election to resolve policy uncertainty and lift S&P 500 by 5% to 3400 by year end, should there be a surprise and Democrats succeed in sweeping Washington, and eventually reversing the Trump tax cuts, under a higher corporate tax rate regime, 2021 estimated EPS would equal $162 (v. Goldman’s baseline estimate of $183), the P/E would compress to 16x, and S&P 500 would end at 2600.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Of course, now that Trump knows just how to manipulate the market, stocks may soon explode higher as the president dangles “optimism” over a Phase 2 deal, which may potentially push the S&P as high as 3,600 – 4,000 by the election, before the Fed finally admits it has blown the world’s biggest ever asset bubble and everything comes crashing down. The only question is whether Powell will follow the advice of Bill Dudley and burst the bubble before the election, or does so just after.


    Tyler Durden

    Sat, 01/04/2020 – 17:00

  • Australian Police Say Arsonists & Lightning To Blame For Bushfires, Not Climate-Change
    Australian Police Say Arsonists & Lightning To Blame For Bushfires, Not Climate-Change

    Authored by Paul Joseph Watson via Summit News,

    Authorities in Australia are working on the premise that arsonists and lightning strikes are to blame for bushfires that have devastated numerous areas of the country, not “climate change” as many global warming alarmists have claimed.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Since November, the fires have struck various regions of the state of New South Wales, destroying thousands of buildings and killing at least 22 people.

    Despite the fact that bushfires are not uncommon in Australia, the severity of the damage led numerous climate change alarmists to blame the disaster on man-made global warming.

    Earlier this week, Bernie Sanders blamed those who were “delaying action on climate change” for “the blood-red sky and unbreathable air in Australia because of raging forest fires.”

    However, according to those tasked with investigating the fires, climate change has nothing to do with it.

    “Police are now working on the premise arson is to blame for much of the devastation caused this bushfire season,” reports 7 News Sydney.

    Authorities in the country have formed Strike Force Indarra, comprising of detectives from homicide and arson units in an attempt to find the culprits.

    Other causes for the fires include lightning strikes and a natural weather phenomenon called Dipole, again neither of which have anything to do with man-made climate change.

    Many bushfires are also actually caused by environmentalist ‘green’ policies which prevent land owners from clearing their own vegetation to protect themselves.

    “Governments appeasing the green beast have ignored numerous state and federal bushfire inquiries over the past decade, almost all of which have recommended increasing the practice of “prescribed burning,” writes Miranda Devine. “Also known as “hazard reduction”, it is a methodical regime of burning off flammable ground cover in cooler months, in a controlled fashion, so it does not fuel the inevitable summer bushfires.”

    As ever with climate change alarmists, they don’t let the facts get in the way of a good power grab.

    *  *  *

    My voice is being silenced by free speech-hating Silicon Valley behemoths who want me disappeared forever. It is CRUCIAL that you support me. Please sign up for the free newsletter here. Donate to me on SubscribeStar here. Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.


    Tyler Durden

    Sat, 01/04/2020 – 16:30

  • U.S. Auto Sales: Decimated In Disastrous And Dismal December
    U.S. Auto Sales: Decimated In Disastrous And Dismal December

    We have been covering the global automotive recession for the better part of 18 months now and, while a lot of our focus has been on the slowdown in China, the United States now appears to be spearheading the misery.

    This revelation comes as a result of what can only be described as absolutely atrocious auto sales numbers for December, which were reported in scattered fashion, hitting the terminal in the appropriate red color, on Friday throughout the day. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Fiat Chrysler sales for Q4 fell 2% despite “robust” demand for the company’s Ram pickup trucks. GM deliveries fell 6% in the quarter and Toyota saw sales fall 6.1% in December, handily missing estimates for a 0.8% gain. 

    And Toyota wasn’t the only automaker that missed estimates in grand fashion: Honda was also expected to report a modest gain in sales, but posted an ugly 12% drop in sales for the quarter.

    Expectations were lower for Nissan, who was expected to post a drop of 22.1% but missed even those pessimistic expectations by posting a monster 29.5% loss for the quarter. 

    Ford is expected to post results on Monday. 

    IBD offered some additional detail on the numbers behind the numbers: 

    • GM deliveries declined 6.3% to 735,909 units in Q4, with fleet sales accounting for 19.7% of the total. For all of 2019, GM deliveries fell 2.3% to 2,887,046 units. North American wholesale sales fell roughly 25% year over year in the quarter. GM cited the 40-day autoworkers’ strike over labor contracts that brought factories to a halt. GM’s newly launched heavy-duty full-size pickups saw sales fall 17% in Q4.

    • Fiat Chrysler reported record Q4 sales for the Ram truck brand, Jeep Wrangler SUV and Dodge Charger passenger car. The Ram brand also posted record full-year sales, amid the launch of the redesigned Ram Heavy Duty pickup truck.

    • For all of 2019, Honda’s sales rose 0.2% to 1,608,170 vehicles. Honda saw declines of 11.3% in December for cars; 2.3% for trucks; 12.9% for the Honda division; and 3.8% for the luxury Acura division. Sales of electric and hybrid vehicles fell 31.4% for December but rose 17.2% for the full year.

    • Nissan auto sales crumbled 29.5% to 104,781 vehicles in December. For all of 2019, Nissan’s sales declined 9.9% to 1,345,681 vehicles. In December, Nissan saw sales plunge 23.4% for cars; 32.9% for trucks; 28.4% in the Nissan division; and 37.8% in the luxury Infiniti division.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Look at the year-long 2019 numbers paints an ugly picture, as well.

    GM’s sales fell 2.3% in 2019, dented by the UAW strike that brought more than 30 U.S. factories to a halt toward the end of the year, according to the Wall Street Journal. Fiat’s sales in the U.S. were down 1% for the year and Toyota’s sales fell 2%. Nissan’s sales fell a whopping 10%. 

    Additionally, year end U.S. sales are expected by analysts to come in at a decrease of 1% to 2% for the year, totaling about 17 million sales. Industry forecasters are expecting a steeper drop, to a range of 16.5 million to 16.8 million vehicles. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Jonathan Smoke, chief economist of Cox Automotive, says that record amount of non-housing debt, slowing retail spending and rising severe delinquencies and defaults are continuing concerns for the industry, according to CNBC. He stated: 

    “Retail spending growth began to slow as we entered the fourth quarter. Collectively these trends suggest that the consumer may not be capable of single-handedly carrying the economy in 2020, which is why we are expecting another decline in new-vehicle sales.”


    Tyler Durden

    Sat, 01/04/2020 – 16:00

  • VA Gov. Northam's Proposed Gun-Confiscation Squad
    VA Gov. Northam’s Proposed Gun-Confiscation Squad

    Authored by Scott Cosenza via LibertyNation.com,

    Like the 2011 Virginia earthquake, gun control proposals rumble through the Commonwealth once again. The latest is Governor Ralph Northam’s (D) budget proposal, which includes – among other things – what sure seems to be funding for a gun confiscation squad.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Democrats showed their intent to turn Virginia from a state that broadly respects the rights of its residents to bear arms to one that seizes and destroys those guns right after the November elections.  Over 100 cities and counties have declared “sanctuary” pledges to uphold the Second Amendment rights of the people, but the state hasn’t backed down. This led to an opinion from the Democrat Virginia Attorney General proclaiming the sanctuary movement a big legal nothing.  And now we have this very anti-gun budget proposal.

    Guns Or Butter

    Wars are fantastically expensive, especially those fought between two factions in the same nation.  We essentially take 100% of the losses and pay for 100% of the cost, as was the case in our Civil War. Putting aside the notion of extreme violent opposition to the confiscation laws proposed by Governor Northam and the Democratic Caucus, even if resistance is more measured, taking so many guns from so many people will not be easy.   According to an email blast raising the alarm in opposition, the Virginia Citizens Defense League* (VCDL), the state’s leading civil rights champion for gun rights, said:

    • The Governor has requested $4 million and 18 law-enforcement positions to enforce his gun ban – a request that could be the preparatory steps for confiscating the guns which would be banned by SB 16.

    • Moreover, the Governor is requesting another $3.5 million to enforce gun control that has NOT been passed by the legislature and is NOT even current law in Virginia: universal background checks, one gun a month limitations, so-called “red flag” gun confiscation orders, and more.

    The group has encouraged its members to voice their opposition in regional meetings scheduled by various county delegations to the Assembly.  If the turnout is anything like we’ve seen with the sanctuary movement, it will be impressive.

    Elections Have Consequences

    The precursor to the seismic waves now bouncing around Virginia was the November election.  Virginians elected a new legislature for 2020 and gave Democrats a majority for the first time since 1994.  With that, the Dems have decided to swing for the fences on their first up at bat in over 20 years, promoting controversial legislation on gun control, zoning, and gender equality.  It’s the gun control bills that have produced the biggest response – an avalanche of opposition by Virginia gun owners.  Senate Bill 16, which was filed 11 days after the election, bans many common firearms, including the AR-15, and does not grandfather them in.  A more aggressive mission to destroy the guns – and the right to own them – of Virginians could hardly be devised.  If the legislation were to pass, gun owners in Virginia would have to sell or surrender their firearms or become felons.  Hence the backlash.

    The first sanctuary county in Virginia was not established after the November elections, but before.  These confiscation bills were introduced in previous sessions, but they had no chance to pass.  This didn’t matter to the Carroll County Board of Supervisors, who started the trend with a resolution announcing they wished:

    [T]o express its intent to stand as a Sanctuary County for Second Amendment rights and to oppose, within the limits of the Constitutions of the United States and the Commonwealth of Virginia, any efforts to unconstitutionally restrict such rights, and to use such legal means at its disposal to protect the right of the citizens to keep and bear arms, including through legal action, the power of appropriation of public funds, and the right to petition for the redress of grievances.

    Since that measure passed in January of 2019, over 100 independent counties and cities have voted in their own sanctuary protections.  Democrats in Richmond may very well be successful in banning guns in Virginia, but the movement between election day and now gives the lie to the notion that they can do so while claiming the will of the people.


    Tyler Durden

    Sat, 01/04/2020 – 15:30

    Tags

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Today’s News 4th January 2020

  • How Long Will It Take For The US To Collapse?
    How Long Will It Take For The US To Collapse?

    Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.com,

    There are a multitude of false assumptions out there on what the collapse of a nation or “empire” looks like. Modern day Americans have never experienced this type of event, only peripheral crises and crashes. Thanks to Hollywood, many in the public are under the delusion that a collapse is an overnight affair. They think that such a thing is impossible in their lifetimes, and if it did happen, it would happen as it does in the movies – They would simply wake up one morning and find the world on fire. Historically speaking, this is not how it works. The collapse of an empire is a process, not an event.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    This is not to say that there are not moments of shock and awe; there certainly are. As we witnessed during the Great Depression, or in 2008, the system can only be propped up artificially for so long before the bubble pops. In past instances of central bank intervention, the window for manipulation is around ten years between events, give or take a couple of years. For the average person, a decade might seem like a long time. For the banking elites behind the degradation of our society and economy, a decade is a blink of an eye.

    In the meantime, danger signals abound as those analysts aware of the situation try to warn the populace of the underlying decay of the system and where it will inevitably lead. Economists like Ludwig Von Mises foresaw the collapse of the German Mark and predicted the Great Depression; almost no one listened until it was too late. Multiple alternative economists predicted the credit crisis and derivatives crash of 2008; and almost no one listened until it was too late. People refused to listen because their normalcy bias took control of their ability to reason and accept the facts in front of them.

    There are a number factors that cause mass blindness to economic and social reality. First and foremost, establishment elites deliberately create the illusion of prosperity by rigging economic data to the upside. In almost every case of economic crisis or geopolitical disaster, the public is conditioned to believe they are in the midst of a financial “boom” or era of “peace”. They are encouraged to ignore fundamental warning signs in favor of foolish faith in the system. Those people that try to break the apathy and expose the truth are called “chicken little” and “doom monger”.

    In the minds of the cheerful lemmings a “collapse” is something very obvious; they think they would know it when they saw it. It’s like trying to teach a blind person about colors; it’s not impossible, but it’s very difficult to get all these Helen Kellers to understand that what they perceive is not the whole reality. There’s a vast world hidden from them and they have no concept of how to observe it.

    Crash events are like stages in the process of collapse; they create moments of clarity for the blind. However, they are also often engineered to benefit the establishment. There’s a reason why the elites put so much energy into hiding the real data on the state of the economy, and it’s not because they are trying to keep the system from faltering by using sheer public ignorance. Rather, a crash event is a tool, a means to an end. As Congressman Charles Lindbergh Sr. warned after the panic of 1920:

    “Under the Federal Reserve Act, panics are scientifically created; the present panic is the first scientifically created one, worked out as we figure a mathematical problem…”

    Central bankers and their cohorts manipulate economic data and promote the false notion of a boom before almost every major crash because they WANT to ambush the populace. They WANT to create panic, and then use it to their advantage as they rebuild and mutate the system into something unrecognizable only decades ago. Each consecutive crash contributes to the collapse of the whole, until eventually the society we once had is barely a distant memory.

    This process can take decades, and the US has been subject to it for quite some time now. Once again in 2019 we are seeing the lie of an “economic boom” being perpetuated in the mainstream. The public was growing too aware of the danger and had to be subdued. More specifically, conservatives were growing too aware. The sad thing is that the boom propaganda is most prominent today among conservatives, who are desperately trying to ignore the fundamentals in an attempt to defend the Trump Administration.

    The same people who were pointing out the economic bubble under Obama are now denying its existence under Trump. Trump himself argued that the markets were a dangerous economic fraud created by the Federal Reserve during his campaign, yet once he was in office he flip-flopped and started taking full credit for the bubble. What is mind boggling to me is that many people, even in the liberty movement, still choose to dismiss this behavior in favor of worshiping Trump as some kind of hero on a white horse.

    This only reinforces my theory that the system is due for another major engineered crash event, and that the ongoing collapse of the US is soon to accelerate. Each case of economic calamity in modern history was preceded by peak delusional optimism and peak greed. When the people traditionally most vigilant against crisis suddenly capitulate and claim victory, this is when reality strikes hardest. This is when the establishment triggers yet another controlled demolition.

    In order to determine how long an empire will last, one has to take into account the agenda of the elites that control its institutions. As long as they are in key positions of power within the system and as long as they can inject their own puppet politicians, they will have the ability to influence the collapse timeline of that system.

    Can they prolong and stave off crisis? Yes, for a short while. However, once the machine of a crash has been set in motion the best they can do is slow down the Titanic; they cannot change its path towards the iceberg. And frankly, at this point why would they? I hear it argued often that the elites are going to “keep the plates spinning” on the economy and that they don’t want to lose their “golden goose” in the US economy. This reveals an naivety among skeptics of the true agenda.

    Firstly, the elites have a highly useful political puppet in the form of Donald Trump; he is useful in that he inspires sharp national division, and, he is a self proclaimed conservative champion and nationalist. If the elites did not trigger a crash under Trump, then this would give the public the impression that conservative ideals and national sovereignty works. This is the opposite of what they want. Why would globalists that want the erasure of nation states and the creation of a centralized socialist “Utopia” seek to make conservatives and nationalists look good? Well, they wouldn’t.

    The only concern of the banks is that they do not take the blame as their engineered collapse of the old world order hits the public with increasingly painful consequences. These consequences are already becoming visible.

    The next major crash has begun in the form of plunging fundamentals, and far too many conservatives are placing their heads in the sand for the selfish sake of proving the political left wrong. Declines in US manufacturing, US freight, global exports and imports, mass closures in US retail, as well as all time highs in consumer debt, corporate debt and national debt are being shrugged off and rationalized as nothing more than “hiccups” in an otherwise booming economy. The Fed’s repo market purchases, barely keeping up with demand from liquidity starved corporations are also not being taken seriously.

    Conservatives and analysts are going to have to forget about supporting Trump, a Rothschild owned proxy, and start acknowledging reality once again. The only question now is, will the elites allow the crash to spread further into mainstreet and strike markets before or after the 2020 election?

    As noted above, to predict the timing of a collapse in a nation or empire, one has to examine the agendas of the elites that dominate its institutions. We can gain some sense of timing from the public admissions of globalist organizations like the IMF and the UN. Each has announced the year 2030 as a target date for the finalization of globalization, a cashless society and sustainability goals. This means that the elites have around ten years to create a crisis and then “solve” that crisis with globalism.

    Ten years is a narrow window, and if the elites intend for conservatives to take the blame for the next crash, they will have to initiate it soon. They may not have a choice anyway, as the chain of dominoes was already been set in motion by the Fed in 2018 with its liquidity tightening policies.

    We can also gauge timing of a collapse to a point by understanding the common tactics the establishment uses to hide what they are doing.  Generally, when a collapse is about to accelerate the elites use crisis events as cover to distract the public and produce scapegoats.  In my article ‘Globalists Only Need One More Major Event To Finish Sabotaging The Economy’, I outlined three potential distractions that could be used in the near term, and if any of these events took place, then people should watch for the collapse to move faster.  Two of these events now appear imminent:  The first being a war with Iran, and the second being a ‘No Deal’ Brexit.

    Finally, we can take into account the globalist need for a scapegoat, and it appears that conservatives and nationalists are their target for blame.  This leaves less than one year for a crisis event if Trump is intended to leave the White House in 2020, or less than four years if he is intended to stay in for a second term.  Keep in mind that A LOT can happen in a single year, and a second Trump term is certainly not guaranteed yet.

    But why create a collapse in the first place?  Crash events allow the establishment to consolidate control over hard assets as poverty forces the population to sell what they have to survive. This poverty also creates fear, which makes the public malleable and easier to control. Each new crisis opens doors to political and social changes, changes which end in less freedom and more centralization. Collapse is a succession of crashes leading to a complete erasure of the original society. It’s not a Mad Max event, it’s a hidden and insidious cancer that takes over the national body and warps it into a wretched form.  The collapse is complete when the nation either breaks apart, or is so damaged for so long that no one can remember what it used to look like.

    What we are witnessing today is the beginning of a new crash, and the final phases of a collapse of our way of life. The economic boom narrative among conservatives is a farce designed to trick us into complacency. The bubble that we warned about under the Obama Administration has been popped under the Trump Administration. Nothing has changed in the ten years since the 2008 crash except that the motivation for keeping the crash hidden is quickly disappearing.

    Crashes are inevitable, but collapse is only possible when the public remains unprepared. Our civilization and its values are under attack, but they can only be destroyed if we stay apathetic to the threat and refuse to prepare for their defense.  We must adopt a philosophy of decentralization.  We need localized and self sufficient economies, as well as a return to localized production.  Beyond that, we have to prepare for the eventuality of a fight.  The fate of the US economy has already been sealed, but the people who are destroying it can still be stopped before they use the collapse to force society into subservience.  We have to offer security, we have to offer alternatives to the “new world order” and we have to remove the globalist threat permanently.

    Make no mistake, we are living in the midst of an epoch moment; the outcome of collapse depends on us and our reactions. This is not the task of the next generation, it is a task for our generation. We do not have another couple of decades to take the danger seriously. The plates are not spinning, they have already dropped.

    *  *  *

    If you would like to support the work that Alt-Market does while also receiving content on advanced tactics for defeating the globalist agenda, subscribe to our exclusive newsletter The Wild Bunch Dispatch.  Learn more about it HERE.


    Tyler Durden

    Fri, 01/03/2020 – 23:45

  • How 2019 Changed Migration At The Southern Border
    How 2019 Changed Migration At The Southern Border

    2019 was a year that changed the face of migration on the U.S. Southwestern border. Not only did many more immigrants try to cross it, but a majority – almost 56 percent – arrived together with their families, fleeing violence in Central America. As a result of this fundamental change in who is seeking to immigrate to the United States, Non-Mexicans outnumbered Mexicans 4:1 at the Southern border in the fiscal year of 2019. These numbers are inferred from arrest records of Customs and Border Protection.

    In FY2019, the number of Mexicans arrested at the border was down to 160,000, while the number of non-Mexicans exceeded 680,000. Out of these, 81 percent came from El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras.

    Infographic: Non-Mexican Immigrants Outnumber Mexicans 4:1 at Southern Border | Statista

    You will find more infographics at Statista

    The number of undocumented immigrants reached its peak in May 2019, when more than 132,000 people were apprehended. In November 2019 (FY2020) was back down to approximately 33,500.

    Because many of the new arrivals are applying for asylum, the Trump administration has overhauled its application process, making many asylum seekers wait in camps on the Mexican side without much assistance. These changes were implemented after another system overhaul – the separation of families in U.S. custody and the tendency to release fewer immigration detainees on bail – had caused chaotic scenes at detention centers and an international outcry.

    Infographic: How 2019 Changed Migration at the Southern Border | Statista

    You will find more infographics at Statista

    Historically, Mexicans made up the largest share of undocumented immigrants to the U.S. but have been more successful at finding work in Mexico, where the economy is improving and workers are more sought after as the country’s population ages. As more asylum seekers and less work migrants arrive, the U.S. has also slashed the number of refugees it accepts annually to the historic low of 18,000 for 2020.

    Infographic: U.S. Slashes Refugee Limit To Historic Low | Statista

    You will find more infographics at Statista


    Tyler Durden

    Fri, 01/03/2020 – 23:25

  • New York Times Reveals America's Weapons-Makers Drive Trump-Impeachment
    New York Times Reveals America’s Weapons-Makers Drive Trump-Impeachment

    Authored by Eric Zuesse via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

    A remarkably non-propagandistic news-report, in the New York Times, by Eric Lipton, Maggie Haberman and Mark Mazzetti, included powerful evidence that the impeachment-effort against US President Donald Trump is motivated, in part if not totally, by a desire by US Senators and Representatives – as well as by career employees of the US Departments of Defense, State Department, and other agencies regarding national defense – to increase the sales-volumes of US-made weapons to foreign countries.

    Whereas almost all of the contents of that article merely repeat what has already been reported, this article in the Times states repeatedly that boosting corporations such as Lockheed Martin, General Dynamics, Boeing, and Northrop-Grumman, has been a major — if not the very top — motivation driving US international relations, and that at least regarding Ukraine, Trump has not been supporting, but has instead been trying to block, those weapons-sales — and creating massive enemies in the US Government as a direct consequence.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The article, issued online on Sunday, December 29th, is titled “Behind the Ukraine Aid Freeze: 84 Days of Conflict and Confusion”, and it quotes many such individuals as saying that President Trump strongly opposed the sale of US weapons to Ukraine, and that,

    In an Oval Office meeting on May 23, with Mr. Sondland, Mr. Mulvaney and Mr. Blair in attendance, Mr. Trump batted away assurances that [Ukraine’s current President] Mr. Zelensky was committed to confronting corruption. “They are all corrupt, they are all terrible people,” Mr. Trump said, according to testimony in the impeachment inquiry.

    In other words, Trump, allegedly, said that he didn’t want “terrible people” to be buying, and to receive, US-made weapons (especially not as US aid — free of charge, a gift from America’s taxpayers).

    The article simply assumes that Trump was wrong that “they are all terrible people.”

    Indeed, Trump himself has sold hundreds of billions of dollars worth of US-made weapons to the Royal Saud family who own Saudi Arabia, and he refuses to back down about those sales on account of that family’s having been behind the widely-reported torture-murder of Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi, and on account of their effort since 2015 to starve into submission — by bombing the food-supplies to — the Houthis in adjoining Yemen, and on account of their using US weapons in order to achieve that mass-murdering goal. Consequently, even if Trump is correct about Ukraine’s Government, he would still have a lot of explaining to do, in order to cancel congressionally authorized US weapons-sales to Ukraine but not to Saudi Arabia.

    However, a very strong case can be made that he is correct about Ukraine — even if he is wrong about the Sauds. Clearly, the standard line in the US-and-allied media, that the February 2014 overthrow and replacement of Ukraine’s democratically elected Government was a ‘democratic revolution’, instead of a US coup, is based on blatant lies, and the US-imposed coup-regime there is still in force, and has been perpetrating an ethnic cleansing in order to be able to remain in power. In fact, the current Ukrainian President, Volodmyr Zelenskiy, is the self-described “business partner” of, and was brought to power by, the brutal Ukrainian oligarch Ihor Kolomoysky, who helped the ‘former’ “Social Nationalist’ (National Socialist or Nazi) Arsen Avakov, plan and execute on 2 May 2014 the burning-alive inside the Odessa Trade Unions Building, of dozens or perhaps over a hundred people who had been printing and distributing leaflets against the coup.

    For the New York Times, in its ’news’-report — even this article that’s less prejudiced than most of mainstream US ’news’-reporting is — to simply presume that Trump had no valid reason for asserting what he did against Ukraine’s present (the Obama-installed) Government of Ukraine, constitutes merely anti-Trump (and pro-Obama) propaganda, on their part, and it would be more appropriate in an editorial or op-ed from them than in an alleged news-article, such as here. However, the actual news-value in that article is real. They quoted from “a piece in the conservative Washington Examiner saying that the Pentagon would pay for weapons and other military equipment for Ukraine, bringing American security aid to the country to $1.5 billion since 2014.” This was an anti-Democrat, pro-Republican, newspaper and article, saying:

    Kurt Volker, the US special representative for Ukraine, told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee at a Tuesday hearing. “I think it’s also important that Ukraine reciprocate with foreign military purchases from us as well, and I know that they intend to do so.” The assistance comes at a pivotal moment for Ukraine’s newly minted president, Volodymyr Zelensky, a popular comedian who won a landslide victory in April. Zelensky has made ending the Russian-backed insurrection in Ukraine’s eastern Donbas region his top political priority.

    The Times, in order to appear nonpartisan, was there citing, as authority, the anti-Trump appointee by Trump, Kurt Volker, who said “it’s also important that Ukraine reciprocate with foreign military purchases from us as well, and I know that they intend to do so.” In other words: Volker was saying that Ukraine’s Government would follow through with America’s war against Russia, next door to Ukraine, and that therefore, US taxpayers should pay for Ukraine’s purchases of US-made weapons, such as from Lockheed Martin and Raytheon. He was saying that milking US taxpayers to boost those US corporations’ profits is good, not bad. He was saying that Ukraine is on US taxpayers’ dole, as if the Obama-installed, rabidly anti-Russian, Ukrainian Government is a charity-case which is the US Government’s business (and not merely those private stockholders’ business), and that therefore, Trump should continue Obama’s policy toward Ukraine, of using Ukraine in order ultimately to place on Ukraine’s border with Russia, missiles against Moscow, right across that border. This is what the New York Times is presenting in a favorable light.

    Then, the New York Times ‘news’-report said:

    For a full month, the fact that Mr. Trump wanted to halt the aid remained confined primarily to a small group of officials.

    That ended on July 18, when a group of top administration officials meeting on Ukraine policy — including some calling in from Kyiv — learned from a midlevel budget office official that the president had ordered the aid frozen.

    “I and the others on the call sat in astonishment,” William B. Taylor Jr., the top United States diplomat in Ukraine, testified to House investigators. “In an instant, I realized that one of the key pillars of our strong support for Ukraine was threatened.”

    In other words: the Times’s further attack against Trump’s intention not to provide this US taxpayer boondoggle to Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, United Technologies, and other US weapons-making corporations — a boondoggle so as to continue free supply to the Obama-installed Ukrainian regime of US-made weapons against Russia — is that career US national-security personnel support and want to continue Obama’s war against Russia.

    Then, the Times reported further:

    “This is in America’s interest,” Mr. Bolton argued, according to one official briefed on the gathering.

    “This defense relationship, we have gotten some really good benefits from it,” Mr. Esper added, noting that most of the money was being spent on military equipment made in the United States.

    America’s war against Russia is designed to enrich investors in US ‘Defense’-contractors.

    Isn’t it clear, then, what was actually behind 9/11, and behind America’s invasion of (instead of merely Special-Forces operation regarding) Afghanistan in 2001, and invasions of Iraq in 2003, and of Libya in 2011, and of Syria in 2012-now, etc., and coup against Ukraine in 2014?

    The Times article closes with this impeach-Trump line:

    But then, just as suddenly as the hold was imposed, it was lifted. Mr. Trump, apparently unwilling to wage a public battle, told Mr. Portman he would let the money go.

    White House aides rushed to notify their counterparts at the Pentagon and elsewhere. The freeze had been lifted. The money could be spent. Get it out the door, they were told.

    The debate would now begin as to why the hold was lifted, with Democrats confident they knew the answer.

    “I have no doubt about why the president allowed the assistance to go forward,” said Representative Eliot L. Engel, Democrat of New York and the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee. “He got caught.”

    In other words: Trump yielded to the threat of being impeached. Trump, the sales-person who had sold the Saud family hundreds of billions of dollars worth of US weaponry, recognized that unless Russia is going to be the main target of US weaponry, Trump’s own Presidency will be in jeopardy.

    US foreign policies are a vast sales-promotion scheme, for America’s billionaires, who crave to control Russia, above all. Trump won’t buck them. Instead, he’s continuing Obama’s policy on Ukraine.


    Tyler Durden

    Fri, 01/03/2020 – 23:05

    Tags

  • This Is The Top Job For Americans Hoping To Make Six Figures With No Experience
    This Is The Top Job For Americans Hoping To Make Six Figures With No Experience

    Given the insane cost of college in the US, who can blame prospective students for trying to game out which career paths have the highest short-term payouts immediately after graduation?

    To that end, the two men behind the website theinterviewguys.com (h/t to MarketWatch’s Quentin Fottrell) analyzed some data from the BLS’s Occupational Requirements Survey to glean some insights on which jobs offer the highest salaries to those who are just starting their careers post-graduation.

    They found that in 2019, the highest-paying job for college graduates that required no previous work experience was being a pharmacist.

    Roughly 64% of pharmacist job postings required no previous work experience in the field, while also carrying a median starting salary of $126,000 a year, more than twice the average wage in the US. Next up was another position in the health-care field: Nurse practitioner. 60% of job postings for nurse practitioners required no prior work experience, while advertising a median salary of $114,000.

    Of course, the high median salaries in these fields aren’t an accident, or some kind of happy coincidence. Rather, students face a difficult curriculum during their undergrad years, plus at least some grad school. Pharmacy students must obtain a doctoral degree in pharmacy just to be eligible to enter the workforce, and they must also pass the Pharmacy College Admission Test.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Looking further down the income distribution, the pair found that high school teachers and special education teachers most often required no previous work experience (According to their research, the interview guys found that more than 91% of postings in those fields stipulated that no prior experience in the field was necessary).

    However, median salaries for these teaching jobs came in at just over $60,000. Police patrol officers also ranked high on the list of jobs requiring no prior experience in the field (something that the SJWs will surely latch on to as an example of the rank injustices permeating the law-enforcement community). The median salary for patrol officer jobs came in at just over $65,400.

    For college graduates, jobs offering high starting salaries with little required experience fall into a category that the study’s authors have dubbed “the sweet spot.” After all, one of the most infuriating struggles that recent grads face is surmounting the ‘experience’ barrier. Every year, hundreds of thousands of American students embark on unpaid or for-credit internships in the hopes of gaining precious work experience.

    Some employers, in turn, have been castigated for taking advantage of this situation by relying on unpaid interns or “perma-interns” who receive pay, but no other benefits, for their work.

    In many professional-class fields, jobs with low starting wages often lead to higher-paying positions after three or four years in the workforce.

    And more often than not, jobs with a low barrier to entry pay much less than other positions. But with unemployment at 50-year lows, some jobs that were traditionally seen as menial or blue-collar labor are seeing upward pressure on wages as jobs like long-haul trucker and fast-food cook become increasingly difficult to fill.


    Tyler Durden

    Fri, 01/03/2020 – 22:45

  • Physicists Just Achieved Quantum Teleportation Between Computer Chips For The First Time
    Physicists Just Achieved Quantum Teleportation Between Computer Chips For The First Time

    Authored by Manuel Garcia Aguilar via TheMindUnleashed.com,

    “Quantum” may possibly have been one of the most common words we’ve been reading, listening to, and even writing about last year – and there is a big reason for that… quantum is no longer the future, quantum is now.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Physicists have been able to demonstrate quantum teleportation between two computer chips for the first time.

    A few years ago, we were just beginning to understand the main aspects of quantum physics. Even Albert Einstein died not agreeing with a lot of the theories enclosing this new world for physics because in some aspects it was not “matching” the special relativity theory (that’s one of the reasons why the “theory of everything,” explaining how everything was created in a physical perspective hasn’t been published yet).

    But not understanding everything about quantum physics doesn’t mean we can’t take advantage of its amazing properties, one of them being entanglement. Entanglement describes how when a pair or group of particles is generated, interact, or share spatial proximity and the quantum state of each particle cannot be described independently, this is one of the fundamental contrasts between classical and quantum physics.

    Scientists from the University of Bristol, in collaboration with the Technical University of Denmark (DTU), have successfully developed chip-scale devices that are able to exploit the application of quantum physics by generating and manipulating single particles of light within programmable nano-scale circuits.

    These chips encode quantum information in light generated inside the circuits and can process information with high efficiency and extremely low noise. This could be translated into an ability to create more complex quantum circuits that nowadays are required in quantum computing and communications, that in the present, are the most powerful supercomputers that exist.

    Quantum teleportation offers quantum state transfer of a quantum particle from one place to another by utilizing entanglement. Establishing this entangled communication in the lab was not easy stuff.

    “We were able to demonstrate a high-quality entanglement link across two chips in the lab, where photons on either chip share a single quantum state,” Bristol Co-author Dan Llewellyn said.

    “Each chip was then fully programmed to perform a range of demonstrations which utilize the entanglement… the flagship demonstration was a two-chip teleportation experiment, whereby the individual quantum state of a particle is transmitted across the two chips after a quantum measurement is performed. This measurement utilizes the strange behavior of quantum physics, which simultaneously collapses the entanglement link and transfers the particle state to another particle already on the receiver chip.”

    Dr. Imad Faruque, another co-author, added:

    “Based on our previous result of on-chip high-quality single-photon sources, we have built an even more complex circuit containing four sources… all of these sources are tested and found to be nearly identical emitting nearly identical photons, which is an essential criterion for the set of experiments we had performed, such as entanglement swapping.”

    The results showed efficiency in the quantum teleportation of 91 percent and other important features such as entanglement swapping used for quantum repeaters and networks and four-photon GHZ states, required in quantum computing and quantum internet.

    These developments are predicted to have immense impacts on modern society, quantum physics is here to stay.


    Tyler Durden

    Fri, 01/03/2020 – 22:25

  • Amid Flavored-Vaping 'Ban', Smoking Loses Its Cool
    Amid Flavored-Vaping ‘Ban’, Smoking Loses Its Cool

    13% of Americans smoke e-cigarettes, but that is nothing compared to China, where 1-in-5 ‘vape’…

    Infographic: 13% of Americans Smoke E-Cigarettes | Statista

    You will find more infographics at Statista

    Worse still, at least 25 percent of 12th grade students have tried nicotine vaping products, according to a poll conducted by New England Journal of Medicine, cited by the New York Times.

    Infographic: Teen Vaping Rises in 2019 | Statista

    You will find more infographics at Statista

    But now, the Trump administration on Thursday announced plans to bar sales of flavored e-cigarette cartridges, except for menthol and tobacco flavors.

    “The United States has never seen an epidemic of substance use arise as quickly as our current epidemic of youth use of e-cigarettes,” Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar said in a statement about the change, which goes into effect in 30 days.

    The FDA released its statement announcing the new policy on Thursday, saying the move was not a “ban” but an announcement prioritizing the agency’s law enforcement powers against tobacco products. The agency “has attempted to balance the public health concerns,” the statement said.

    Will this ‘ban’ push smokers back to ‘real’ cigarettes?

    While lighting up a cigarette was once considered a sign of class and sophistication or, at the very least, an act of coolness, smoking seems to have lost some of its spark in recent years. According to a new report published by the Federal Trade Commission, cigarette sales in the United States dropped to 216.9 billion in 2018, the lowest level since the FTC started tracking cigarette sales in 1967.

    As Statista’s Felix Richter shows the the chart below, cigarette sales have declined more or less continuously over the past 40 years, dropping by 66 percent since peaking in the early 1980s.

    Infographic: Has Smoking Lost Its Cool? | Statista

    You will find more infographics at Statista

    Over the same period, cigarette advertising and promotional spending increased from $1.2 billion in 1980 to $8.4 billion in 2018, most of which came in the form of price discounts for retailers and wholesalers.

    Interestingly, the number of cigarette smokers in the United States, while also declining, has not dropped at a similar rate as cigarette sales over the past four decades. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), an estimated 34.2 million adults in the U.S. were smoking cigarettes in 2018, down 34 percent from 51.6 million in 1980.


    Tyler Durden

    Fri, 01/03/2020 – 22:05

  • Luongo Laments "Is This Trump's Point Of No Return?"
    Luongo Laments “Is This Trump’s Point Of No Return?”

    Authored by Tom Luongo via Gold, Goats, ‘n Guns blog,

    When I wrote that the coup against President Trump had morphed into a Civil War, I wasn’t kidding. The sham impeachment created the perfect environment for the Democrats and Republicans to get something definitive from him by playing the House and the Senate off each other.

    With the Senate Neocon Occupied Territory the escalation of belligerence since Speaker Nancy Pelosi pushed through the impeachment vote has been serious.

    First, there was the rider to the NDAA which upped the sanctions on everyone willing to work on Nordstream 2. Then Lindsey Graham pushed the frankly insane DASKA bill through the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

    Pelosi forced her impeachment vote through the House on partisan lines. Then, clearly overstepping her authority, she refused to send the Articles to the Senate hoping to add a more serious charge, like Obstruction of Justice or Treason for laundering Russian money through Deutsche Bank.

    It is under these circumstances we should view the events in Iraq over the last week, especially the killing of IRGC Quds Forces Commander Qassem Solemaini.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Because I’ve warned from the beginning of this impeachment, Trump was just 17 votes in the Senate away from conviction. And failure on his part to respond to an attack on our troops now or our soil, the embassy in Baghdad, would have been enough to turn that many against him and install Mike Pence.

    At the end of the day we are held captive by a minority of power-mad Trotskyites without any capacity for forgiveness or humility. They believe in societal order through the whip and the sword.

    Truly Maoist in their thinking, the only political power that exists comes from the barrel of a gun. This is why there has been zero opportunities for diplomacy with Iran.

    Iran is to be destroyed. If not today, tomorrow. If not then then the day after. It will not end.

    And any potential diplomacy was sabotaged at every turn. Peace can only happen through subjugation. Demands placed on Iran after Trump’s disastrous decision to exit the JCPOA were nothing short of regime change, arch neocon Secretary of State Mike Pompeo saw to that.

    A man like Solemaini would never submit to this. And yet, fighting a war against the Empire is always reduced to terrorism to sell it to the public.

    Like it or not Trump executed the man most responsible for the systemic destruction of ISIS and neutering of Al-Qaeda in Syria and Iraq. He’s also a man, over the years, who has fought the U.S. to a standstill across the Middle East.

    Those were his pertinent crimes.

    The results of these fights were to empower Israel’s enemies in Lebanon, Syria and Iraq. Russia and China supported this in their own interests. Turkey came to realize it was being used.

    There was no way around that. It was a direct consequence of winning the battle to preserve Syria from becoming a failed state.

    And that is a goal any rational person should wish for.

    This is the most dangerous escalation of Trump’s administration. Nothing he’s done to this point compares with killing Solemaini and taking immediate credit for it.

    Nothing he’s done is more tone deaf or disproportionate to whatever crimes were the proximate cause. And nothing he could have done would be more galvanizing of resistance to U.S. occupation of Iraq and Syria.

    Trump, to his credit, held back the neocons at critical junctures over the past couple of years. After the Russian ELINT plane was shot down, Putin negotiated a truce which would have seen Iranian forces in Syria pulled back from the Golan Heights as a start to changing the dynamic there.

    Benjamin Netanyahu said no all Iranians out of Syria. The war between Israel and the Shia forces backed by Iran continued. The path to peace could have begun then if Trump had the moral courage to force that outcome.

    But the neocons at home had him under suspicion of treason. His National Security staff wouldn’t allow that to happen. If he hadn’t pulled out of the JCPOA and left room to negotiate we wouldn’t be here today.

    But he did. And we are downstream of this bad decision. It’s been one escalation after another and a series of increasingly dangerous confrontations. This doesn’t end with Iran going meekly to bed, folks.

    They aren’t disobedient children but they aren’t animals either.

    Killing Solemaini was presaged months ago with the U.S. designating the Quds Force a terrorist organization, which gives the U.S. unilateral legal cover to summary execution of anyone affiliated with them, especially if they are not on home soil.

    But, at the same time, Trump assassinated (note the difference) members of the Iraqi Popular Mobilization Forces in the raid as well, since these are considered members of the Iraqi military and the attack occurred on Iraqi soil.

    So, in simplistic and, I believe, legal terms Trump committed an Act of War against Iraq. Iran obviously considers killing Solemaini, legal definitions aside, such as well.

    This is an act Trump cannot walk back. He can’t ask Iran to come to the negotiating table now or ever. It’s an act of overt war. Whether it leads directly to forces facing off in high level combat is debatable. It will certainly continue escalating from here.

    Israel has been itching for the U.S. to attack and destroy Iran’s nuclear R&D facilities. The only way to achieve that was to get Trump to pull out of the JCPOA, forcing Iran back into enrichment and then using that as the casus belli.

    Welcome to 2020.

    And the sad truth is that it means more killing, more murder and more of everything bad. There is no Just War rationalization for this. While no one rational wants to see Iran with nuclear weapons the end result of the policy led us to that potential outcome.

    No rational person should want anyone with nuclear weapons and yet Netanyahu sits on hundreds of warheads.

    Beating people into submission doesn’t work. The neocons told Trump to smack Iran in the mouth, that’s the only lesson these animals understand.

    By the way, they say that about everyone.

    Solemaini may have been responsible for hundreds of American deaths, but Iran and the U.S. have been at war for forty years. At some point that has to be processed honestly.

    Americans supporting this refuse to comprehend that we’re as much to blame as Iran is for the violence. We’re not the good guys and they aren’t the bad guys. Everyone sucks here. For every Iranian that shouts “Death to America” there are Americans who sing “Bomb, Bomb, Bomb Bomb, Bomb Iran.”

    Trump was elected to end this belligerence but he’s incapable of separating strength from weakness. A mafiosi-type who uses violence indiscriminately, Trump is a weak man. This was indiscriminate in that Trump believes the political calculus is in his favor, so he can get away with it. He shores up his support in the Senate just long enough to beat the impeachment and can sail to re-election.

    But, who he is was written on the bombs he threw at the Al Shairat airbase and the MOAB he dropped in Afghanistan in April 2017 to prove a point to Putin and Xi he wasn’t a wimp.

    But he is a wimp. And a coward. And neither man was impressed by this. He hasn’t won a single negotiation of note in three years. Killing Solemaini was the result of having no capacity for diplomacy.

    China’s won the trade war. Russia gets their pipelines. Syria will be returned to Syrians and Iraq will reject U.S. presence there. Venezuela won’t fall and North Korea has nukes. Nothing has changed and yet everything has.

    A strong man admits his mistakes and makes concessions to those he’s harmed. He doesn’t hide behind how unfair it is the political machine is arrayed against him.

    And, now, he’s a failed president no different than Obama who he despises.

    The only thing more pathetic than Trump right now is the gaggle of jackals running against him. Weep for the future.

    *  *  *

    Join my Patreon if you want honest takes on politics, economics and where we’re headed.  Install the Brave Browser if you want to help yourself continue talking about it.


    Tyler Durden

    Fri, 01/03/2020 – 21:45

    Tags

  • "Dire Circumstances": Aussie Wildfires Intensify After Killing Half A Billion Animals; Record Numbers Evacuate
    “Dire Circumstances”: Aussie Wildfires Intensify After Killing Half A Billion Animals; Record Numbers Evacuate

    The brushfires raging across Australia which have killed an estimated 480 million animals have intensified over the last 12 hours, according to NASA, causing a record number of residents evacuate as forecasters predict worsening conditions.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Authorities on Friday urged evacuations for Australians living in parts of New South Wales and Victoria to avoid brushfires which are expected to rage out of control over the weekend. Temperatures in the area topped 104 F across much of the state, and no end to the destruction is currently in sight. According to NSW Transport Minister Andrew Constance, this is “the largest evacuation of people out of the region ever.”

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    “Conditions are set to mirror or even deteriorate beyond what we saw on New Year’s Eve,” said the Bureau of Meteorology’s Jonathan How, adding that strong and dry winds would pick up over the weekend.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Over 1,300 homes have been destroyed, while 17 deaths have been reported.

    In a harbinger of the searing conditions expected, a number of fires burnt out of control in South Australia as temperatures topped 40 degrees C (104 F) across much of the state and strong winds fanned flames.

    Victoria declared a state of disaster across areas home to about 100,000 people, with authorities urging people to evacuate before a deterioration expected on Saturday. –Reuters

    If they value their safety they must leave,” said police emergency responder Michael Grainger. “I’d suggest personal belongings are of very, very little value in these circumstances,” adding “These are dire circumstances, there is no doubt.

    In the southern seaside resort town of Mallacoota, over 4,000 people were forced to take refuge on the beach and in boats as an “apocalyptic” scene unfolded amid a dark orange sky.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Via Facebook

     <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.jshttps://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js


    Tyler Durden

    Fri, 01/03/2020 – 21:25

  • Why The Minimum Wage Is So Bad For Young Workers
    Why The Minimum Wage Is So Bad For Young Workers

    Authored by Mitch Nemeth via The Mises Institute,

    In today’s political discourse, the minimum wage is frequently mentioned by the more progressive members of Congress. On a basic level, raising the minimum wage appears to be a sympathetic policy for low-income wage earners. Often kept out of the conversation, however, are the downstream effects of this proposal. The consensus among economists has always been that a price floor on “low-skilled labor” leads to unemployment “among the very people minimum wage legislation allegedly helps.” Surely those who retain their employment will reap the higher hourly pay but not without consequence to the rest of the “low-skilled” labor market.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Government-mandated minimum wage increases directly result in a higher price floor for hourly labor. The more indirect consequences include reductions in hours worked, layoffs, automation, operational changes, and loss of opportunity. In Economics 101, students are taught about trade-offs. A trade-off, as defined by the Business Dictionary, is “a technique of reducing or forgoing one or more desirable outcomes in exchange for increasing or obtaining other desirable outcomes in order to maximize the total return.” We incur trade-offs every day, such as the decision to buy dinner from a restaurant for $10 or to eat our holiday leftovers. Businesses incur trade-offs as well.

    For example, let’s consider your local grocery store. The grocer may employ ten people, including one manager and nine employees. The manager makes well over the current minimum wage, but six of the nine other employees make the current minimum wage. If the current minimum wage is increased from $7.25 to $12.50 per hour, the rate of increase is 72.4 percent. While this increase may sound reasonable from the perspective of some readers, this is a large increase given the relatively low profit margins in this industry. What are the downstream effects?

    The employer may either reduce the hours worked for employees or lay off staff. Several things result:

    • Those who are not laid off will reap the benefits of a higher minimum wage, but they will have to work harder to make up for less staff.

    • Staff making a wage higher than the old minimum wage but lower than the new rate will also request that their wages be increased to distinguish them from their peers (those who retained their jobs at the higher minimum wage) and to compensate them for their skills.

    • Those who are laid off will be forced to find other employment.

    • There may be a lack of employment due to these employees being priced out of the market.

    The Effects on Youth Employment

    Meanwhile, rapid advancements in technology may result in fewer job opportunities when the cost of labor is higher. Think of your local Kroger’s self-checkout line or Chick-fil-A’s mobile-ordering application.

    Not surprisingly, American Action Forum’s evidence indicates that minority youth may be the most negatively affected by wage price floors. Various studies have analyzed the impact of minimum wage increases, most of which have been gradual increases implemented over a period of years. In an EconTalk podcast with Russ Roberts, Jacob Vigdor shared his main findings about Seattle’s minimum wage increase: “First of all, the minimum wage did appear to raise wages. … That’s what we expected to see. But when we looked at employment, we actually saw a reduction.” Vigdor further mentions that hours worked decreased as wages went up.

    The study showed that the amount of money paid in the low-wage labor market declined overall, or in the aggregate. The results varied depending on the level of experience of the worker; those with the most work experience came out ahead. Vigdor’s study shows that on average their paychecks were twenty dollars higher per week. But the biggest loss “in terms of much lower pay would be amongst the workers who hadn’t even entered the labor market yet when the minimum wage started to increase, because they were finding it harder to find any work at all.”

    The key takeaway from Vigdor’s study was the minimum wage’s effect on workers who had yet to enter the labor market. In effect, the higher minimum wage created a barrier to entering the hourly labor market for those without experience. Who tends to lack experience? Young individuals and immigrants.

    As any young individual seeking an internship or their first job knows, the hardest thing about the search is having sufficient experience. Experience means that the individual needs less training and can be productive on the first day. Businesses understand that “on-the-job training is an investment, and at $15 an hour that investment doesn’t make sense from the business owner’s perspective.” This investment makes even less sense when it is understood that the teenager will only work for a few months and then leave, a dilemma that many employers face during summer and winter breaks.

    The Employment Policies Institute addresses teen unemployment in an article titled “The Teen Unemployment Crisis: Questions and Answers.” It notes that one of the goals of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) is to “protect the educational opportunities of minors.” Problematically, increasing the cost of labor disincentivizes companies from hiring workers, especially those who require training. Additionally, as technology rapidly advances, easily automated functions may become obsolete for workers. Policymakers must consider the interests of ensuring a viable labor market for our nation’s youth while promoting policies that incentivize businesses to pay decent wages.

    Although many teenagers may be predisposed to sympathize with progressive policies like minimum wage increases, they ought to understand the larger implications of such proposals. Markets can withstand gradual change, but they may be unable to adequately adjust to steep increases in the cost of labor. In New State Ice Co. v. Liebmann, US Supreme Court justice Louis Brandeis famously described how a “state may, if its citizens choose, serve as a laboratory; and try novel social and economic experiments without risk to the rest of the country”; Justice Brandeis coined the phrase “laboratories of democracy.”  Twnety-nine states and the District of Columbia, as of 2019, have experimented with minimum wage increases. But studies have demonstrated that these progressive “successes” do not come without unintended consequences.


    Tyler Durden

    Fri, 01/03/2020 – 21:05

    Tags

  • Dem Senator Insists Iranian General "Most Significant Leader US Has Ever Assassinated"
    Dem Senator Insists Iranian General “Most Significant Leader US Has Ever Assassinated”

    Though it might sound hard to believe, Connecticut Sen. Chris Murphy insisted during what we imagine was a hastily-arranged appearance on “the Rachel Maddow Show” Thursday night that Iranian General Qasem Suleimani could be “the most significant foreign political leader the United States has ever assassinated.”

    Murphy, a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee who has long had designs on joining the Democrats’ Congressional leadership, was likely invited to appear on the show by its producers after news of the assassination, which took place early Friday morning (local time) near the Baghdad International Airport.

    A statement released by the Pentagon after news of the attack broke claimed Suleimani was “actively developing plans” to attack American diplomats and service members in Iraq when a two-car convoy that he was traveling in was targeted in a drone strike.

    During his brief appearance via phone, Murphy told Maddow that “there’s no doubt that Qasim Suleimani was an enemy of the United States…the question tonight is whether Suleimani is a greater threat to the United States as the functional head of the Quds force, or as a maryr.”

    He also warned about Iran’s ability to retaliate against US assets in the region.

    “The danger here is of course that we are going to get into a conflict in the region that will ultimately accrue to the detriment of US national security interests no matter how we feel about the fact that Suleimani is dead this evening. They have the capability to launch assassination attempts right back at US political leaders, and their proxy forces can threaten US forces and Israel itself throughout the region.”

    “They can end up spilling into a set of consequences that ultimately do a lot more damage to US national security interests than the assassination itself cures.”

    “There are plenty of grave consequences for our relationship with Iraq, This is a very dangerous moment, this could be the most significant political leader that the US has ever assassinated.”

    Murphy also threw in some criticisms, claiming “you can’t do this with Congressional authorization” (though it looks like President Trump just did) and some pundits have been discussing the possibility of the House using this as the basis for a third article of impeachment.

    Murphy, of course, wasn’t the only Democratic power player to weigh in on the assassination. The four remaining top presidential contenders have all published comments essentially saying the same thing: That Qasem was a bad actor in the region, but that Trump’s decision to do something about it was still wrong.

    Former Vice President Joe Biden’s statement got the most attention after he accused Trump of tossing “a stick of dynamite into a tinder box”.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Elizabeth Warren warned Soleimani was a “murder, responsible for the deaths of thousands, including hundreds of Americans” but added that his assassination will “increase the likelihood of more deaths and new Middle East conflict.”

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    And Bernie Sanders accused Trump of breaking his promise to end America’s “forever wars.”

    “Trump’s dangerous escalation brings us closer to another disastrous war in the Middle East that could cost countless lives and trillions more dollars. Trump promised to end endless wars, but this action puts us on the path to another one,” he said in a tweet, while also managing to bring up the fact that he voted against the War in Iraq.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    As for Pete Buttigieg, he hadn’t yet tweeted a statement on the attack as of 8 am ET.

    Fortunately, Murphy’s brief appearance on Maddow isn’t the only reason we’re talking about Murphy this morning.

    In a hilarious example of Dems committing flagrant acts of hypocrisy while condemning the Trump Administration for carrying out such a bold and potentially “game changing” attack, conservatives are pointing out that Murphy – a Democratic Senator who is known for his hawkish foreign policy views – was practically begging for an attack like this just two days ago in a tweet that he and his social media team have somehow not yet deleted.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    What a difference two days during a holiday-shortened week can make…


    Tyler Durden

    Fri, 01/03/2020 – 20:45

    Tags

  • Civil War 2.0 Manufactured By "Media's Mendacious Retailing Of Obvious Falsehoods"
    Civil War 2.0 Manufactured By “Media’s Mendacious Retailing Of Obvious Falsehoods”

    Authored by James Howard Kunstler via Kunstler.com,

    In that mercifully quiet week between Christmas and New Years, I re-watched Ken Burns’ documentary of the first Civil War, in contemplation of a possible second. What an almighty bloodbath that was. Thousands butchered in minutes in one battle after another, heads and limbs flying, men turned inside-out, and horses, too. The blue and the gray were hostage to their battlefield tactics and didn’t seem to learn from the insane extravagance of souls wasted in massed assaults against massed artillery again and again and again. The population of the whole nation (Confederacy included) was 31 million in 1860 and the war killed two percent of that, almost entirely young men.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Another impression left by that documentary was the startling beauty of the countryside in that day, and of the little towns that dotted that landscape where all the carnage and horror played out. Not a strip-mall in the whole gorgeous panorama. The rolling fields neatly fenced in the stillness of a summer’s day. A peaceful tranquility we today cannot even imagine. Everything human-scaled and so many buildings graced with beauty deliberately made: pediments, steeples, cupolas, columns, and swags. Walt Disney could not have imagined a more tender and appealing place. The lyrical names of those towns are linked to rivers of blood: Shiloh, Spotsylvania, Missionary Ridge, Cold Harbor….

    And the last impression accumulated over each installment was that this we did it to ourselves, and couldn’t seem to stop, just as today various parties to current events can’t seem to stop their provocations to a new episode of national domestic violence. This time it is the very government at war with itself, and so far the war is merely legalistic, the battles of lawyers — of which, one senses, we have far too many for our own good. The Department of Justice in particular is at war with itself, one faction in it refusing to cooperate with the other, hiding documents, trafficking in political muck, kluging up the works with deceptions, and still at it in the yet-unresolved case of General Flynn, which should have been thrown out of court months ago based on obvious prosecutorial malice.

    Likewise, The New York Times, NBC News, and many other companies can’t seem to give up on their mendacious retailing of obvious falsehoods, in league with rogue government agencies. Their readers and followers learned nothing from the stunning failure of Robert Mueller’s long investigation to find any crimes, and most don’t even understand that the purpose of it was simply to antagonize the president while trying desperately to come up with ammunition against him for the next election — using all the resources of federal machinery. In other words, it was just a government-sponsored elaboration of the “opposition research” conjured up by Hillary Clinton’s Fusion GPS hirelings in 2016.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The bigger picture of all this chicanery is right out there to see for anyone really paying attention.

    Mr. Obama and Hillary hijacked the most pernicious instruments of government — the CIA and FBI — to win the election, and then to overthrow the actual winner. Slowly slowly, they were found out, despite all the smoke they were blowing and hiding in. Barr & Durham have hardly said a thing about their efforts to unwind the massive hairball of subterfuge and ass-covering that is their purview. Yet, the particulars of what went on, and who did what, are now pinned to the wall. We know exactly what Christopher Steele was and how that all worked. We know how John Brennan played it and how James Clapper and Jim Comey went along with it, and took it further and deeper, and where Rod Rosenstein and Andrew McCabe stepped in, and exactly how Mr. Mueller got roped in to front his operation — despite his mental incapacity. And we also know that Barack Obama approved of all that activity through 2016 into January 20, 2017.

    When it comes into the courts some months from now, Brennan, Comey, and the rest will surely cop a plea that they were following Mr. Obama’s presidential instructions. The impeachment hysteria is an exact index of the rising fear of that coming finger-pointing. Mr. Obama has been drawn into the heart of this matter. His reputation will be destroyed — and with it, the Progressive agenda that he represented for two terms, and which still holds his party hostage as much as the battlefield tactics of 1864 held the armies of North and South hostage.

    We have heard very little from Mr. Obama in recent months, and only a few squawks out of Hillary. The Lawfare shock troops are working feverishly in the background to invent new congressional chicanes to trap Mr. Trump, but their legal cleverness can’t overcome the weakness of their cause, just as the soldiering of Robert E. Lee and his generals could not overcome the tragic wrongfulness of fighting for slavery. A century and half from now, people in this land (whatever it is called by then) will say that coup against Mr. Trump was a valiant endeavor, just as people today will say that the Civil War of 1861 – 1865 was about some metaphysical truths above and beyond slavery.

    Hillary is still on the loose and she still has many partisans in the ranks of government, and they are scheming desperately now to save their skins. I don’t believe that Mr. Obama actually commands any troops in this fight. He remains the mere symbol that he was from the very start, when the Democratic Party hoisted him out of obscurity as the grand prize for post-war liberalism. After the election, I think Mr. Trump was prepared to drop his wish to “lock her up.” But he has had three years to discover just how much malice was arrayed against him, and now he going to run her to ground.


    Tyler Durden

    Fri, 01/03/2020 – 20:25

  • Negative-Yield Bond Pool Declines As Hopes For Global Recovery Soar
    Negative-Yield Bond Pool Declines As Hopes For Global Recovery Soar

    Europe’s pool of negative-yielding government bonds declined in December to its smallest size since May, Tradeweb data showed on Thursday.

    Trade optimism and the hopes central bankers can engineer a soft landing in the global economy in 1H20 have been some of the reasons behind the shrinking negative-yielding government bonds.

    Eurozone government bonds quoted by Tradeweb showed negative yields fell to 4.14 trillion euros in December, which is about 52% of the total eight trillion-euro market. The latest figures are down from 57% in November.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    In September, the negative-yielding government bonds surged to the highest level ever, at 5.63 trillion euros, or about 70% of all government bonds in Europe were negative.

    As for the global pool of negative-yielding bonds, well, it peaked at around $15 trillion last year and has been estimated by Tradeweb to be around $12 trillion today.

    And if the global recovery that markets have already priced in doesn’t materialize — then it’s likely that a mad-dash back into bonds could be seen, destined to increase the pool of negative-yielding government debt to new record levels. Perhaps that is what gold is expecting.

     


    Tyler Durden

    Fri, 01/03/2020 – 20:05

  • Iran Has Hezbollah Sleeper Cells In The US Ready To Strike
    Iran Has Hezbollah Sleeper Cells In The US Ready To Strike

    Authored by Paul Joseph Watson via Summit News,

    The threat posed by Iran-backed Hezbollah sleeper cells embedded in major American cities has once again come to the fore following the killing of Iran’s Quds Force General Qasem Soleimani.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Following last night’s assassination of the Iranian military leader, authorities in both New York and Los Angeles announced that they were ramping up security in readiness for possible revenge attacks on U.S. soil.

    This is because Iran is known to have placed Hezbollah terrorist sleeper cells throughout not just Europe but the United States too.

    Last year, the the criminal prosecution and conviction in New York of the Hezbollah operative Ali Kourani revealed that the terror outfit has already plotted to attack U.S. interests inside the country and is ready to activate if it considers the existence of either Hezbollah or Iran to be at stake.

    Following the arrest of Kourani and another Hezbollah operative named Samer el-Debek, the U.S. intelligence community reversed its belief that Hezbollah was unlikely to attempt attacks within the U.S.

    “It’s our assessment that Hezbollah is determined to give itself a potential homeland option as a critical component of its terrorism playbook,” said National Counterterrorism Center Director Nicholas Rasmussen.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    “We in the intelligence community do in fact see continued activity on behalf of Hezbollah here inside the homeland,” he added.

    Hezbollah has never directly attacked the U.S. homeland, but Kourani, working for the Hezbollah-controlled Islamic Jihad Organization, was confirmed to have been conducting surveillance of FBI and U.S. Secret Service offices, as well as a U.S. Army armory and John F. Kennedy International Airport, all in New York City.

    “While living in the United States, Kourani served as an operative of Hezbollah in order to help the foreign terrorist organization prepare for potential future attacks against the United States,” said U.S. Assistant Attorney General for National Security John Demers.

    In casing both JFK and Toronto’s Pearson International Airport, “Kourani told the FBI that he provided Hezbollah with details about security procedures, the uniforms worn by security officers, and whether the officers were armed. His surveillance, Kourani told the FBI, focused on exit points, security checkpoints, camera locations, baggage claim procedures, and what questions airport screeners asked passengers,” reported ForeignPolicy.com.

    With the world now waiting for Iran’s response to Soleimani’s killing, we can only hope that it doesn’t come in the form of a massive Hezbollah-backed terror attack targeting a major American city.

    *  *  *

    My voice is being silenced by free speech-hating Silicon Valley behemoths who want me disappeared forever. It is CRUCIAL that you support me. Please sign up for the free newsletter here. Donate to me on SubscribeStar here. Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.


    Tyler Durden

    Fri, 01/03/2020 – 19:45

  • "Creepy", Mysterious, Unexplained Drones Are Flying In Precise Formations Over Colorado, Nebraska
    “Creepy”, Mysterious, Unexplained Drones Are Flying In Precise Formations Over Colorado, Nebraska

    Nobody knows where they are coming from, or why they are there.

    Back on Christmas we wrote about large, non-governmental drones flying in mysterious patterns in Colorado. Since then, sightings have only increased, despite there being no explanation as to why.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Local sheriff’s departments in regions of Nebraska and Colorado have been “bombarded” with reports of large drones with “blinking lights and wingspans of up to 6 feet” flying over rural towns and open fields, according to MSN News. The drones have even prompted a federal investigation – yet no one has been able to explain them. 

    Missy Blackman, who saw three drones hovering over her farm outside Palisade, Neb said: “It’s creepy. I have a lot of questions of why and what are they, and nobody seems to have any answers.”

    Sheriff James Brueggeman of Perkins County, Neb. saw the drones on patrol one night. He commented: “In terms of aircraft flying at night and not being identified, this is a first for me personally.”

    He said he has heard rumblings of people wanting to shoot down a drone, but has urged residents to contact law enforcement instead. 

    Brueggeman said: “I think it’s kind of a joke, but you have to remember the part of the country we live in. People here don’t like their privacy to be invaded.”

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Dawn George, who lives near Wray, Colo. said: “They’re high enough where you couldn’t shoot one anyway, but they’re low enough that they’re a nuisance.” She says her dogs bark at the drones when they fly over. 

    The drones are attracting attention at the same time the FAA proposed new regulations that would require most drones to be identifiable. A spokesman for the FAA, Ian Gregor, said the timing of the rule was coincidental, but also that the agency had opened an investigation into the “mystery” drone sightings. 

    Gregor said: “Multiple F.A.A. divisions and government agencies are investigating these reports.”

    Meanwhile, the drones have been the talk of rural Colorado and Nebraska. Sighting are increasing and so are the inquiries of witnesses and those in the area. Some have suggested simple answers, like a mapping operation or land survey, but many ask why those tasks would be undertaken at night. 

    Senator Cory Gardner, Republican of Colorado said he would “closely monitor the situation.”

    But regulations around drones are still fuzzy:

    Unmanned drones, which have exploded into popular usage in recent years and can be used for everything from mapping to photography to farming, can be difficult to track. Operators of all but the smallest drones have been required to register with the federal government since 2015, but there is no straightforward, legal way for state and local officials to identify the owner of a particular drone or to track that drone’s location.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>
     

    Reggie Govan, a former chief counsel to the F.A.A. who now teaches at the University of Pennsylvania Law School said: “Like in many other areas of drone regulation, the statutory and regulatory framework is lagging the technology. It’s just that simple.”

    Govan says the government has tracking tools to figure out where the drones are coming from, but the vast distance they fly over could make it difficult. Limits in drone detection have allowed rogue operators to approach the White House without raising alarms and even deploy homemade bombs in a Pennsylvania neighborhood, in one case. 

    Michael Yowell, a sheriff’s captain in Lincoln County, Colo said: “Most people are very reasonable, and they say it could be somebody mapping or doing topography. But you can’t rule out what you don’t know.”

    The sightings started in Northeast Colorado in mid December and have grown more widespread since then. Almost all sightings have occurred between sunset and 10PM, but they have occasionally been spotted during daylight hours. One witness said she looked at them through binoculars and saw no markings, just plain silver and white coloring. Captain Yowell tried to photograph the drones but couldn’t get a clear picture. 

    Yowell said: “We want to know, at around 10 o’clock, when we start to lose visuals of these, which direction are they homing? Which way are they heading? We hope that’s how we can contact somebody on the ground.”

    Residents like Dawn George are worried they may never get answers: “All the sudden, it’s just going to stop and we’re not going to have answers. And that’s very unsettling to a lot of people. It’s the fear of the unknown.”


    Tyler Durden

    Fri, 01/03/2020 – 19:25

  • Mish: Illinoisans Leave State In Record Numbers… And So Are We
    Mish: Illinoisans Leave State In Record Numbers… And So Are We

    Authored by Mike Shedlock via MishTalk,

    According to new IRS documents for 2017 and 2018, people are fleeing Illinois in record numbers.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    New IRS data confirms Record Number of Illinoisans Leave State as Tax Base Continues to Shrink.

    The IRS has just released new domestic migration data for both 2017 and 2018 and it shows Illinoisans left the state in record numbers. In both years, Illinois lost more people and more taxable income than in any past year reported by the IRS.

    The IRS data complements the new Census Bureau data that shows near-record out-migration of Illinoisans in 2019.

    Grim Numbers

    • Illinois lost more than 130,000 tax filers and their dependents in 2017 and another 88,000 in 2018. Illinois’ 2018 loss was the third worst in the country, with only California and New York losing more residents, 153,000 and 160,000, respectively.

    • Illinois lost $6.8 billion in Adjusted Gross Incomes to net out-migration in 2017 and $5.6 billion in 2018. Illinois’ 2018 loss was the third worst in the country, with only California and New York losing more AGI, $8.0 billion and $9.6 billion, respectively.

    • The three biggest gainers nationally in 2018 of residents and their incomes were Florida, Arizona and Texas. Florida was the biggest winner by far, gaining a net 115,000 people and $16 billion in AGI. Arizona gained 65,000 people and $3.5 billion in AGI. Texas gained 77,000 people and $3.4 billion in AGI.

    • When measured on per capita basis, only New York lost more AGI than Illinois in 2018. Illinois lost $435 in AGI per person while New York lost $484 per person.

    • The biggest per capita winners of AGI were Nevada, up $766 per person, Florida, up $762 per person, and Idaho, up $646 per person.

    • Illinois’ neighbors suffered far smaller AGI losses than Illinois in 2018, ranging from a loss of $145 per person in Iowa to just $52 per person in Missouri.

    Third Biggest Loser

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    • Domestic in-migrants to Illinois earned far less than the Illinois residents who left the state. The average AGI of those who left in 2018 was approximately $85,000, while those who entered the state had incomes of just $66,000.

    • The wealth gap between residents leaving and coming to Illinois has more than tripled since 2000. In 2000, those moving into Illinois earned on average $5,000 less than those leaving Illinois. In 2018, the gap is now nearly $19,000.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Net Loser to 43 States

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    • Illinois was a net loser of people to 43 states in 2018, while it netted gains from just six states. The total gain from those six states, however, was trivial – just 667 net residents. In contrast, Illinois netted losses of 88,664 people to the other 43 states.

    • Illinois’ biggest resident losses weren’t just to Florida and Texas, two of the nation’s biggest in-migration winners. Indiana and Wisconsin were the second and fourth largest net winners of Illinois’ residents.

    • All of Illinois’ neighbors netted gains vs. Illinois. Indiana gained nearly 26,000 Illinois residents but gave up just 15,000 of its own. That left Indiana with a net gain of nearly 11,000 residents vis-a-vis Illinois. Wisconsin ended up with a net gain of more than 7,000 residents vs. Illinois. Kentucky, Iowa, Michigan and Missouri all netted gains of 1,200 to 2,900 residents vs. the Prairie State.

    Any way the data is sliced, Illinois is chronically losing its population and its tax base. It is a national outlier along with New York, New Jersey and Connecticut. For full information on Illinois’ demographic and out-migration losses, see Wirepoints: Out-migration.

    The outflow is particularly alarming given the state’s pension shortfall, which is already the highest in the nation. As the state’s population and tax base continue to shrink, the risk of insolvency for the state continues to rise.

    And more tax hikes will only exacerbate the situation  Illinoisans already face the highest total tax burden in the nation, according to Kiplinger and Wallethub.

    Illinois’ legislature shows no signs of pursuing the spending and pension reforms needed to make Illinois competitive again. Until that changes, expect the Illinois exodus to only get worse.

    Thanks for Wirepoints for the discussion.

    Escape Illinois: Get The Hell Out Now, We Are

    On October 5, I announced Escape Illinois: Get The Hell Out Now, We Are

    We are moving to Southern Utah this year. Going house hunting in February (will rent for a year) and we will sell this one rather than trying to rent it.

    Property taxes are too much of a killer to keep it (as in ~$15,000 a year on a ~$400K home).

    Yikes. Had enough.


    Tyler Durden

    Fri, 01/03/2020 – 19:05

  • Round Two: US Drone Airstrikes Kill Six Pro-Iran Militia Commanders
    Round Two: US Drone Airstrikes Kill Six Pro-Iran Militia Commanders

    Whether he is eating ice cream or not, Trump appears to be on a rampage to recreate the end of The Godfather.

    Less than 24 hours after a US drone shockingly killed the top Iranian military leader, Qasem Soleimani, resulting in equity markets groaning around the globe in fear over Iranian reprisals (and potentially, World War III), the US has gone for round two with Reuters and various other social media sources reporting that US air strikes targeting Iraq’s Popular Mobilization Units umbrella grouping of Iran-backed Shi’ite militias near camp Taji north of Baghdad, have killed six people and critically wounded three, an Iraqi army source said late on Friday.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Iraqi official media has also confirm that two vehicles were targeted north of Baghdad, carrying commanders of the pro-Iran militias in the PMUs.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Two of the three vehicles making up a militia convoy were found burned, a Reuters source said, as well as six burned corpses.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    The strikes reportedly took place at 1:12 am local time.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    According to unconfirmed reports, a US MQ-9 Reaper drone targeted a convoy carrying several high ranking officials of PMU (Hashd al-Shaabi) in Taji, North of Baghdad. The casualties are said to be mostly among members of the IRGC-backed Asaib Ahl al-Haq. It is not known whether Qais al-Khazali is dead or alive.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Separate reports claim that Shibl al-Zaidi, a commander of Kataib Imam Ali brigades, an Iranian-backed militia and the PMU’s 40th Brigade, is among those the six who were killed in the strike.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Al-Zaidi was close (see on left) to Soleimani & Abu Mahdi al-Mohandis, both killed 24hrs ago.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    That said there are conflicting reports, with some noting that a Twitter account allegedly belonging to al-Zaidi tweeted that he is alive after the attack.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Additionally, Hamad al-Jazairi, the deputy leader of Saraya al-Khorasani, was also reprotedly among those killed tonight.

    In separate, unconfirmed reports, yet another airstrike is said to have targeted a convoy in Iraq’s Nineveh governorate.

    And so, with the US laying death and carnage from the sky across Iraq, reactions have ranged from the sarcastic and laconic…

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    … to the objectively concerned, with some wondering how much further is Iraq going to let US operate freely in country before they decide to kick their assets out? These airstrikes really make the Iraqi government look weak like they can’t deal with their problems by themselves, which may or may not be true, but the point stands.”

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Of course, the other point is when and how will Iran respond, as it is now clear that if Tehran does nothing it will only embolden the US to pick off its top generals one at a time, while any substantial escalation could ignite a regional war with even more dire consequences.


    Tyler Durden

    Fri, 01/03/2020 – 18:49

  • Why Is Ben Rhodes Suddenly So Interested In Congressional Authorization?
    Why Is Ben Rhodes Suddenly So Interested In Congressional Authorization?

    Authored by Kyle Smith via NationalReview.com,

    Former national security adviser Ben Rhodes, the architect of the Iran nuclear deal, purposely structured the JCPOA as a treaty that was not a treaty because he and his boss, President Obama, had no intention whatsoever of doing with the JCPOA what the Constitution mandates for all treaties, which is to obtain the approval of two-thirds of the Senate.

    Rhodes and Obama simply rammed through what was in effect a treaty without seeking the approval of even one Senator.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Yet here is Rhodes after the strike that killed Qasem Soleimani, the commander of the secretive Iranian Quds force that sows mischief (and kills Americans, and ordered the attack on the U.S. embassy in Baghdad) outside Iran’s borders.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Rhodes’s tweet is incomprehensible unless one or both of the following two conditions applies:

    1) Rhodes is very, very stupid;

    2) Rhodes thinks one set of laws and principles applies to presidents he likes and another set applies to presidents he doesn’t like.

    Congress gets to “assert itself” in the Trump Administration’s foreign policy? When Rhodes was in charge of President Obama’s foreign policy (a documentary showed him bossing around Secretary of State John Kerry), he not only didn’t solicit Congress’s opinion on Iran policy but took extraordinary action purposely to cut the Senate out of a matter of which it should have had oversight.

    Moreover, as David French at The Dispatch points out this morning, the strike that killed Soleimani actually was authorized under the Constitution because (as Rhodes may or may not remember) Congress did approve of U.S. military actions in Iraq. Those actions were re-authorized by the Obama Administration.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Whether the Soleimani hit was a good idea is worth debating, but President Trump did have the proper authority to order it.


    Tyler Durden

    Fri, 01/03/2020 – 18:25

  • Trump Jabs Dems Over Iran Reaction, Rages That 'Killer' Soleimani "Should Have Been Taken Out Years Ago!"
    Trump Jabs Dems Over Iran Reaction, Rages That ‘Killer’ Soleimani “Should Have Been Taken Out Years Ago!”

    Update (0900ET): President Trump has expanded his comments this morning, switching focus to Soleimani’s terrible deeds…

    “General Qassem Soleimani has killed or badly wounded thousands of Americans over an extended period of time, and was plotting to kill many more… but got caught!

    He was directly and indirectly responsible for the death of millions of people, including the recent large number of PROTESTERS killed in Iran itself.

    While Iran will never be able to properly admit it, Soleimani was both hated and feared within the country. They are not nearly as saddened as the leaders will let the outside world believe. He should have been taken out many years ago!

    *  *  *

    Having tweeted a patriotic US flag last night following the actions to assassinate Soleimani…

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    President Trump’s first direct tweet (he has retweeted numerous comments from others) since the attack is a clear jab at the Democrats over their actions (or lack of them) on Iran’s death-dealers…

    “Iran never won a war, but never lost a negotiation!”

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    This follows leading Democrats comments speaking from both sides of their mouths unable to praise Trump’s actions while admitting Soleimani was a very bad guy…

    Biden – who trump is clearly taking aim at – said the following…

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    And Warren followed a similar line…

    Soleimani was a murderer, responsible for the deaths of thousands, including hundreds of Americans.

    But this reckless move escalates the situation with Iran and increases the likelihood of more deaths and new Middle East conflict. Our priority must be to avoid another costly war.”

    We can’t wait to see what Schumer and Pelosi say.


    Tyler Durden

    Fri, 01/03/2020 – 18:22

    Tags

  • Rail Traffic Continues To Plunge Amid Industrial Recession
    Rail Traffic Continues To Plunge Amid Industrial Recession

    US freight railroads have long been used as a barometer of the country’s economic health, continue to show declines in traffic, suggesting the industrial recession could persist into 2020. 

    The Association of American Railroads (AAR) published a new report that shows US weekly rail traffic for the week ending December 21 was down 10.5% to 507,589 carloads and intermodal units compared with the same week last year.

    Total carloads for the week were 245,048 carloads, down 11.5% compared with the same week in 2018, while weekly intermodal volume was down 9.5% to 262,541 containers and trailers. 

    The AAR tracks ten carload commodity groups on a weekly basis — with Petroleum and Petroleum Products and Other segments showed marginal growth over the week as all other segments including Chemicals; Coal; Farm Products excl. Grain, and Food; Forest Products, Grain, Metallic Ores and Metals; Motor Vehicles and Parts; and Nonmetallic Minerals registered declines. 

    For the first 51 weeks of 2019, US rail traffic across all segments was 12,780,814 carloads, down 4.8% from the same period last year; and 13,550,432 intermodal units, down 5.1% from last year. Total rail traffic in the first 51 weeks was 26,331,246 carloads and intermodal units, a 5.9% drop over last year.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Canadian and Mexican railroads also reported traffic declines for the week and in the first 51 weeks as both countries are teetering if not already in a recession. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    North American rail volume for the week was down 9.2% to 350,256 carloads over the same week last year, and 348,566 intermodal units, down 8.2 % over the previous year. Total combined weekly rail traffic in North America was 698,822 carloads and intermodal units, down 8.7%. 

    North American rail volume for the first 51 weeks of 2019 was 35,963,299 carloads and intermodal units, down 3.9% compared with 2018.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    In a separate report, AAR described how 400,000 railcars currently sit in storage amid slumping rail demand. 

    But it’s not just rail traffic that is tumbling, class-8 truck orders collapsed last month, all of this is a symptom of an industrial recession that shows no signs of abating into 2020.


    Tyler Durden

    Fri, 01/03/2020 – 18:05

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Today’s News 3rd January 2020

  • Lessons Of The OPCW's Douma Gas Attack Report: When The Narrative Fails, Lie
    Lessons Of The OPCW’s Douma Gas Attack Report: When The Narrative Fails, Lie

    Authored by Robert Fisk via The Independent,

    In the very early spring of this year, I gave a lecture to European military personnel interested in the Middle East. It was scarcely a year since Bashar al-Assad’s alleged use of chlorine gas against the civilian inhabitants of the Damascus suburb of Douma on 7 April 2018, in which 43 people were said to have been killed.

    Few present had much doubt that the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), which represents 193 member states around the world, would soon confirm in a final report that Assad was guilty of a war crime which had been condemned by Donald Trump, Emmanuel Macron and Theresa May. 

    But at the end of my talk, a young Nato officer who specialises in chemical weapons – he was not British – sought me out for a private conversation.

    “The OPCW are not going to admit all they know,” he said. “They’ve already censored their own documents.”

    I could not extract any more from him. He smiled and walked away, leaving me to guess what he was talking about. If Nato had doubts about the OPCW, this was a very serious matter.

    When it published its final report in March this year, the OPCW said that testimony, environmental and biomedical samples and toxicological and ballistic analyses provided “reasonable grounds” that “the use of a toxic chemical had taken place” in Douma which contained “reactive chlorine”.

    The US, Britain and France, which launched missile attacks on Syrian military sites in retaliation for Douma – before any investigation had taken place – thought themselves justified. The OPCW’s report was splashed across headlines around the world – to the indignation of Russia, Assad’s principal military ally, which denied the validity of the publication.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Then, in mid-May 2019, came news of a confidential report by OPCW South African ballistics inspector Ian Henderson – a document which the organisation excluded from its final report – which took issue with the organisation’s conclusions. Canisters supposedly containing chlorine gas may not have been dropped by Syrian helicopters, it suggested, and could have been placed at the site of the attack by unknown hands. 

    Peter Hitchens of the Mail on Sunday reported in detail on the Henderson document. No other mainstream media followed up this story. The BBC, for example, had reported in full on the OPCW’s final report on the use of chlorine gas, but never mentioned the subsequent Henderson story.

    And here I might myself have abandoned the trail had I not received a call on my Beirut phone shortly after the Henderson paper, from the Nato officer who had tipped me off about the OPCW’s apparent censorship of its own documents. “I wasn’t talking about the Henderson report,” he said abruptly. And immediately terminated our conversation. But now I understand what he must have been talking about.

    For in the past few weeks, there has emerged deeply disturbing new evidence that the OPCW went far further than merely excluding one dissenting voice from its conclusions on the 2018 Douma attack.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The most recent information – published on WikiLeaks, in a report from Hitchens again and from Jonathan Steele, a former senior foreign correspondent for The Guardian – suggests that the OPCW suppressed or failed to publish, or simply preferred to ignore, the conclusions of up to 20 other members of its staff who became so upset at what they regarded as the misleading conclusions of the final report that they officially sought to have it changed in order to represent the truth. (The OPCW has said in a number of statements that it stands by its final report.)

    At first, senior OPCW officials contented themselves by merely acknowledging the Henderson report’s existence a few days after it appeared without making any comment on its contents. When the far more damaging later reports emerged in early November, Fernando Arias, the OPCW’s director general, said that it was in “the nature of any thorough enquiry for individuals in a team to express subjective views. While some of the views continue to circulate in some public discussion forums, I would like to reiterate that I stand by the independent, professional conclusion [of the investigation].” The OPCW declined to respond to questions from Hitchens or Steele.

    But the new details suggest that other evidence could have been left unpublished by the OPCW. These were not just from leaked emails, but given by an OPCW inspector – a colleague of Henderson – who was one of a team of eight to visit Douma and who appeared at a briefing in Brussels last month to explain his original findings to a group of disarmament, legal, medical and intelligence personnel. 

    As Steele reported afterwards, in a piece published by Counterpunch in mid-November 2019, the inspector – who gave his name to his audience, but asked to be called “Alex” – said he did not want to undermine the OPCW but stated that “most of the Douma team” felt the two reports on the incident (the OPCW had also published an interim report in 2018) were “scientifically impoverished, procedurally irregular and possibly fraudulent”. Alex said he sought, in vain, to have a subsequent OPCW conference to address these concerns and “demonstrate transparency, impartiality and independence”.

    For example, Alex cited the OPCW report’s claim that “various chlorinated organic chemicals (COCs) were found” in Douma, but said that there were “huge internal arguments” in the OPCW even before its 2018 interim report was published. Findings comparing chlorine gas normally present in the atmosphere with evidence from the Douma site were, according to Alex, kept by the head of the Douma mission and not passed to the inspector who was drafting the interim report. Alex said that he subsequently discovered that the COCs in Douma were “no higher than you would expect in any household environment”, a point which he says was omitted from both OPCW reports. Alex told his Brussels audience that these omissions were “deliberate and irregular”.

    Alex also said that a British diplomat who was OPCW’s chef de cabinet invited several members of the drafting team to his office, where they found three US officials who told them that the Syrian regime had conducted a gas attack and that two cylinders found in one building contained 170 kilograms of chlorine. The inspectors, Alex remarked, regarded this as unacceptable pressure and a violation of the OPCW’s principles of “independence and impartiality”.

    Regarding the comments from Alex, the OPCW has pointed to the statement by Arias that the organisation stands by its final report.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Further emails continue to emerge from these discussions. This weekend, for example, WikiLeaks sent to The Independent an apparent account of a meeting held by OPCW toxicologists and pharmacists “all specialists in CW (Chemical Warfare)”, according to the document. The meeting is dated 6 June 2018 and says that “the experts were conclusive in their statements that there is no correlation between symptoms [of the victims] and chlorine exposure.” 

    In particular, they stated that “the onset of excessive frothing, as a result of pulmonary edema observed in photos and reported by witnesses would not occur in the short time period between the reported occurrence of the alleged incident and the time the videos were recorded”. When I asked for a response to this document, a spokesman for the OPCW headquarters in Holland said that my request would be “considered”. That was on Monday 23 December.

    Any international organisation, of course, has a right to select the most quotable parts of its documentation on any investigation, or to set aside an individual’s dissenting report – although, in ordinary legal enquiries, dissenting voices are quite often acknowledged. Chemical warfare is not an exact science – chlorine gas does not carry a maker’s name or computer number in the same way that fragments of tank shells or bombs often do.

    But the degree of unease within the OPCW’s staff surely cannot be concealed much longer. To the delight of the Russians and the despair of its supporters, an organisation whose prestige alone should frighten any potential war criminals is scarcely bothering to confront its own detractors. Military commanders may conceal their tactics from an enemy in time of war, but this provides no excuse for an important international organisation dedicated to the prohibition of chemical weapons to allow its antagonists to claim that it has “cooked the books” by permitting political pressure to take precedence over the facts. And that is what is happening today. 

    The deep concerns among some of the OPCW staff and the deletion of their evidence does not mean that gas has not been used in Syria by the government or even by the Russians or by Isis and its fellow Islamists. All stand guilty of war crimes in the Syrian conflict. The OPCW’s response to the evidence should not let war criminals off the hook. But it certainly helps them. 

    And what could be portrayed as acts of deceit by a supposedly authoritative body of international scientists can lead some to only one conclusion: that they must resort to those whom the west regards as “traitors” to security – WikiLeaks and others – if they wish to find out the story behind official reports. So far, the Russians and the Syrian regime have been the winners in the propaganda war. Such organisations as the OPCW need to work to make sure the truth can be revealed to everyone.


    Tyler Durden

    Fri, 01/03/2020 – 00:05

    Tags

  • The World Of Wine: Visualizing An Industry Ripe For Disruption
    The World Of Wine: Visualizing An Industry Ripe For Disruption

    Winemaking is often thought of as a symbol of transformation.

    While the fermented drink dates back 9,000 years, Visual Capitalist’s Katie Jones points out that the wine market is now experiencing its own transformation due to technological innovation, and the introduction of new business models. Generating $370 billion in revenue in 2019, the global industry is expected to grow considerably over the next decade—but not as we know it.

    Today’s infographic from Raconteur explores wine consumption by region, and looks at how changing tastes are driving a new era of the millennia-old staple.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Will the industry continue to get better with age, or will it join the countless other industries that have fallen victim to disruption?

    The Wine Leaders of the World

    To start, let’s take a look at the countries around the world that have the biggest economic footprints linked to the trade and consumption of wine:

    Exports: Spain is the largest exporter of wine globally, producing 21 million hectoliters of volume in 2018, followed by Italy with 19.7 million hectoliters.

    Imports: Germany leads on imports with 14.5 million hectoliters of volume in 2018, while the UK is the second-largest importer with 13.2 million hectoliters.

    Consumption: The U.S. currently leads on wine consumption, with Americans drinking an average of 3.7 liters per person each year—generating almost $50 billion in revenue.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Currently, 80% of all wine consumed within China is produced domestically, and with a growing middle class, there is a huge potential for the Chinese industry to gain ground in comparison to other leading wine markets.

    Rapidly Changing Tastes

    While older generations prefer wine to other alcoholic beverages, spirits are the drink of choice for those aged 18 to 27. In fact, only 27% of this age group prefers wine to spirits or beer, meaning wine companies will need to adapt to these younger audiences and their differing values.

    Marketing could create an opportunity to connect with this audience in a more meaningful way, with packaging having the most potential to sway their decision making process by providing a number of unique benefits:

    • Sustainability
    • Smaller serving sizes
    • Portability

    Interestingly, canned wine is already a $70 million industry in the United States — and by 2025, it could make up 10% of total sales.

    New Threats to the Industry

    Along with changing expectations for packaging, millennials also crave new experiences, with more alternative options appealing to this age group, such as cannabis-infused beverages, craft beer, and whiskey.

    Dealcoholized cannabis-infused wine is a new product innovation that could also appeal to this audience and have direct implications for the industry—but while cannabis companies have shown an interest in the category, collaboration with the tech industry is proving to be the most transformative.

    When Two Valleys Collide

    Technology is squeezing every opportunity it can get out of the wine industry, impacting different parts of the supply chain.

    Winemaking

    Drones are making farms and vineyards across the globe more efficient, while new technologies used to improve harvesting, sorting, and filtration during the winemaking process are also cropping up and providing new solutions to antiquated problems.

    Consumption

    Traditionally, decanting wine has been a slow and delicate process. Smart wine decanters however, can expedite that process.

    These decanters use air filtration systems to remove impurities and enhance the aroma in just a few minutes—streamlining the decanting process, which typically takes around three hours.

    Impact on the Environment

    Industry experts predict that packaging such as edible bottles made from sugar substitutes, and compostable, non-plastic glass will replace glass bottles.

    Meanwhile, QR codes have the potential to replace paper labels on wine bottles entirely, and a growing number of wine brands are already using augmented reality to deliver more immersive experiences to end consumers.

    For an industry steeped in history and tradition, the future holds exciting potential for new innovations that will transform the way we look at wine forever.


    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 01/02/2020 – 23:45

  • Military And Political Trends Of 2019 That Will Shape 2020
    Military And Political Trends Of 2019 That Will Shape 2020

    Via Southfront.org,

    In the year 2019 the world was marked with a number of emerging and developing crises.

    The threat of terrorism, conflicts in the Middle East, expanding instability in South America, never-ending military, political and humanitarian crises in Africa and Asia, expansion of NATO, insecurity inside the European Union, sanction wars and sharpening conflicts between key international players. One more factor that shaped the international situation throughout the year was the further collapse of the existing system of international treaties. The most widely known examples of this tendency are the collapse of the INF and the US announcement of plans to withdraw from the New START. Meanwhile, the deterioration of diplomatic mechanisms between key regional and global actors is much wider than these two particular cases. It includes such fields as NATO-Russia relations, the US posture towards Israeli occupation of the Golan Heights, unsuccessful attempts to rescue vestiges of the Iran nuclear deal, as well as recent setbacks in the diplomatic formats created to de-escalate the Korean conflict.

    One of the regions of greatest concern in the world, is the Middle East. The main destabilizing factors are the remaining terrorist threat from al-Qaeda and ISIS, the crises in Libya, Syria and Iraq, the ongoing Saudi invasion of Yemen, the deepening Israeli-Arab conflict, and a threat of open military confrontation involving the US and Iran in the Persian Gulf. These factors are further complicated by social and economic instability in several regional countries such as Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and even Iran.

    After the defeat of ISIS, the war in Syria entered a low intensity phase. However, it appears that the conflict is nowhere near its end and the country remains a point of instability in the region.

    ISIS cells are still active in the country. The announced US troop withdrawal appeared to be only an ordinary PR stunt as US forces only changed their main areas of presence to the oil-rich areas in northeastern Syria. Washington exploits its control over Syrian resources and influence on the leadership of the Syrian Kurds in order to effect the course of the conflict. The Trump administration sees Syria as one of the battlegrounds in the fight against the so-called Iranian threat.

    The province of Idlib and its surrounding areas remain the key stronghold of radical militant groups in Syria. Over the past years, anti-government armed groups suffered a series of defeats across the country and withdrew towards northwestern Syria. The decision of the Syrian Army to allow encircled militants to withdraw towards Idlib enabled the rescue of thousands of civilians, who were being used by them as human shields in such areas as Aleppo city and Eastern Ghouta. At the same time, this increased significantly the already high concentration of militants in Greater Idlib turning it into a hotbed of radicalism and terrorism. The ensuing attempts to separate the radicals from the so-called moderate opposition and then to neutralize them, which took place within the framework of the Astana format involving Turkey, Syria, Iran and Russia, made no progress.

    The Summer-Fall advance of the Syrian Army in northern Hama and southern Idlib led to the liberation of a large area from the militants. Nevertheless, strategically, the situation is still the same. Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, formerly the official branch of al-Qaeda in Syria, controls most of the area. Turkish-backed ‘moderate militants’ act shoulder to shoulder with terrorist groups.

    Turkey is keen to prevent any possible advances of the government forces in Idlib. Therefore it supports further diplomatic cooperation with Russia and Iran to promote a ‘non-military’ solution of the issue. However it does not seem to have enough influence with the Idlib militant groups, in particular HTS, to impose a ceasefire on them at the present time. Ankara could take control of the situation, but it would need a year or two that it does not have. Therefore, a new round of military escalation in the Idlib zone seems to be only a matter of time.

    Syria’s northeast is also a source of tensions. Turkey seized a chunk of territory between Ras al-Ayn and Tell Abyad in the framework of its Operation Peace Spring. The large-scale Turkish advance on Kurdish armed groups was halted by the Turkish-Russian ‘safe zone’ agreement and now the Syrian Army and the Russian Military Police are working to separate Kurdish rebels from Turkish proxies and to stabilize Syria’s northeast. If this is successfully done and the Assad government reaches a political deal with Kurdish leaders, conditions for further peaceful settlement of the conflict in this part of the country will be created. It should be noted that Damascus has been contributing extraordinary efforts to restore the infrastructure in areas liberated from terrorists by force or returned under its control by diplomatic means. In the eyes of the local population, these actions have an obvious advantage over approaches of other actors controlling various parts of Syria.

    Israel is another actor pursuing an active policy in the region. It seeks to influence processes which could affect, what the leadership sees as, interests of the state. Israel justifies aggressive actions in Syria by claiming to be surrounded by irreconcilable enemies, foremost Iran and Hezbollah, who try to destroy Israel or at least diminish its security. Tel Aviv makes all efforts to ensure that, in the immediate vicinity of its borders, there would be no force, non-state actors, or states whose international and informational activities or military actions might damage Israeli interests. This, according to the Israeli vision, should ensure the physical security of the entire territory currently under the control of Israel and its population.

    The start of the Syrian war became a gift for Israel. It was strong enough to repel direct military aggression by any terrorist organization, but got a chance to use the chaos to propel its own interests. Nonetheless, the rigid stance of the Israeli leadership which became used to employing chaos and civil conflicts in the surrounding countries as the most effective strategy for ensuring the interests of the state, was delivered a blow. Israel missed the moment when it had a chance to intervene in the conflict as a kind of peacemaker, at least on the level of formal rhetoric, and, with US help, settle the conflict to protect its own interests. Instead, leaders of Israel and the Obama administration sabotaged all Russian peace efforts in the first years of the Russian military operation and by 2019, Tel Aviv had found itself excluded from the list of power brokers in the Syrian settlement. Hezbollah and Iran, on the other hand, strengthened their position in the country after they, in alliance with Damascus and Russia, won the war on the major part of Syrian territory, and Iran through the Astana format forged a tactical alliance with Turkey.

    Iran and Hezbollah used the preliminary outcome of the conflict in Syria, and the war on ISIS in general, to defend their own security and to expand their influence across the region. The so-called Shia crescent turned from being a myth exploited by Western diplomats and mainstream media into a reality. Iran and Hezbollah appeared to be reliable partners for their regional allies even in the most complicated situations.

    Russia’s strategic goal is the prevention of radical Islamists from coming to power. Russia showed itself ready to enter dialogue with the moderate part of the Syrian opposition. Its leadership even demonstrated that it is ready to accept the interests of other actors, the US, Israel, Kurdish groups, Turkey, Iran, and Hezbollah, if this would help in reaching a final deal to settle the conflict.

    Summing up the developments of 2019, one might expect that the current low-intensity state of the Syrian conflict would continue for years. However, several factors and developments could instigate the renewal of full-fledged hostilities:

    • A sudden demise or forceful removal of President Bashar al-Assad could create a situation of uncertainty within the patriotic component of the Syrian leadership;

    • Changes within the Russian political system or issues inside Russia which could lead to full or partial withdrawal of support to the Syrian government and withdrawal of Russian forces from Syria;

    • A major war in the Middle East which would turn the entire region into a battlefield. In the current situation, such a war could only start by escalation between the US-Israeli-led bloc and Iran.

    The Persian Gulf and the Saudi-Yemen battleground are also sources of regional instability. In the second half of 2019, the situation there was marked by increased chances of open military confrontation between the US-Israeli-Saudi bloc and Iran. Drone shoot-downs, oil tanker detentions, open military buildups, and wartime-like rhetoric became something common or at least not very surprising. The US, Saudi Arabia, and Israel point to Iran as the main instigator of tensions.

    Iran and its allies deny responsibility for the escalation reasonably noting that their actions were a response to aggressive moves by the US-Israeli-Saudi axis. From this point of view, Iran’s decision to limit its commitments to the already collapsed Nuclear Deal, high level of military activity in the Persian Gulf, shoot down of the US Global Hawk spy drone, and increased support to regional Shia groups are logical steps to deter US—led aggression and to solidify its own position in the region. Iran’s main goal is to demonstrate that an open military conflict with it will have a devastating impact to the states which decide to attack it, as well as to the global economy.

    The US sanctions war, public diplomatic support of rioters, and the Trump administration’s commitment to flexing military muscle only strengthen Tehran’s confidence that this approach is right.

    As to Yemen’s Houthis, who demonstrated an unexpected success in delivering retaliatory strikes to Saudi Arabia, they would continue to pursue their main goal – achieving a victory in the conflict with Saudi Arabia or forcing the Kingdom to accept the peace deal on favorable terms. To achieve this, they need to deliver maximum damage to Saudi Arabia’s economy through strikes on its key military and infrastructure objects. In this case, surprising missile and drone strikes on different targets across Saudi Arabia have already demonstrated their effectiveness.

    The September 14 strike on Saudi oil infrastructure that put out of commission half of the Saudi oil output became only the first sign of future challenges that Riyadh may face in case of further military confrontation.

    The unsuccessful invasion of Yemen and the confrontation with Iran are not the only problems for Saudi Arabia. The interests and vision of the UAE and Saudi Arabia in the Middle East have been in conflict for a long time. Nonetheless, this tendency became especially obvious in 2019. The decline of influence of the House of Saud in the region and inside Saudi Arabia itself led to logical attempts of other regional players to gain a leading position in the Arabian Peninsula. The main challenger is the UAE and the House of Maktoum.

    Contradictions between Saudi Arabia and the UAE turned into an open military confrontation between their proxies in Yemen. Since August 29th, Saudi Arabia has provided no symmetric answer to the UAE military action against its proxies. It seems that the Saudi leadership has no will or distinct political vision of how it should react in this situation. Additionally, the Saudi military is bogged down in a bloody conflict in Yemen and struggles to defend its own borders from Houthi attacks.

    The UAE already gained an upper hand in the standoff with Saudi Arabia in the economic field. This provided motivation for further actions towards expanding its influence in the region.

    During the year, Turkey, under the leadership of President Recep Erdogan, continued strengthening its regional positions. It expanded its own influence in Libya and Syria, strengthened its ties with Iran, Qatar, and Russia, obtained the S-400, entered a final phase in the TurkStream project, and even increased controversial drilling activity in the Eastern Mediterranean. Simultaneously, Ankara defended its national interests -repelling pressure from the United States and getting off with removal from the F-35 program only. Meanwhile, Turkish actions should not be seen as a some tectonic shift in its foreign policy or a signal of ‘great friendship’ with Russia or Iran.

    Turkish foreign policy demonstrates that Ankara is not seeking to make ‘friends’ with other regional and global powers. Turkey’s foreign policy is mobile and variable, and always designed to defend the interests of Turkey as a regional leader and the key state of the Turkic world.

    Developments in Libya were marked by the strengthening of the Libyan National Army (LNA) led by Field Marshal Khalifa Haftar and backed by the UAE, Egypt, and to some extent Russia. The LNA consolidated control of most of the country and launched an advance on its capital of Tripoli, controlled by the Government of National Accord. The LNA describes its main goal as the creation of the unified government and the defeat of terrorism. In its own turn, the Government of National Accord is backed by Turkey, Qatar, the USA and some European states. It controls a small part of the country, and, in terms of military force, relies on various militias and even radical armed groups linked with al-Qaeda. Ankara signed with the Tripoli government a memorandum on maritime boundaries in the Mediterranean Sea. Thus, it sees the GNA survival as a factor which would allow it to justify its further economic and security expansion in the region. This clash of interests sets conditions for an escalation of the Libyan conflict in 2020.

    Egypt was mostly stable. The country’s army and security forces contained the terrorism threat on the Sinai Peninsula and successfully prevented attempts of radical groups to destabilize the country.

    By the end of the year, the Greater Middle East had appeared in a twilight zone lying before a new loop of the seemingly never-ending Great Game. The next round of the geopolitical standoff will likely take place in a larger region including the Middle East, the Caucasus, and Central Asia.

    Consistently, the stakes will grow involving more resources of states and nations in geopolitical roulette.

    The threat that faces Central Asia is particularly severe since the two sets of actors have asymmetrical objectives. Russia and China are rather interested in the political stability and economic success of the region which they view as essential to their own political and security objectives. It is not in the interest of either country to have half a dozen failed states in their immediate political neighborhood, riven by political, economic, and religious conflicts threatening to spread to their own territories. In addition to being a massive security burden to Russia and China, it would threaten the development of their joint Eurasian integration projects and, moreover, attract so much political attention that the foreign policy objectives of both countries would be hamstrung. The effect would be comparable to that of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq on the US political and military establishment. The monetary price of these wars, the sheer political distraction, wear and demoralization of the armed forces, and the unfortunately frequent killings of civilians amount to a non-tenable cost to the warring party, not to mention damage to US international “soft power” wrought by scandals associated with Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib, and “black sites”. Even now, shock-waves in the US military hierarchy continue to be felt regarding the court-martialed senior-ranking US Navy “SEAL” commando charged for the wanton killing of civilians in Northern Iraq during the US military’s anti-ISIS operations.

    By contrast, this dismal scenario would be enough to satisfy the US foreign policy establishment which, at the moment, is wholly dominated by “hawks” determined to assure the continuation of US hegemony. Preventing the emergence of a multi-polar international system by weakening China and Russia is their desire. This sets the stage for another round of great power rivalry in Central Asia. While the pattern is roughly the same as during the 19th and late 20th centuries—one or more Anglo-Saxon powers seeking to diminish the power of Russia and/or China—the geography of the battlefield is considerably larger for it encompasses the entirety of post-Soviet Central Asian republics. Also included is China’s province of Xinjiang which has suddenly attracted considerable Western attention, manifested, as usual, by concern for “human rights” in the region. Historically, such “concern” usually precedes some form of aggressive action. Therefore the two sets of great power actors—the US and other interested Western powers on the one hand, with Russia and China on the other—are locked in a standoff in the region.

    The key security problem is militancy and the spread of terrorism. The US and its NATO partners remain unable to achieve a military victory over the Taliban in Afghanistan. The Taliban reached a level of influence in the region, turning it into a rightful party to any negotiations involving the United States. Nonetheless, it is unlikely that a fully-fledged peace deal can be reached between the sides. The Taliban’s main demand is the withdrawal of all foreign troops from the country. For Washington, conceding to this would amount to public humiliation and a forceful need to admit that the superpower lost a war to the Taliban. Washington can achieve a military victory in Afghanistan only by drastically increasing its forces in the country. This will go contrary to Trump’s publicly declared goal – to limit US participation in conflicts all around the world. Therefore, the stalemate will continue with the Taliban and the US sitting at the negotiating table in Qatar, while Taliban forces slowly take control of more and more territory in Afghanistan.

    Besides fighting the US-backed government, in some parts of the country, the Taliban even conducts operations against ISIS in order to prevent this group from spreading further. Despite this, around 5,000 ISIS militants operate in Afghanistan’s north, near the border with Tajikistan. Member states of the Collective Security Treaty Organization are concerned that ISIS militants are preparing to shift their focus to Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Armenia, and Russia. The terrorists are infiltrating CIS states, incorporating with organized crime, creating clandestine cells, brainwashing and recruiting new supporters, chiefly the socially handicapped youth and migrants, [and] training them to carry out terrorist activities. The worsening situation in Central Asia contributes to the spread of radical ideas. Now the main threat of destabilization of the entire Central Asian region comes from Tajikistan. This state is the main target of militants deployed in northern Afghanistan.

    Destabilization of Central Asia and the rise of ISIS both contribute to achievement of US geopolitical goals. The scenario could devastate Russia’s influence in the region, undermine security of key Russian regional ally, Kazakhstan, and damage the interests of China. The Chinese, Kazakh, and Russian political leadership understand these risks and engage in joint efforts to prevent this scenario.

    In the event of further destabilization of Central Asia, ISIS sleeper cells across the region could be activated and a new ISIS self-proclaimed Caliphate could appear on the territory of northern Afghanistan and southern Tajikistan. Russia and China would not benefit from such a development. In the case of China, such instability could expand to its Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, while in Russia the main targets could be the Northern Caucasus and large cities with high numbers of migrant laborers from Central Asian states.

    Armenia now together with Georgia became the center of a US soft power campaign to instigate anti-Russian hysteria in the Caucasus. Ethnic groups in this region are traditionally addicted to US mainstream propaganda. On the other hand, the importance of the South Caucasus for Russia decreased notably because of the strong foothold it gained in the Middle East. 2020 is looking to be another economically complicated year for Georgia and Armenia.

    Throughout 2019, China consolidated its position as a global power and the main challenger of the United States. From the military point of view, China successfully turned the South China Sea into an anti-access and area-denial zone controlled by its own military and moved forward with its ambitious modernization program which includes the expansion of China’s maritime, airlift, and amphibious capabilities. The balance of power in the Asia-Pacific has in fact shifted and the Chinese Armed Forces are now the main power-broker in the region. China appeared strong enough to fight back against US economic and diplomatic pressure and to repel the Trump Administration’s attempts to impose Washington’s will upon Beijing. Despite economic war with the United States, China’s GDP growth in 2019 is expected to be about 6%, while the yuan exchange rate and the SSE Composite Index demonstrate stability. The United States also tried to pressure China through supporting instability in Hong Kong and by boosting defense aid to Taiwan. However, in both cases, the situation appears to still be within Beijing’s comfort zone.

    An interesting consequence of US-led pressure on China is that Washington’s actions provided an impetus for development of Chinese-Russian cooperation. In 2019, Moscow and Beijing further strengthened their ties and cooperation in the economic and military spheres and demonstrated notable unity in their actions on the international scene as in Africa and in the Arctic for example.

    As to Russia itself, during the year, it achieved several foreign policy victories.

    • The de-facto diplomatic victory in Syria;

    • Resumption of dialogue with the new Ukrainian regime and the reanimation of the Normandy format negotiations;

    • Improvement of relations with some large European players, like France, Italy, and even Germany;

    • Implementation of the Nord Stream 2 project despite opposition from the US-led bloc;

    • Implementation of the Turkish Stream project with Turkey;

    • Strengthening of the Russian economy in comparison with previous years and the rubble’s stability despite pressure from sanctions. Growth of the Russian GDP for 2019 is expected to be 1.2%, while the Russia Trading System Index demonstrated notable growth from around 1,100 points at the start of the year to around 1,500 by year’s end.

    The salient accomplishment of the Russian authorities is that no large terrorist attack took place in the country. At the same time, the internal situation was marked by some negative tendencies. There was an apparent political, media, and social campaign to undermine Chinese-Russian cooperation. This campaign, run by pro-Western and liberal media, became an indicator of the progress in Chinese-Russian relations. Additionally, Russia was rocked by a series of emergencies, corruption scandals linked with law enforcement, the plundering of government funding allocated to the settlement of emergency situations, the space industry, and other similar cases. A number of Russian mid-level officials made statements revealing their real, rent-seeking stance towards the Russian population. Another problem was the deepening social stratification of the population. Most of the citizens experienced a decrease in their real disposable income, while elites continued concentrating margin funds gained through Russia’s successful actions in the economy and on the international level. These factors, as well as fatigue with the stubborn resistance of entrenched elites to being dislodged, caused conditions for political instability in big cities. Liberal and pro-Western media and pro-Western organizations exploited this in an attempt to destabilize the country.

    Militarization of Japan has given the US a foothold in its campaign against China, Russia, and North Korea. The Japan Self-Defense Forces were turned into a fully-fledged military a long time ago. Japanese diplomatic rhetoric demonstrates that official Tokyo is preparing for a possible new conflict in the region and that it will fight to further expand its zone of influence. The Japanese stance on the Kuril Islands territorial dispute with Russia is an example of this approach. Tokyo rejected a Russian proposal for joint economic management of four islands and nearby waters, while formally the islands will remain within Russian jurisdiction -at least for the coming years. Japan demands the full transfer of islands a term which is unacceptable to Russia from a military and political point of view. The social and economic situation in Japan was in a relatively stable, but guarded state.

    Denuclearization talks between the United States and North Korea reached a stalemate after the North Korean leadership claimed that Washington was in no hurry to provide Pyongyang with acceptable terms and conditions of a possible nuclear deal. The example of the US unilateral withdrawal from the nuclear deal with Iran also played a role. The positive point is that tensions on the Korean Peninsula de-escalated anyway because the sides sat down at the negotiation table. Chances of the open military conflict involving North Korea and the United States remain low.

    In February 2019, the Indian-Pakistani conflict over the disputed region of Jammu and Kashmir put the greater region on the brink of a large war with potential for the use of nuclear weapons. However, both India and Pakistan demonstrated reasonable restraint and prevented further escalation despite an open confrontation between their militaries which took place at the same moment. Meanwhile, the February escalation demonstrated the growing power of Pakistan. In the coming years, look to Jammu and Kashmir as a point of constant instability and military tensions, with very little chance that the sides will find a comprehensive political solution to their differences.

    The threat of terrorism is another destabilizing factor in the region. In 2019, ISIS cells made several attempts to strengthen and expand their presence in such countries as Malaysia and Indonesia. Law enforcement agencies of both countries are well aware of this threat and contribute constant and active efforts to combat this terrorism and radicalism. It should be noted that Malaysia is in conflict with the Euro-Atlantic elites because of its independent foreign policy course. For example, its government repeatedly questioned the mainstream MH17 narrative and officially slammed the JIT investigation as politicized and nontransparent. So, the leadership of the country is forced to be in a state of permanent readiness to repel clandestine and public attempts to bring it into line with the mainstream agenda.

    While the European Union is, theoretically, the world’s biggest economy using the world’s second most popular currency in international transactions, it remains to be seen whether, in the future, it will evolve into a genuine component of a multi-polar international system or become a satellite in someone else’s—most likely US—orbit. There still remain many obstacles toward achieving a certain “critical mass” of power and unity. While individual EU member states, most notably Germany and France, are capable of independent action in the international system, individually they are too weak to influence the actions of the United States, China, or even Russia. In the past, individual European powers relied on overseas colonial empires to achieve great power status. In the 21st century, European greatness can only be achieved through eliminating not just economic but also political barriers on the continent. At present, European leaders are presented with both incentives and obstacles to such integration, though one may readily discern a number of potential future paths toward future integration.

    Continued European integration would demand an agreement on how to transfer national sovereignty to some as yet undefined and untested set of European political institutions which would not only guarantee individual rights but, more importantly from the point of view of national elites, preserve the relative influence of individual EU member states even after they forfeited their sovereignty. Even if the Euro-skeptics were not such a powerful presence in EU’s politics, it would still be an insurmountable task for even the most visionary and driven group of political leaders. Such a leap is only possible if the number of EU states making it is small, and their level of mutual integration is already high.

    The post-2008 Euro zone crisis does appear to have communicated the non-sustainability of the current EU integration approach, hence the recent appearance of “two-speeds Europe” concept which actually originated as a warning against the threat of EU bifurcation into well integrated “core“ and a less integrated “periphery”. In practical terms it would mean “core” countries, definitely including Germany, France, and possibly the Benelux Union, would abandon the current policy of throwing money at the less well developed EU member states and, instead, focus on forging “a more perfect Union” consisting of this far more homogeneous and smaller set of countries occupying territories that, over a thousand years ago, formed what used to be known as the Carolingian Empire. Like US territories of the 19th century, EU states outside of the core would have to “pull themselves up by their bootstraps” to earn membership in the core, which would require them to adopt, wholesale, the core’s political institutions.

    The deepening disproportion of EU member state economies, and therefore sharpening economic disputes, are the main factor of instability in Europe. The long-delayed withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the union, which is finally expected to take place in 2020, might trigger an escalation of internal tensions over economic issues which might blow up the EU from the inside. Other cornerstones of European instability are the extraordinary growth of organized crime, street crime, radicalism, and terrorism, most of which were caused by uncontrolled illegal migration and the inability of the European bureaucracy to cut off the flows of illegal migrants, integrate non-radicalized people into European society, and detect all radicals and terrorists that infiltrate Europe with migrants.

    The situation is further complicated by the conflict in Ukraine and the destruction of international security treaties, such as the US withdrawal from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty and its planned withdrawal from the New START (Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty). These developments go amid constant military and political hysteria of micro-states and Poland instigated by the Euro-Atlantic elites. The EU bureaucracy is using this state of hysteria and ramping up speculations about a supposed military threat from Russia and an economic and political threat from China to distract the public and draw attention away from the real problems.

    The return of Russia as the diplomatic and military great power to Africa marked a new round of the geo-economic standoff in the region. The apparent Russian-Chinese cooperation is steadily pushing French and British out of what they describe as their traditional sphere of influence. While, in terms of economic strength, Russia cannot compete with China, it does have a wide range of military and diplomatic means and measures with which to influence the region. So, Beijing and Moscow seem to have reached a non-public deal on a “division of labor”. China focuses on implementation of its economic projects, while Russia contributes military and diplomatic efforts to stabilize the security situation, obtaining revenue for its military and security assistance. Moscow plays a second violin role in getting these guaranteed zones of influence. Terrorism is one of the main threats to the region. The Chinese-Russian cooperation did not go without a response from their Western counterparts that justified their propaganda and diplomatic opposition to Beijing-Moscow cooperation by describing Chinese investments as “debt-traps” and the Russian military presence as “destabilizing”. In 2019, Africa entered into a new round of great powers rivalry.

    The intensification of US “soft power” and meddling efforts, social, economic tensions, activities of non-state actors, and organized criminal networks became the main factors of instability in South America. Venezuela and Bolivia were targeted by US-backed coups. While the Venezuelan government, with help from China and Russia, succeeded in repelling the coup attempt, Bolivia was plunged into a violent civil conflict after the pro-US government seized power. Chile remained in a state of social economic crisis which repeatedly triggered wide-scale anti-government riots. Its pro-US government remained in power, mainly, because there was no foreign ‘democratic superpower’ to instigate the regime change campaign. Actions of the government of Colombia, one of the key US regional allies, undermined the existing peace deal with the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) and forced at least a part of the former FARC members to take up arms once again. If repressions, killings, and clandestine operations aimed at the FARC members committed to the peace continue, they may lead to a resumption of FARC-led guerrilla warfare against the central government. The crisis developing in Mexico is a result of the growth of the drug cartels-related violence and economic tensions with the United States. The right-wing Bolsonaro government put Brazil on track with the US foreign policy course to the extent that, the country worked with Washington against Venezuela, claiming that it should not turn into ‘another Cuba’. A deep economic crisis in Argentina opened the road to power for a new left-centric president, Alberto Fernandez. Washington considers South America as its own geopolitical backyard and sees any non pro-US, or just national-oriented government, as a threat to its vital interests. In 2020, the US meddling campaign will likely escalate and expand, throwing the region into a new round of instability and triggering an expected resistance from South American states. An example of this is the situation in Bolivia. Regardless of the actions of ousted President Evo Morales, the situation in the country will continue escalating. The inability of the pro-US government to deliver positive changes and its simultaneous actions to destroy all the economic achievements of the Morales period might cause Bolivia to descend into poverty and chaos causing unrest and possibly, a civil war.

    During 2019, the world superpower, led by the administration of President Donald Trump, provided a consistent policy designed to defend the interests of US domestic industry and the United States as a national state by any means possible. This included economic and diplomatic pressure campaigns against both US geopolitical competitors and allies. The most widely known Trump administration move of this kind was the tariff war with China. However, at the same time, Washington contributed notable efforts in almost all regions around the globe. For example, the United States opposed Chinese economic projects in Africa, Russia’s Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline in Europe, tried to limit exports of the Russian defense industry, pressured NATO member states who did not want to spend enough on defense, and proposed that US allies pay more for the honor and privilege of provided “protection”. Additionally, Trump pressured the Federal Reserve Board of Governors into lowering interest rates and announced plans to lower interest rates even further to weaken the dollar in order to boost national industry and increase its product availability on the global market. These plans caused strong resistance from international corporations and global capitalists because this move may undermine the current global financial system based upon a strong US dollar. This straightforward approach demonstrated that Trump and his team were ready to do everything needed to protect US security and economic interests as they see them. Meanwhile, it alienated some “traditional allies”, as in the case of Turkey which decided to acquire Russian S-400s, and escalated the conflict between the Trump Administration and the globalists. The expected US GDP growth in 2019 is 2.2%. The expected production growth of 3.9% reflects the policy aimed at supporting the real sector. In terms of foreign policy, the White House attempted to rationalize US military presence in conflict zones around the world. Despite this, the unprecedented level of support to Israel, confrontation with Iran, China, and Russia, militarization of Europe, coups and meddling into the internal affairs of sovereign states remain as the main markers of US foreign policy. Nevertheless, the main threat to United States stability originates not from Iranians, Russians, or Chinese, but rather from internal issues. The constant hysteria in mainstream media, the attempt to impeach Donald Trump, and the radicalization of different social and political groups contributes to destabilization of the country ahead of the 2020 presidential election.

    The year 2019 was marked by a number of dangerous developments. In spite of this, it could have been much more dangerous and violent. Political leadership by key actors demonstrated their conditional wisdom by avoiding a number of open military conflicts, all of which had chances to erupt in the Middle East, South Asia, East Asia, South America, and even Europe. A new war in the Persian Gulf, US military conflict with North Korea, an India-Pakistan war -none of these were started. A peaceful transfer of power from Petro Poroshenko to Volodymyr Zelensky in Ukraine allowed for the avoidance of a military escalation in eastern Europe. China and the United States showed their restraint despite tensions in the Asia-Pacific, including the Hong Kong issue. A new global economic crisis, expected for some time by many experts, did not happen. The lack of global economic shocks or new regional wars in 2019 does not mean that knots straining relations among leading world powers were loosened or solved. These knots will remain a constant source of tension on the international level until they are removed within the framework of diplomatic mechanisms or cut as a result of a large military conflict or a series of smaller military conflicts.

    Chances seem high that 2020 will become the year when a match will be set to the wick of the international powder keg, or that it will be the last relatively calm year in the first quarter of the 21st century. The collapse of international defense treaties and de-escalation mechanisms, as well as accumulating contradictions and conflicts among world nations give rise to an especial concern.


    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 01/02/2020 – 23:25

  • The Shocking Size Of The Australian Wildfires
    The Shocking Size Of The Australian Wildfires

    The devastating California wildfires of 2018 and last year’s fires in the Amazon rainforest made international headlines and shocked the world, but, as Statista’s Katharina Buchholz details below, in terms of size they are far smaller than the current bushfire crisis in Australia, where approximately 12 million acres have been burned to date.

    Infographic: The Shocking Size of the Australian Wildfires | Statista

    You will find more infographics at Statista

    Fires in remote parts of northern Russia burned 6.7 million acres last year, but most of the regions were sparsely populated and no casualties were reported.

    While the California fires of 2018 have long been put out and the Amazon fires have been reduced at least, Australia is only in the middle of its fire season. Ongoing heat and drought are expected to fan the flames further. This week, shocking pictures of bright orange skies in Queensland and flames ripping through towns captured the world’s attention.

    The bushfires grew more severe amidst a heatwave that saw Australia record its hottest day and simultaneously driest spring on record, according to The New York Times. New South Wales has been affected disproportionately, plunging Sydney into dark smoke in mid-December. Around 10 of the 12 million burned acres are located in the state.

    Bushfires frequently occur in Australia, with some years bringing more severe destruction that others. Scientists are claiming that in connection to climate change, fires will become more frequent and more severe when they happen.


    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 01/02/2020 – 23:05

  • Localism In The 2020s, Part 1 – The 2nd Amendment Sanctuary Movement
    Localism In The 2020s, Part 1 – The 2nd Amendment Sanctuary Movement

    Authored by Mike Krieger via Liberty Blitzkrieg blog,

    Many of you probably have heard of the second amendment sanctuary movement, which consists of municipalities and counties across the U.S. passing resolutions pledging not to enforce additional gun control measures infringing upon the right to bear arms.

    The current movement traces its origins back to Effingham County in southern Illinois, which passed a resolution in April 2018 calling the county a second amendment “sanctuary”, essentially a vow to ignore gun control legislation proposed by Illinois state lawmakers. This particular tactic gained traction not just within Illinois, where 67 of 102 counties have now passed similar resolutions, but throughout the country.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The movement started gaining more attention over the past couple of months following the blistering momentum it found in Virginia after Democrats won the state legislature in November. As of this writing, 87 out of Virginia’s 95 counties have passed such resolutions and it’s important to note that virtually all of them were passed in the two months since the election. In other words, this is happening at a very rapid pace.

    Before discussing the significance of all this, let’s address some thoughtful criticism of the movement from Michael Boldin of the Tenth Amendment Center. His primary point of contention is that the resolutions these municipalities and counties are passing — unlike immigration sanctuary ordinances passed in places such as San Francisco — carry no weight of the law.

    Specifically, they’re not passing ordinances, but rather resolutions, which Michael describes as “non-binding political statements.” In other words, it’s all just talk at this stage and he’s frustrated that much of the media coverage makes it seem what’s being passed is more concrete than it actually is. Although I disagree with his overall assessment of the importance of what’s happening, he makes many good points and puts some much needed meat on the bone of this issue for those getting up to speed. He published an instructive video on the topic, which I recommend checking out.

    Despite his legitimate criticisms, I believe the second amendment sanctuary movement is meaningful in the bigger picture of the nation’s emergent social and political evolution. Although it is indeed mostly just talk at this point, there’s nothing wrong with that. If you’re going to build a movement you need to start by talking and establishing some sort of consensus amongst your peers. More concrete steps can follow in the future. Don’t forget this is a learning process for many of the people involved, and many of those coming out to these city and county meetings likely never engaged politically in such a manner before in their lives.

    Moreover, if the goal from the start had been to pass ordinances that carry the weight of the law, the movement wouldn’t have spread nearly as fast. It wouldn’t have catapulted into the consciousness of so many across the country and I probably wouldn’t be writing about it right now. The fact that it’s largely just talk via county and city resolutions allowed the movement go viral in a short period of time, which is a fine strategy when it comes to something like this.

    That said, it’s important to note when it comes to something as serious as this — municipalities and counties vowing to refuse to enforce state and federal laws — the only thing that really matters in the end is how the public actually responds when and if the rubber meets the road. Are people willing to make major sacrifices like go to jail? That’s ultimately the most important variable in the end. What sort of fortitude do these local communities really posses on this issue, and how many are willing to engage in genuine acts of civil disobedience and sacrifice if push comes to shove. We simply don’t know.

    Even bigger picture, the second amendment sanctuary movement should be seen as a manifestation of a core trend I except to grow considerably in the decade to comelocalism. The people driving this movement aren’t petitioning Washington D.C. or even their state house, instead they’re looking to their friends and neighbors and taking a unified stand at the local level. Simply put, they’re attempting to take matters into their own hands as opposed to begging distant authority figures. This is in large part why their actions seem disorganized and unsophisticated; these are just regular people saying enough is enough, and in this case the line in the sand happens to be firearms.

    This goes against everything we’re taught. We’re led to believe we have representatives in D.C. that actually represent us and we just need to elect the right people to have our voices heard. This sounds good, but we all know by now it’s a lie. These largely rural Americans are finally starting to give up on this lie and are looking to local solutions because they have no other choice. It’s hard overstate how important this is. It demonstrates a new degree of political realism in the face of disconnected and unresponsive governments far removed from where they live. It’s people finally realizing they’re much better off connecting and working within their own communities to change things rather than groveling to self-interested, professional political crooks.

    Importantly, this is how it should be. If we’re going to crawl out of the mess we’re in it seems clear we need a different approach. Pretending all we need to do is “elect good people” to Congress or the Presidency is a slave mentality. The system itself is so completely corrupt and so explicitly rewards criminal and evil behavior, we need to start thinking and acting differently, which means focusing on what’s closest to home. Get your own house in order before trying to save the world.

    As stated earlier, the fact the second amendment sanctuary movement is grounded at the local governmental level (municipalities and counties), as opposed to the state or federal level, is extremely significant.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    It’s also crucial to see this in a much larger context. As the populace (across ideological lines), grows increasingly disillusioned with their complete lack of agency within our imperial oligarchy, engaged citizens will naturally shift focus toward the local level in pursuit of alternative avenues for change. Firearms is just one issue, but there are many more and the list is seemingly endless.

    In general, we need to stop believing in the fantasy that topdown change from Washington D.C. will magically fix the problems of such a geographically and politically diverse nation. It’s lazy, unrealistic, and more often than not dangerous. Change needs to start at home, and people will turn to localism out of necessity.

    More in Part 2…

    *  *  *

    Liberty Blitzkrieg is an ad-free website. If you enjoyed this post and my work in general, visit the Support Page where you can donate and contribute to my efforts.


    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 01/02/2020 – 22:45

  • Even More Colleges Are Now Taking Equity Stakes In Their Students As Tuition
    Even More Colleges Are Now Taking Equity Stakes In Their Students As Tuition

    The trend of colleges foregoing traditional tuition in favor of now taking an “equity stake” in their graduates looks like it is catching on.

    The idea was first floated by Milton Friedman back in 1955, who suggested an incoming sharing agreement between the universities and the graduates once they enter the work force and begin to earn a regular salary. This obviously shifts much of the liability to make “workforce ready” graduates to the institution. 

    The Wall Street Journal recently profiled 27 year old Alex Ross, who took advantage of General Assembly coding school’s $14,700 design boot camp. She hasn’t been able to find work yet, but that’s not bothering her, as she took advantage of General Assembly’s income-share-agreement program, which requires her to make monthly payments of 10% of her paycheck for 48 months – but only after she lands a job paying $40,000 per year or more.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    No matter how much she earns, her payback won’t exceed a $22,000 cap. 

    Ross said: “I considered taking out a loan, but didn’t want to start making payments right away. I didn’t want the pressure before I was employed full-time.”

    Tonio DeSorrento, co-founder and CEO of Vemo Education, a company that helps schools design and implement income sharing programs, said: “It’s not the best thing for everyone, every time. But the fact that the school stands behind its product serves as proof it offers value.”

    There’s now more than 60 universities that offer ISAs nationwide, including Purdue and the University of Utah. In the New York City metropolitan area, there is the Flatiron School and Holberton School, in addition to General Assembly.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Why might this process be working out so well, aside from its “free market” thinking? There’s been no federal laws defining or regulating ISAs, and terms vary widely. A typical university takes 2% to 10% of a graduate’s income for the first 5 to 10 years after graduation, starting as soon as the graduate lands a job paying at least $20,000 to $30,000.

    Total payback is often capped at 110% to 120% of the amount borrowed.

    Coding boot camps, like the one attended by Ross, mostly offer accelerated terms.

    …a graduate typically pays 10% to 15% of their income for the first three to five years after graduating, starting as soon as the person lands a job paying at least $40,000 to $50,000. Total payments are typically capped at 1.5 to 2 times the amount fronted.

    Whether an ISA costs more than a traditional student loan depends on how much the graduate earns.

    For example:

    …a student graduating with a traditional 10-year, $10,000 student loan with a 7.5% interest rate would make monthly payments of $117 until he or she paid off the loan. The payments would total $14,090.

    Graduates with an ISA for the same amount could wind up paying back anything from $0—if they never land a good-paying job—to $20,000 if they obtain a job earning $100,000 a year.

    “The lowest earners pay the least. It’s very progressive that way,” Mr. DeSorrento said. 
    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    And there have already been success stories, like Jane Zhu. Five months into a 10 month program from Pursuit coding school, she was applying to jobs. After finishing the program, she had a “near six figure job” already lined up as a junior software engineer. She pays back $900 a month and, while it’s a “squeeze” with two kids, she says it’s manageable and it’s “only for 3 years”. 

    Recall, we first wrote about this trend back in April 2019. Shortly after we wrote about an online software engineering school that was allowing students to pay their tuition by forfeiting 17% of their income after they graduated, we wrote about how the new method for funding college was starting to make its way to the mainstream. 

    Oh and, by the way – paging Neel Kashkari and Paul Krugman – if Friedman is right about this tuition model – what else do you think he could have been right about?

     


    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 01/02/2020 – 22:25

  • Doug Casey's Top 7 Predictions For The 2020s
    Doug Casey’s Top 7 Predictions For The 2020s

    Authored by Doug Casey via InternationalMan.com,

    The task is to make some predictions (although “forecasts” sounds more legitimate) about the Big Picture.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    OK, I’m game. Let’s write some plausible science fiction, with a tinge of horror story.

    #1 Demographics

    First, it’s good to remember that demographics have a life of their own. That’s not good from the point of view of those of us of European descent. We’re only 10% of world population and falling rapidly. Worse, it seems we’re responsible for all the world’s problems and therefore aren’t very popular.

    In Europe, I expect the ’20s will have a lot of mass migration, the largest in scale since the barbarian invasions of the fifth century. This time there will be millions, then tens of millions, of Africans coming across the Mediterranean, looking for a higher standard of living—like all migrants.

    In the United States there will be hundreds of thousands coming up from Central America. A Reconquista movement will develop, to make the Southwest Hispanic again. And young Chicanos and cholos won’t be interested in paying 50% of their incomes to support old white broads on Social Security in New England.

    Meanwhile, lots of Mohammedans from Central Asia will migrate north to Russia.

    Millions of Chinese will migrate to Africa. The reason for this is that the Chinese have lent scores of billions of dollars to Africans to build seaports, airports, roads, railroads, mines, and other infrastructure as part of their One Belt, One Road Initiative. They’re repossessing these assets and bringing in their own people in order to run them profitably—as well as disperse excess population.

    All of these things will be massively destabilizing.

    #2 The Greater Depression

    The consequence of scores of trillions of new currency units being printed around the world in response to the crisis that began in 2007 will be a catastrophic Greater Depression. Made worse by negative interest rates. Expect massive unemployment, high retail inflation, a collapse of the bond market, and a much lower stock market. Most important, expect a lower standard of living for the average American.

    #3 The Election of a Left-Wing Democrat

    One consequence of the Greater Depression will be the election of a left-wing Democrat, if not in 2020, then definitely in 2024. The US has been undergoing what amounts to a cultural revolution, because the universities, media, and entertainment have been captured by the memes of cultural Marxism. The last cultural revolution was in the ’60s. This one will be much more serious, with broader participation. In fact, the US is on the ragged edge of a civil war between the Red counties and the Blue counties. They don’t like each other and don’t share the same values. The best solution is separation.

    #4 China Implodes

    China is on its way to dominating the world this century. The changes in China over the last 30 years are both real and unparalleled in world history. But in the meantime, its financial system—starting with its banks—will implode. Mrs. Wong will be very, very unhappy to find that 50% of her savings has disappeared.

    #5 The United States Starts a Major War

    The US is likely to provoke a major war, partly in an attempt to unite a culturally divided country. But not just a sport war such as we’ve had in Iraq, Syria, and Afghanistan. Probably with China, possibly Russia or Iran. Perhaps with all three. The US won’t do well, since it will find that its aircraft carriers, F-35s, and the like are equivalent to cavalry before WW1 and battleships before WW2.

    #6 US Dollar Loses Its Top Status

    The US dollar will lose its preeminence and will be treated like a hot potato by foreigners. Trillions will flood back to the US in exchange for whatever is available: land, companies, what have you. This will help take domestic inflation to unprecedented levels. Meanwhile, China, Russia, and numerous other countries want to discard the dollar. It makes no sense to use the currency of your adversary—or enemy. Especially when all dollar transactions have to clear through New York.

    Foreign governments have been buying gold in anticipation of this. And the gold price will go considerably higher.

    #7 The Singularity

    But enough doom and gloom. On the bright side, we’ll approach the Singularity. Many technologies—including artificial intelligence, robotics, space exploration, biotech, genetic engineering, and nanotechnology—are advancing at the rate of Moore’s Law.

    As these new technologies come into their own over this decade, the changes they create will be on par with electrification, the automobile, the airplane, and the computer during the 20th century. But all this will happen in a decade or so. These things have the potential to transform the very nature of reality.

    What Should You Do?

    I can give you a lot of speculations. But in times of radical change the most important thing is to keep what you have.

    I suggest three simple actions. Diversify politically and geographically. Buy lots of gold and silver. Have a nice piece of productive land in a reasonably secure jurisdiction.

    And get yourself a nice widescreen to watch it all happen. You might as well be entertained…

    *  *  *

    The decade ahead is likely to be an increasingly volatile time. More governments are putting their money printing on overdrive. Negative interests are becoming the rule instead of the exception to it. One thing is for sure, there will be a great deal of change taking place in the years ahead especially for retirees, savers, and investors.

    Legendary speculator Doug Casey and his team released just released a timely report that outlines how to survive and thrive as the financial uncertainty continues to unfold around the world. Click here to download the PDF now.


    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 01/02/2020 – 22:05

  • Judge Exempts 70,000 Truckers From California 'Gig Worker' Law
    Judge Exempts 70,000 Truckers From California ‘Gig Worker’ Law

    A federal judge in San Diego has temporarily blocked California’s new ‘gig worker’ labor law from impacting some 70,000 independent truckers, ruling they would suffer ‘irreparable harm’ if their employers are forced to classify them as salaried employees.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    US District Judge Roger Benitez on Tuesday granted a temporary restraining order requested by the California Trucking Association while he decides on whether to issue a permanent injunction – noting that the association is likely to eventually prevail on its argument that California’s law runs afoul of federal law, according to CBS News. Benitez added that the injunction is in the public interest.

    The public focus of the law has largely involved ride-share companies such as Uber and Lyft and food delivery companies like DoorDash and Postmates, which have vowed their own challenges in court and at the ballot box. There are about 400,000 workers in California doing such “gig” work, according to various estimates. However, an additional 1.5 million workers in California, doing jobs such as cleaning, construction, building maintenance and trucking, are likely to feel its effects.

    The trucking association’s lawsuit, filed in November, said many truckers would have to abandon $150,000 investments in clean trucks and the right to set their own schedules in order for companies to comply with AB5, which the group says illegally infringes on interstate commerce. –CBS News

    Opposing the trucking association is Democratic Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez of San Diego, who says the state will continue to fight “to return jobs in the trucking industry to good, middle class careers.”

    “For decades, trucking companies have profited from misclassifying drivers as independent contractors, taking away rights such as meal and rest periods and fair pay,” she added.

    Meanwhile, freelance writers and photographers filed a lawsuit last month to block the law, arguing that it’s an unconstitutional violation of free speech and the media.

    On Tuesday, the American Society of Journalists and Authors and the National Press Photographers Association asked a federal judge to grant them a temporary restraining order while he considers a more permanent injunction in March. However, no date was immediately set for a hearing or decision by U.S. District Judge Philip Gutierrez in Los Angeles. –CBS News

    Uber claims the law doesn’t apply to its drivers, filing a Monday lawsuit along with Postmates to challenge the legislation.


    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 01/02/2020 – 21:45

  • "Unknown" Viral Pneumonia Outbreak In China Has Hong Kong, Taiwan Worried About SARS
    “Unknown” Viral Pneumonia Outbreak In China Has Hong Kong, Taiwan Worried About SARS

    Authored by Nicole Hao via The Epoch Times,

    Hong Kong and Taiwan are on high alert following a notice from Chinese authorities on Dec. 31 that 27 people contracted an “unknown viral pneumonia in the central city of Wuhan.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    With some netizens likening the epidemic to the deadly outbreak of the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) virus that killed almost 800 people in 2002-2003 after being covered up by Chinese authorities, the Hong Kong and Taiwan government have called for faster genetic testing after Chinese authorities said they were yet to confirm the cause of the outbreak.

    As China has the technology to identify viruses within 48 hours, the authority’s slow response has led many to be suspicious as to why the disease has yet to be identified.

    Emergency Notice for New Outbreak

    On Dec. 30, Wuhan city Health Commission released an “Emergency Notice About Unknown Pneumonia.” The notice said that several Wuhan hospitals had received pneumonia patients with similar symptoms and that no further details were available.

    The notice was soon spread by Chinese netizens via different social media platforms. Although the government soon censored this information, the notice was broadly spread among overseas Chinese communities.

    On Dec. 31, state-run media confirmed the outbreak but also did not have any information about the cause of the infections.

    The report said patients’ symptoms included fever, having difficulty breathing and invasive lesions in both lungs. 27 people from Wuhan had fallen ill, with seven of them in serious condition.

    Most of the patients were sellers at the Huanan Seafood Market located close to Hankou Railway Station in the city’s Jianghan district. That same market was linked to all SARS cases seen in Wuhan in 2003. The market is not limited to selling seafood, netizens said, but also sees various animals including cats, snakes, and marmots.

    The notice added that hospitals were planning to release two of the 27 infected people in the next few days after some more treatment, while 18 other patients are in a stable condition.

    The state-run People’s Daily reported on the afternoon of Dec. 31 that the initial investigating team didn’t find an obvious human-to-human transmission, and that so far, no medical staff have been infected.

    “The cause of the disease is not clear,” the newspaper said on the popular social media platform Weibo, citing unnamed hospital officials.

    “We cannot confirm it is what’s being spread online, that it is SARS virus. Other severe pneumonia is more likely.”

    The Chinese National Health Commission, a cabinet-level executive department for sanitation and health, said it has sent a group of experts to Wuhan on Dec. 31 to lead more tests and another investigation.

    Meanwhile, Hong Kong and Taiwan have stepped up border screening and hospitals are on alert.

    Hong Kong

    Every day, there are four trains that run between Hong Kong and Wuhan. As a result, the presence of the disease in Wuhan has Hongkongers worried.

    David Hui Shu-cheong, a professor of respiratory medicine at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, told local media on Dec. 31 that the critical situation of Wuhan’s viral pneumonia reminded him of what Hong Kong faced with SARS in 2003.

    Hui pointed out that in 2003, one out of four SARS patients was in serious condition. He said mainland authorities should arrange virus tests as soon as possible. Meanwhile, people should wear a facial mask and wash their hands frequently if they plan to go to Wuhan, he added.

    Yuen Kwok-yung, microbiology professor at Hong Kong University, tried to calm down the public after acknowledging that the outbreak had similarities to the 1997 outbreak of bird flu and the 2003 outbreak of SARS.

    He said at a government-organized press conference on Dec. 31:

    “Now in Hong Kong and the mainland, the protection is better than 2003 … So I think people shouldn’t panic but must be alert, must follow the instructions from Hong Kong’s Department of Health and Hospital Authority.”

    Taiwan

    Fears about the disease has been a topic of great concern in Taiwan. People are worried that with the Chinese New Year holiday on Jan. 25, there is a heightened risk that the virus may be spread by Taiwanese businessmen returning from China.

    Taiwan’s Centers for Disease Control (CDC) organized a press conference on the afternoon of Dec. 31. Lo Yi-Chun, the CDC’s deputy director, gave a briefing on the situation and said the agency had sent an inquiry email to China requesting information.

    Lo said that once the Wuhan side has confirmed the type of virus, the Taiwanese government will set up an emergency working team to coordinate departments reacting to possible infections.

    On Jan. 2, Taiwan News reported that a 6-year-old child who arrived in Taiwan on Dec. 31 after passing through Wuhan has developed a fever and is being closely monitored. However, the child was allowed to go home as they had not been traveling in Wuhan and had not been in contact with animals.

    Since the first SARS epidemic, no additional cases of the virus have been reported so far worldwide.

    The virus was first discovered in China’s Guangdong province in 2002, after which it spread to Hong Kong and other cities. At least 1,755 Hongkongers became infected with the SARS virus, of which 299 died. In neighboring Taiwan, 307 people contracted the virus, of which 47 died.

    Globally, a total of 8,096 people from 31 countries contracted SARS, including Singapore, the United States, the United Kingdom, Germany, Australia, and the Philippines.

    There is currently no cure for SARS.

    *  *  *

    Media outlets in America are dividing our nation by pushing false narratives and spinning the facts. Honest news, without hidden agendas or corporate control, is now more crucial than ever. The Epoch Times’ operating revenue is generated mostly from subscriptions. When you subscribe, you’re supporting their Mission of Upholding Independent, Honest and Traditional Journalism.


    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 01/02/2020 – 21:25

  • Oil & Gold Spike, Stocks Slip On Reports Iran's Top Military Commander Killed
    Oil & Gold Spike, Stocks Slip On Reports Iran’s Top Military Commander Killed

    Following reports that Iran’s most senior elite military commander, IRGC Quds Force chief Qasem Suleimani, has been killed (reportedly assassinated by a US airstrike), global markets are starting to react.

    Oil prices are spiking (but we suspect have a lot more to go)…markets are just waking up to the consequences of this action!

    Brent…

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    WTI…

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    And gold is bid on safe-haven flows…

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    As stocks sink…

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    This is far from over.


    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 01/02/2020 – 21:08

  • Commercial And Industrial Loan Growth Stalls Amid Manufacturing Recession
    Commercial And Industrial Loan Growth Stalls Amid Manufacturing Recession

    New Federal Reserve data shows commercial and industrial loan growth weakened in 2H19, an indication the industrial recession continues to plague the overall US economy.

    C&I loans rose 1.6% in Dec. to $2.4 trillion, with most of the growth seen in the first half of the year. As for 2H19, no “green shoots” have yet materialized in industrials.

    The Financial Times said commercial real estate lending marginally increased at smaller to mid-sized banks but dipped at larger ones.

    Decelerating C&I loan growth in 2019 is a direct result of an industrial recession that has been deepening in the back half of the year.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    C&I loan growth quarterly quickly decelerated in 2019 and has dove recently into a contraction.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    C&I loan growth yearly faded from a top in 4Q18 to levels that are considered stagnate in 4Q19.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Jennifer Piepszak, JPMorgan Chase’s CFO, said business confidence has perked up since a temporary trade war resolution was found in the fall, but uncertainty in an economic rebound remains.

    “Trade would, of course, top the list there, but the elections in the US will contribute to an uncertain environment in 2020,” Piepszak said.

    Refinitiv data shows that in 4Q19, capital expenditure by S&P 500 firms rose 1%, far from the 12% increase seen a year earlier – a clear sign that President Trump’s tax cut to boost the economy has been exhausted.

    CapEx is the primary driver of C&I loans. Still, with massive uncertainty in the global economy and a domestic slowdown that has resulted in an industrial recession, C-suite executives chose to buy back their stock rather than build factories.

    Brian Klock, a bank analyst at Keefe, Bruyette & Woods, said, “we’re just not seeing that big CapEx coming through,” and it could remain depressed in 2020.

    So far this year, C&I loan growth at the largest 25 US banks has been underwhelming.

    Brian Foran of Autonomous Research blamed the slowdown on the trade war.

    Foran also said low demand for credit in the oil and gas space was another significant contributor to the slowdown. 

    With CapEx spending unlikely to significantly turn higher in the near term, forcing C&I loan growth lower amid an industrial recession — the damage to the US economy has likely been seen. It could result in a low growth period in 2020.


    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 01/02/2020 – 21:05

  • "If History Is A Guide, The Market Peak Will Occur In Q1 2020"
    “If History Is A Guide, The Market Peak Will Occur In Q1 2020”

    Submitted by Joe Carson, former head of  Global Economic Research at Alliance Bernstein

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Two Equity Market Booms, Two Policy Paths

    Equity market booms are far from alike, and their symptoms and causes differ as well. In the past two decades there have been two fundamentally different types of equity market booms that resulted in the market valuation of US companies relative to Nominal GDP soaring to equivalent record highs. 

    Yet, during the dot.com boom monetary policy “leaned against the wind” whereas during the current equity market boom monetary policy has opted to “go with the wind.”

    Easy money policy can extend the life cycle of an equity boom, but at the risk of greater financial instability at some point for the simple reason easy money can trigger speculation and over-valued assets since it does not increase the economy’s long-term growth rate or the profitability of companies. 

    Two Equity Market Booms

    The US equity markets soared in 2019, with broad stock averages posting gains of 25% to 30%, extending a long advance in equity prices.  The surge in equity prices lifted the market valuation of domestic companies by estimated record $9 trillion over the course of 2019, pushing the total valuation to approximately $40 trillion at the end of 2019. 

    Measured in relation to Nominal GDP – a well-known metric to assess the over-or-under valuation of the overall stock market – the market valuation of domestic companies stood at 1.85X at the end of 2019, near the upper end of its long run average.

    A similar level of the market valuation of domestic companies to Nominal GDP occurred at the end of the dot.com boom. Fueled by speculation that a new business model (internet) would result in large gains in future profits investors’ poured huge sums of money into new start-ups driving 20% to 30% gains in the broad equity markets for five consecutive years. At the peak of the tech boom in Q1 2000 the market valuation of domestic companies to Nominal GDP stood at a record high of 1.86x – a level that appears to be reached again at the end of 2019.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The dot.com equity boom of the late 1990s and the current equity market boom have little in common. To be fair, powerful common elements of liquidity and optimism about future profits are key factors in both cycles, but the dot.com liquidity engine was not sourced by easy money, whereas the current equity cycle is.

    Two Policy Paths

    During the dot.com boom the target of the federal funds rate averaged 5.5%, with a range of 4.75% to 6.5%, running 250 to 300 basis points over underlying inflation. Compare that to the zero to 2% target of fed funds for the past several years, and a fed funds rate that consistently ran below underlying inflation. 

    And, most importantly, the different monetary policy regimes are most extreme at the highest points of the relative market valuations. To be sure, at the peak valuation of the dot.com equity boom in 2000 policymakers were raising official rates, or “leaning against the wind” trying to dampen the wealth effect in the economy. Compare that to 2019 when policymakers faced with similar jobless and underlying inflation stats of 2000, decided to lower official rates, or in other words, “go with the wind”.

    In reality, monetary policy can contribute to an equity market boom by holding rates low, or cutting them as what occurred in 2019, causing investors to demand less compensation for risk, inflating the prices of assets in the process. Yet, historical evidence is unambiguous that easy money contributes nothing to long-term economic growth or operating profits of companies, but can and has triggered financial instability. 

    Presiding over one stock market boom (and bust) that was not fueled by easy money could be seen as bad luck. But presiding over a second one that is fueled by easy money smacks of negligence since one of the mandates of monetary policy is to ensure financial stability.

    Policymakers appear to be in no rush to reverse the policy actions of 2019 so the current equity bull market will continue to run. Yet, the odds of a policy mistake are rising and the safety valve of easy money for the equity market is limited as well. And if history proves to be a reliable guide the equity market peak will occur in Q1 2020. 


    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 01/02/2020 – 20:45

  • Baltic Index Has Worst Day In Six Years – Vessel Demand Sinks As Front-Loading Ends 
    Baltic Index Has Worst Day In Six Years – Vessel Demand Sinks As Front-Loading Ends 

    The Baltic Dry Index (BDI), a composite of the Capesize, Panamax and Supramax time charter averages, recorded its most significant one-day percentage drop in six years, reported Reuters

    BDI was pressured 10.5% on Thursday thanks to waning demand for dry bulk vessels. It was the most significant one-day percentage drop since January 2014. The index fell 114 points to 976 points, the lowest print since May 2019. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    “Some of it represents the fact that it is the first quoting for almost a week now. We expect a bit more softness to come around and we see … China as the main locomotive behind this,” Peter Sand, the chief shipping analyst at BIMCO, told Reuters. 

    It wasn;t just the headline Baltic Dry Index (h/t @JHannisdahl):

    • Capesize -16.47% to $11,976

    • Panamax -13.76% to $7,695

    • Supramax 58k tons -9.11% to $7,539

    • Handysize -9.21% to $6,410

    “The market as such is not strong in a fundamental way,” Sand said, adding that the global economy will continue to weaken into 2020. 

    Slowing demand for bulk carriers could be due to the decline in firms’ front-loading goods ahead of tariff deadlines as trade resolutions have been found between the US and China. 

    Chinese firms and US importers rushed to ship goods to the US through 1Q19 to Septemeber as the US and China were engaged in a tit-for-tat trade war. The implementation of tariffs by both countries on billions of dollars in goods forced importers and exporters to increase outbound and inbound delivers before tariff deadlines went into effect. 

    As a result of trade policy change, demand for bulk carriers increased throughout the year, raising the Baltic index +318% from January to Septemeber. With a possible trade resolution and the need to front-load has subsided, the dry bulk index topped out in September and has plunged 61% in the last three months. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Front-loading also gave the economy a boost, but since that has ended, the US economy continues to decelerate into 2020. 

    The JP Morgan Global Manufacturing PMI printed at 50.1 in December, versus a 50.3 in November, suggesting a global slowdown will continue into 2020. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Plunging shipping rates and waning global manufacturing data signals the world has entered a period of low-growth, and the probability of a massive economic rebound in early 2020 is unlikely.


    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 01/02/2020 – 20:25

  • Iran's Top Military Commander, Qasem Suleimani, Assassinated In US Airstrike
    Iran’s Top Military Commander, Qasem Suleimani, Assassinated In US Airstrike

    LIVE FEED:

    Update 3: The Pentagon has confirmed that Soleimani was killed at the direction of President Trump in what it termed a “defensive action” as per the following statement:

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    And while Trump has yet to make a statement, shortly after the news of Suleimani’s death, the president tweeted an American flag with no commentary:

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    * * *

    Update 2It’s official — unbelievable as it is  first Iraqi state TV, and then Iran TV too, announced the death of Iran’s most senior elite military commander, IRGC Quds Force chief Qasem Suleimani:

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    This is the spark that could set the whole region on fire, given Suleimani is Iran’s most important, visible and powerful military leader.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Journalists are circulating graphic photos of the blast aftermath, seeking on the ground confirmation of Suleimani’s identity:

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    It appears Iranian officials have begun circulating condolences, acknowledging his death.

    At the beginning of the last decade, when Gen. Suleimani began becoming a more visible and powerful face of influence in Iran and across the Middle East, one former CIA officer cited in a New Yorker biographical piece on him referred to the IRGC commander as the “most powerful operative in the Middle East today.”

    As leader of the Revolutionary Guards’ most elite Quds force, he directed all unconventional warfare and intelligence activities abroad. For that reason Washington and Tel Aviv had long considered him threat #1 within the Iranian military command structure. 

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    With war in the Middle East now virtually inevitable, here is the latest US naval deployment as of Jan 2:

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    * * *

    updateIt appears the ‘mystery’ strike which took out vehicles along the perimeter of Baghdad International Airport in the early morning hours of Friday was actually a US targeted assassination

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    There are even significant but as yet completely unconfirmed rumors, some coming from of a well-known BBC Iran reporter and other regional sources, that Iran’s most senior military commander, the IRGC’s Quds Force chief Qasem Suleimani was taken out in the hit, which appears to have been an airstrike.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    According to Stars and Stripes:

    An early-morning strike hit the Baghdad International Airport perimeter, near the air cargo terminal, the Iraqi government said Friday.

    The attack, which set two cars ablaze, apparently occurred at about 1 a.m. Social media users posted hearing the explosions, then the sounds of military aircraft.

    The Iraqi defense ministry’s security information cell confirmed the strike about 45 minutes later, posting photos of the burning vehicles on its Facebook page and attributing the damage to a rocket attack.

    Later, security sources told local media a strike hit two vehicles, killing Mohammed Redha, a senior member of Iraq’s Popular Mobilization Units — an umbrella group that includes Iran-backed Shiite militias with close ties to Iran and other militias that have fought the Islamic State group since 2014. Other PMU members and “guests” were also killed, the PMU said.

    Just who those “guests” were remains the major question as huge rumors of Qasem Suleimani’s death continue to spread, however unlikely.

    It true this could be the spark that ignites WWIII in the region, given Suleimani is Iran’s most important and powerful military leader.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    * * *

    earlier:

    At a moment tensions are on edge after pro-Iran militia protesters attacked and set fire to the outside of the US embassy compound in Baghdad’s Green Zone earlier this week, another major incident is developing overnight.

    Reuters and Al Jazeera are reporting that at least three missiles struck on or near a base that houses American and Iraqi counter-terrorism forces in the early Friday morning hours at Baghdad International Airport. 

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    All civilian flights have been canceled as US military helicopters were also seen patrolling the skies in the immediate aftermath.

    Al Jazeera has cited Iraqi security sources to say that though the rocket attacks appeared to have targeted a joint US-Iraqi training base within the sprawling airport perimeter. At lease one of the projectiles landed near a passenger terminal, causing an immediate shutdown of the civilian side of the airport.  

    It is the second such rocket attack on the airport in under a month, after on Dec.9 four projectiles were launched on the facility, targeting the US-Iraqi base on the property.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Vehicles at the airport were filmed exploding as a result of the attack, and there are conflicting reports of possible civilian casualties. 

    Kurdistan24 journalist Barzan Sadiq has said at least one civilian was killed in the attack with more injured, as well as multiple Iraqi military personnel among the wounded. 

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    While details are as yet unclear and unconfirmed at this point, Reuters did confirm the following per local security authorities:

    Three Katyusha rockets fell on Baghdad International Airport, the military-run Security Media Cell said in a statement on early Friday.

    The rockets landed near the air cargo terminal, burning two vehicles and injuring several citizens, Security Media Cell added.

    Earlier in the day Defense Secretary Mark Esper put Iran and its proxies on notice, saying the US is prepared to launch “pre-emptive action” if American troops and interests come under threat. 

    developing…


    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 01/02/2020 – 20:17

  • The Most Absurd PC Moments Of The 2010s
    The Most Absurd PC Moments Of The 2010s

    Authored by Katherine Timpf via NationalReview.com,

    A lot has happened in the last decade – including a lot of things being called racist, sexist, offensive, or insensitive.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Here, in no particular order, are 24 of the most absurdly politically correct moments of the decade:

    1. A college diversity-training course taught that it was culturally insensitive to expect people to be on time. 

    A Clemson University training course taught its attendees that it is offensive to expect people to be on time, because “time may be considered fluid” in other cultures.-

    2. The phrase “trigger warning” was deemed a trigger.

    According to a piece in Everyday Feminism, “trigger warning” is actually in itself a trigger — because it could “be re-traumatizing for folks who have suffered military, police, and other forms of violence.” (The piece recommended using “content warning” instead.)

    3. A professor was accused of sexual harassment for saying that effort is 10 percent of the grade. 

    A Brooklyn College of City University of New York professor says he was forced to change his syllabus after he was accused of “sexual harrassment” for stating that effort was 10 percent of the grade.

    4. A campus survey included a trigger warning to caution college students that it may contain “anatomical names of body parts.”

    The survey was distributed at several major universities — because, apparently, college students just might not be able to handle the kinds of words that most kids hear in their middle-school biology classes.

    5. University researchers demanded that we accept people who “identify as real vampires.”

    Apparently, it’s the least we can do to prevent anti-vampire discrimination.

    6. A Seattle-area councilman was concerned about the city hosing poop off of its sidewalks because he thought that it might seem too racially insensitive.

    The area in question reportedly stank like “urine and excrement” — but one councilman was worried that hosing it down could be a microaggression.

    7. A bathing-suit advertisement was criticized for being “sexist” because it depicted a woman in a bathing suit.

    I thought it was normal for product advertisements to depict the product that they’re selling — but apparently, I was wrong.

    8. Some feminists decided that “pussyhats” were both racist and transphobic. 

    Why? Well, because not all women have vaginas, and not all vaginas are pink, of course.

    9. A professor claimed that the small chairs in preschools are sexist, “disempowering,” and “problematic.” 

    Apparently, it makes no difference that preschoolers are small people.

    10. College students decided against bringing a camel to school for a “Hump Day” event, due to concerns about racism.

    Students at the University of St. Thomas in Minnesota were worried that the presence of a camel might offend Middle Eastern students.

    11. A school in Seattle reportedly insisted that Easter eggs be called “spring spheres.”

    Maybe calling them, simply, “eggs” would still have been too religious? Hard to say.

    12. A group of Berkeley students insisted that they could not take their in-class exam due to their lack of privilege. 

    Apparently, test-taking was just too emotionally taxing for some University of Berkeley students to be able to handle.

    13. The phrase “long time, no see” was reportedly declared to be “derogatory” toward Asians. 

    A student at Colorado State University said she was told that she shouldn’t use the phrase — despite the fact that even NPR admits that “it is so widespread as a greeting that there’s nothing to indicate the term’s origins, be they Native American or Mandarin Chinese.”

    14. A college newspaper changed its name from “The Bullet” because its editors were concerned that that name was too dangerous. 

    The University of Mary Washington changed its newspaper’s name from “The Bullet” to “The Blue and GrayPress” — because its editors were worried that the old name “propagated violence.”

    15. Lecturers were warned that capital letters might scare students and that they should avoid using them. 

    Journalism lecturers at Leeds Trinity University were instructed to avoid using all caps when communicating with students, because it might make them too afraid to do the assignment.

    16. A campus-wide email told white students to stop wearing hooped earrings, because doing so was cultural appropriation. 

    A resident assistant at Pitzer College sent an email to her entire school claiming that white girls wearing hooped earrings was offensive to “the black and brown bodies who typically wear hooped earrings.”

    17. A campus Christian club was found guilty of discrimination for requiring its leaders to be Christians. 

    Apparently, the Chico State University club’s rules violated a 2011 executive order.

    18. Oxford University law students were told that they didn’t have to learn about rape or violence law if they found it too triggering.

    Undergraduate law students were reportedly allowed to leave during any lessons about such material if they felt uncomfortable.

    19. The word “too” was declared sexist.

    According to a piece in the Huffington Post, the adverb has “deprived” “most women” “of self-satisfaction and appreciation.”

    20. A liberal author demanded that “normal people” avoid wearing any kind of red hat, because all red hats can be too scary.

    Sorry, Washington Nationals fans.

    21. Skinny eyebrows were declared “cultural appropriation.”

    Apparently, it is offensive to tweeze your eyebrows a lot if you’re not Latina. (Note: Thick eyebrow styles were called “cultural appropriation” during the 2010s, too.)

    22. Evergreen State University told professors to take student protesters’ feelings into account when grading them.

    Apparently, their “emotional commitment” to protesting should be taken into account when evaluating their academic work. (Apparently, grading classwork based on, you know, classwork would be too insensitive.)

    23. A lot of college kids were upset about The Vagina Monologues.

    Several colleges and universities either canceled or adapted performances of The Vagina Monologues over concerns about excluding women without vaginas. One school, Southwestern University in Texas, canceled theirs for another reason: because a white lady wrote it.


    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 01/02/2020 – 20:05

    Tags

  • "Their Day Is Coming, I Promise You": Durham Probe To Contain "Very Problematic Findings", Meadows Warns
    “Their Day Is Coming, I Promise You”: Durham Probe To Contain “Very Problematic Findings”, Meadows Warns

    Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC) sat down with Steve Bannon on Thursday’s War Room: Impeachment, where he suggested that US Attorney John Durham will uncover “very problematic findings” with the FBI’s counterintelligence operation against the Trump campaign – both before and after the 2016 US election.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    “When we look at the investigation that is going on now with Mr. Durham, he is finding things that will be very problematic,” said Meadows – who will not be seeking reelection in 2020.

    “And where they’re problematic is not just in the initial investigation, it is after January of 2017 before the president is actually sworn into office, they’re still operating on trying to take him down when they know they had no case,” Meadows added.

    Durham, appointed by Attorney General Bill Bar to examine the origins of the Russia investigation, has reportedly been focusing on former CIA Director John Brennan’s communications in regards to the January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment which concluded that Vladimir Putin meddled in the last election to help President Trump.

    Barr, who has been directly involved in the investigation, reportedly traveled to London over the summer to discuss matters with UK intelligence officials – telling NBC that he was there “to introduce Durham to the appropriate people and set up a channel through which he could work with these countries.”

    Meadows told Bannon that impeachment is about power dynamics between the establishment’s approach to foreign policy vs. President Trump’s agenda:

    “It’s a policy and power debate. I want to emphasize the power. This is all about are we going to let the American people along with their representatives and the President of the United States establish foreign policy or are we going to let the intel and national security apparatus continue to do whatever they’ve done for years which is not effective. That’s the reason why there was such a big pushback with Brennan and Clapper.

    He notes: “Their day is coming. I promise you. Their day is coming.” -War Room: Impeachment

    Watch:


    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 01/02/2020 – 19:45

    Tags

  • Does Bernie Sanders Want To Kill Pro Baseball?
    Does Bernie Sanders Want To Kill Pro Baseball?

    Authored by Chris Calton via The Mises Institute,

    Bernie Sanders loves baseball. He loves it so much, that when he learned of Major League Baseball’s decision to phase out 42 of their 160 minor league teams, he called for the government to pressure the MLB to keep the teams, protecting the jobs of minor league players while raising their annual salaries. He has suggested using the government subsidies to professional sports stadiums to compel the League to submit to his demands. But his goal is not to reduce corporate welfare (is it ever?) — he merely wants a business to maintain its unprofitable branches.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    It should be absurd enough — even to people who subscribe to Sanders’s socialist ideas — to say that the government needs to protect the jobs of people who play games for a living. Sports entertainment is certainly a valid economic good, but the most faithful apostles of state omnipotence should be able to recognize that salaried professionals for games is a remarkable luxury that few people can realistically expect to enjoy in any economy. Sanders also cites the community value of minor league baseball teams — romantically referencing his own personal memories — failing to realize that profits from attendance are the signal of how much a community values the franchise. It is as if Sanders is a better judge of what communities value than the citizens themselves.

    These obvious objections aside, Sanders thinks he is working to save baseball, but if he gets his way, his plan is actually likely to accelerate baseball’s decline (unless the government beefs up its subsidies for professional sports, which Sanders would undoubtedly support). The reality is that the minor league system is a relic of a society that consumed sports very differently from the way modern spectators do, and the decision to phase out minor league teams reflects these changes.

    Two American Pastimes

    Baseball’s popularity steadily grew throughout the late nineteenth century, leading to the development of several professional leagues. Athletic competition waged within each respective league, and economic competition waged between them. At the turn of the century, the two dominant leagues — the American and National Leagues — came to an agreement that allowed them to maintain some independence but brought the economic and athletic competition together. The leagues would continue to compete athletically in isolation, and the annual champions of each league would play each other in the World Series (the mid-season All-Star game was added in 1933, but interleague play in the regular season did not begin until 1997). Other leagues who failed to match National and American on the economic front survived as farm teams — the minor league feeder system for the majors.

    Although baseball continued to grow in the first two decades of the twentieth century, popularity exploded after rule changes shifted the dominance from the pitcher to the hitter, leading to power hitters such as Babe Ruth, who drew fans hoping to see him knock the ball out of the park. But fans had no way of witnessing these feats from home. If you wanted to watch the game, you had to buy a ticket and travel to the stadium — a significant barrier even for those participating in the automobile boom that was already underway. The best teams naturally made their homes in America’s largest cities where fans could walk to the stadium, and minor league franchises found a market in smaller cities whose populations still enjoyed baseball but were not large enough to support a major league team. Attendance was crucial to making the sport economically viable.

    The earlier football leagues attempted to follow baseball’s model, some even enjoying the backing of the MLB. But unlike with baseball, the market was tight. Contrary to popular conception, it was not so much that Americans had no taste for the sport, but that the dependency on ticket revenues limited leagues’ expansion. Football players were far more likely to sustain injuries during a game, and even when they didn’t, the sport was more taxing, so it was impossible to play one hundred forty games in a season, as baseball teams did in the early twentieth century. Playing a fraction of the games, football teams could not be profitable from home-game ticket sales, so leagues were small and geographically constrained to allow competing teams to share a field.

    However, while professional football was limited by these economic barriers, the sport was perfect for students. Universities are not unlike small cities, giving college sports teams an association to develop a fan base around. Baseball fans saw their team as representing their city; college football teams did the same for universities. The growth of college football mirrored that of baseball much more closely than professional football did, if on a smaller scale. The limitation here, of course, was that, prior to World War II, few Americans attended college. Football was by default a sport for economic elites while baseball was the populist pastime.

    In the 1950s, economic changes disrupted this trend. In the postwar economic boom, millions of middle-class Americans bought mass-produced homes outside of major cities, giving rise to the suburbs as a type of community that did not fully resemble the city or the country. Although the proliferation of automobiles made trips to the city more accessible, baseball had fewer fans in walking distance of their stadiums. For major league teams, of course, this was a less pronounced problem — more people were willing to make the trip to see a major league game, but minor league teams felt the change more dramatically.

    Television, though, most helped launch football to the top of the sports hierarchy in the United States. Football may not have been the most economically viable sport when revenues had depended primarily on live attendance, but the sport was perfect for television, whose revenue came from advertisements. Suburbanization and home television ownership grew in tandem. In 1950, Bob Levitt — a pioneer suburban developer — started advertising his $7,995 homes as including not only a refrigerator and a washing machine, but also a personal television. In 1948, less than two hundred thousand television sets were sold. In 1950, the number had grown to five million.

    By 1958, forty-two million households had a television set. This year proved pivotal for football’s popularity, as the championship game between the Baltimore Colts and the New York Giants — played in Yankee Stadium, indicating baseball’s surviving dominance — ended in sudden-death overtime, following an exciting eighty-yard drive to the winning touchdown for the Colts. The game earned the enduring title “The Greatest Game Ever Played,” and it did for football what Babe Ruth had done for baseball in 1919.

    Minor Leagues, Major Waste

    Baseball certainly benefited from the new medium as well, but it had developed in a way that made it comparatively less suitable for televised sports. Minor league teams were financially viable when live attendance was the only way for most people to enjoy a game, but televisions made it too easy for audiences to watch only the best athletes. The (modern) 162-game season also meant that fans were saturated with games, analogous to taking a popular Broadway show and televising it on repeat. Baseball’s live-attendance model was not built with the expectation that the same fans would attend every game. But TV made this possible. Television, combined with the high number of games in the baseball season, made it easy for fans to virtually ignore minor league baseball.

    The minors, of course, still served as a necessary nursery system, preparing players for the major leagues. Football, however, having grown predominantly through college sports, had a natural feeder system that required no financial support from the National Football League. The growing university system evolved as a de facto nursery that still enjoyed the live-audience support from students and local fans, and because both college and professional football played fewer games, each could attract a marketable television audience.

    By the 1980s, when college baseball started to enjoy its own rapid rise in popularity — even earning modest television coverage — minor league baseball began to look increasingly unnecessary. In fact, as Sanders himself inadvertently hints, government subsidies (including, significantly, support from municipal governments) have helped prop up both major and minor league franchises. Sanders fails to recognize that the necessity of these subsidies undermines his claim about the community value of the sports teams — if communities value them, they’ll buy tickets to the games.

    Apparently, what people really value is the ability to watch the greatest athletes from the comfort of their homes for free instead of paying to watch second-tier athletes live.

    The MLB is merely responding to customer demand by phasing out minor league franchises, and if Bernie gets his way — short of doling out more government largesse to franchise owners — his plan will not save baseball; it will help kill it.


    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 01/02/2020 – 19:25

    Tags

  • From Full House To The Big House? Lori Loughlin Learning Martial Arts As Trial Looms
    From Full House To The Big House? Lori Loughlin Learning Martial Arts As Trial Looms

    “Aunt Becky” from Full House is preparing for the possibility of doing hard time over the college admissions scandal, hiring a prison coach to train her on fighting and ‘prison lingo,’ according to RadarOnline.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    “She’s knuckling down, learning the lingo and practicing martial arts to give off the impression she’s tough and to ward off potential bullies,” an insider told Radar, adding that the 55-year old Laughlin “knows there will be plenty of them in federal prison.”

    Loughlin and her 56-year-old husband Mossimo Giannulli have been accused of paying $500,000 in bribes to get their daughters into the University of Southern California. They contend they are not guilty, and that federal prosecutors have intentionally withheld evidence in their case.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    They have been charged with conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud, honest services fraud, money laundering and federal programs bribery.

    “Prison is going to be sink or swim and Lori doesn’t intend to sit back and take the abuse without a fight,” the insider added.

    “Besides the physical training she’s getting lots of advice from prison professors on how to earn one’s keep behind bars … It’s a sure sign she knows deep down she’s facing an inevitable stretch and will need to be prepared.”

    Loughlin faces up to 45 years in prison if convicted on all charges – though the chances of this actually happening fall somewhere between slim and none based on the short sentences handed out to other offenders in the scandal. Loughlin faced two years under a plea deal she declined, according to TMZ.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The Full House star isn’t the only parent who though to prepare for the potential of prison life. As we noted last April, parents have been seeking advice from a former convicted felon, Justin Paperny, who now works as a “prison consultant”. He told CBS that he had been hired by one parent charged in the scheme, while he is “in talks” with others. 

    Loughlin’s trial is set for April 3.


    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 01/02/2020 – 19:05

    Tags

  • The Great Russian Election-Hacking Myth
    The Great Russian Election-Hacking Myth

    Authored by ‘TheDarkMan’ via TheDuran.com,

    The claim that Russia somehow interfered with the 2016 American Presidential election (and was thereby responsible for the ascent of Donald Trump) has been parroted incessantly by both the mainstream media and leading Democrats, including of course Hillary Clinton. While many people believe this claim, Mrs Clinton doesn’t simply blame Russia for her election loss but the world and his dog, as can be seen from the above cartoon.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Though we are now in 2020, many leading Democrats and a substantial tranche of the American media are still replaying the 2016 election, and if their attention has switched to Ukraine, their pronouncements contain the same inference, namely that Trump is being assisted by foreigners, and should he triumph again in November, his Presidency will still be illegitimate. What though is the evidence for Russian interference, and how was this interference carried out?

    The evidence, such as it is, is that a company/organisation called the Internet Research Agency paid for a number of advertisements on social media. This evidence is compelling, although anyone who has seen these advertisements can only wonder how they were supposed to have influenced the election to Trump’s benefit. Lee Camp has argued that the Internet Research Agency is nothing more than a troll farm that was generating memes in order to attract clients. In view of the puerile nature of some of these advertisements, it is difficult to disagree with him.

    In an earlier age, both the cinema and the Western press portrayed Russia agents as sinister and deadly men and women who would kill without conscience. They travelled on professionally forged documents, used sophisticated weapons, and were totally loyal to the Kremlin. Are we now to believe James Bond’s deadliest enemy is a troll who sits behind a keyboard all day long hoping to dissuade people from voting Democrat by posting cartoons augmented by subtle propaganda? Apparently so.

    There is also the little matter of the hacked e-mails, but these were not hacked from a US Government network, rather they were  from John Podesta’s Gmail account, and one of Hillary Clinton’s accounts hosted by her (illegal) private server. The hack of Podesta’s account was effected by a phisher. If you use e-mail a lot you’ll quite likely receive many such fake e-mails every week, although you may not notice those that are sent directly to your spam folder. Mrs Clinton’s account was hacked by someone in China, possibly an agency of the Chinese Government, though it would be just as unfair to point the finger directly at Xi Jiping as at Vladimir Putin.

    The other alleged hack was shown by William Binney to have been not a hack but a leak of information. The probable culprit was Seth Rich, who was murdered July 10, 2016 in strange circumstances.  Although claims about his murder have been dismissed as a conspiracy theory, any such theory is a lot more plausible than most of the garbage that has been peddled about Trump and the Kremlin.

    Is it then possible that Russia or any other outside agent could have interfered with the elections in a more direct manner, and could perhaps do so again? The only way to do this would be to tamper with the vote count electronically. It remains to be seen how this could be done, but as far as votes are tampered with at all, this appears to be a purely Democratic pastime. In June last year, under pressure from Judicial Watch, California began a purge of up to a million and a half “inactive” voters from its rolls. Why did it take a court action to compel this? Clearly because the people running this particular area – Los Angeles County – felt an unpurged roll was preferable to a purged one. Kevin McCarthy is the Republican Congressman for Los Angeles County; all the others are Democrats. Including Adam Schiff! Only two of the Districts fourteen senators are Republicans.

    While Russian interference with voting sounds and is extremely improbable, the actual hacking of American Government websites and those of commercial organisations is something that is done routinely by all manner of actors, not all of them hostile but clearly all of them unwelcome (with one exception).

    Here are a few examples:

    • In March 1995, a Russian by the name of Vladimir Levin rather than Vladimir Putin was arrested at Stansted Airport on suspicion of hacking into Citibank and stealing money,  a massive financial fraud. He was eventually extradited to the United States where after a plea bargain he was sentenced to three years behind bars and ordered to pay restitution.

    • Scotsman Gary McKinnon hacked into no fewer than 97 US military and NASA computers over a thirteen month period in 2001–2002. He said he was looking for evidence of UFOs and other fringe subjects. His was said to have been the biggest military hack of all time.

    • In October 2012, the South Carolina Department Of Revenue was hacked; this affected over three and a half million accounts.

    • In August 2013, hackers targeted Yahoo. Although based in the US, this Internet giant has branches worldwide. According to a report by National Public Radio four years later, it was likely that every Yahoo! account in existence at the time had been hacked.

    • Also in 2013, the social network site Tumblr was hacked, which led to the compromise of over 65 million passwords.

    • In May 2014, eBay was hacked, and 145 million users had their data compromised.

    • Navinder Singh Sarao was said to have helped trigger a multibillion dollar Wall Street crash. The so-called Hound Of Hounslow was living with his parents at the time of his arrest in April 2015. Although not a hacker, he made (and apparently lost) millions by manipulating markets with a sophisticated computer program of his own design.

    • In October 2018, digitaltrends dot com reported that a hack of the Pentagon had compromised the personal information of over thirty thousand staff. Has Rachel Maddow even mentioned this?

    • Finally, the Pentagon is so aware of its vulnerability to hackers that in 2016 it invited people to hack into it – the one exception alluded to above. The winner of the Hack The Pentagon Bounty Program was a teenager; David Dworken received a share of $75,000 prize money.

    All this tends to undermine the ludicrous claims of Rachel Maddow and her fellow cranks that Russia and Russia alone is any sort of threat to America cyber security.


    Tyler Durden

    Thu, 01/02/2020 – 18:45

    Tags

Digest powered by RSS Digest