Today’s News 15th July 2019

  • The $3.8 Billion Aircraft Carrier That Sprang A Leak

    It triggered embarrassing headlines across the globe late last week and over the weekend: “Britain’s new multi-billion aircraft carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth was forced to cut short sea trials this week after springing a leak,” reported CNN.

    It was the “future flagship” of the Royal Navy’s fleet, and embarked from Portsmouth for sea trials last month, but then a leak so severe that it reached “neck-high” in some flooded parts of the ship forced a hasty return to its Portsmouth base.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    HMS Queen Elizabeth, via Global Look Press

    “Following a minor issue with an internal system on HMS Queen Elizabeth, the ship’s company were required to remove a small volume of water from the ship,” a Royal Navy spokesperson said. “An investigation into the cause is underway.”

    The “minor issue” involved a whopping 250 tons of water (66,000 gallons) flooding two compartments and a stairwell inside the 65,000-ton warship. 

    A number of UK media reports said the cause was a likely high-pressure sea water pipe which burst. Days following the incident, which was first revealed middle of last week, the Royal Navy reported that the ship’s hull remained undamaged and that all the water was successfully pumped out.

    “During her time out of the water, 284 hull valves were changed, both rudder blades were removed and cleaned, her sea inlet pipes were inspected, all sacrificial anodes were replaced and a renewed coat of anti-foul paint was applied to the ship’s bottom,” a Royal Navy press release described further.

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

    The Royal Navy calls the Queen Elizabeth as well another carrier still under construction, the HMS Prince of Wales, “the largest and most advanced warships ever built for the Royal Navy.”

    The ship has reportedly been plagued by other mechanical issues such as a shaft seal leak resulting the ship taking on 200 liters of water every hour, as well as sprinklers being falsely triggered in an aircraft hangar, according to the BBC.

    Also interesting is that its captain was removed last May due to misuse of a British Defence Ministry vehicle, the BBC reported. 

  • "Sweden Is At War"

    Authored by Judith Bergman via The Gatestone Institute,

    • In 2017, a Swedish police report, “Utsatta områden 2017” (“Vulnerable Areas 2017”) showed that there are 61 such areas — also known as no-go zones — in Sweden. They encompass 200 criminal networks, consisting of an estimated 5,000 criminals. Most of the inhabitants are non-Western immigrants and their descendants.

    • In March, the Swedish National Forensic Centre estimated that since 2012, the number of shootings classified as murder or attempted murder had increased by almost 100 percent.

    • Sweden is at war and it is the politicians who are responsible. Five nights in a row, cars have been set on fire in the university town of Lund. Such insane acts have occurred on hundreds of occasions in various places in Sweden over the past fifteen years. From 1955 to 1985, not a single car was ignited in Malmö, Gothenburg, Stockholm or Lund…. None of these criminals is starving or lacking in access to clean water. They have a roof over their heads and they have been offered free schooling…. They do not live in dilapidated houses…. It is called upbringing and this is missing for thousands of girls and boys in Swedish homes today.” — Björn Ranelid, Swedish author, Expressen, July 5, 2019.

    • “Very few things were better in Sweden [before]…. We have built a strong country, where we take care of each other. Where society takes responsibility and no man is left alone”. — Swedish Prime Minister Stefan Löfven.

    • Sadly, many Swedes probably feel terribly left alone in a country that increasingly resembles a war zone.

    In 2018, Sweden experienced a record number of lethal shootings, 306 in all. Forty-five people were killed and 135 injured nationwide, most deaths occurring in Region South, where Malmö is located. In March, the Swedish National Forensic Centre estimated that since 2012, the number of shootings classified as murder or attempted murder has increased by almost 100 percent. The Centre also found that the most popular weapon used in the shootings is the Kalashnikov assault rifle. “It is one of the world’s most manufactured weapons and used in many wars,” said the Centre’s team manager, Mikael Högfors. “When they are no longer needed… they are smuggled into Sweden”.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    In the first six months of 2018, according to the police, almost every other shooting took place in a “vulnerable area”, also known as no-go zones. In 2017, a Swedish police report, “Utsatta områden 2017” (“Vulnerable Areas 2017”) disclosed that there are 61 such areas in Sweden. They encompass 200 criminal networks, consisting of an estimated 5,000 criminals. Most of the inhabitants are non-Western immigrants and their descendants.

    The police wrote in the 2017 report that global ethnic conflicts are replicated in the vulnerable areas:

    “… the [Swedish] judiciary and the rest of [Swedish] society do not understand these conflicts or have answers to how they can be solved. The police therefore need to have a better knowledge of the world and understanding of events in order to interpret what is happening in the areas. The presence of returnees, sympathizers for terrorist groups such as the Islamic State, al Qaeda and al-Shabaab, and representatives of Salafist-oriented mosques, contribute to tensions between these groups and other residents in the vulnerable areas. Since the summer of 2014, when a Caliphate was proclaimed in Syria and Iraq, sectarian contradictions have increased, especially between Sunnis, Shiites, Levantine Christians, and nationalists of Kurdish origin”. (p 13)

    On June 3, the police released a new list revealing that there are now 60 such areas, instead of the previous 61. That does not mean, however, that much has improved. On the contrary.

    In 2019, shootings still continue apace. In Malmö — a city of more than 300,000 inhabitants, one third of whom were “born abroad” according to the city’s statistics — a 25-year-old man was shot dead outside a social services office on June 10, while on the same day, at Malmö Central Station, police shot a man who said he had a bomb in his bag and was alleged to have behaved in a threatening way. That evening, two men were shot in the Lorensborg area of Malmö. Later that night, two explosions shook the city.

    Because of the increased number of shootings, city employees are now apparently so uncomfortable about working in the city that the Malmö municipality has released guidelines on how municipal workers — especially those who work in home care, rehabilitation and short-term housing — can remain safe in the city as they go about their jobs.

    Under the heading, “Personal safety – tips and advice on how to avoid getting into unwanted situations”, the municipality advises its employees to “Plan your itinerary – know your area…try to minimize the time from when you park your bike / car until you enter [the destination]”. Also, “Before leaving a building, look out first and make an assessment of the surroundings to avoid getting into an unwanted situation… keep away from people who are considered potentially threatening or dangerous and increase the distance if there are no other people nearby”.

    One city employee, who received the guidelines, accused the municipality of hypocrisy: “To the media, the municipality says that everything is fine, even though it is not. Then they send this type of mail to their employees”.

    The municipal government’s guidelines on safety seem appropriate for a civil war zone, such as Beirut once was, rather than for the once-peaceful city of Malmö.

    Beirut also comes to mind in the Swedish city of Linköping, where in early June an explosion blasted through a residential building, until it looked as if it had been pounded in a war. Miraculously, no one was killed in the blast, but 20 people were injured. The police suspect that the incident was gang-related. A few weeks later, two men were shot in the Linköping district of Skäggetorp — on the police list of “vulnerable areas” or “no-go zones”.

    After that, on June 30, in more gang related incidents, three shootings took place in three different suburbs in Stockholm. Two people, one of whom had been shot in the head, died. One of the murdered men, a rapper named Rozh Shamal, had earlier been convicted of assault, robbery and drug offenses, among other things. This year, just in Stockholm, eleven people have already been shot to death — the same number as for all of 2018. This year in Sweden, more than twenty peoplehave so far been shot to death.

    “The development is unacceptable,” said the head of the police’s national operational department (Noa), Mats Löfving. “In many cases, military automatic weapons are used. We see a reduction in the number of those injured in firearm violence, but the number of killings does not go down”.

    On July 1, National Police Chief Anders Thornberg said that the situation is “extraordinarily serious”. He claimed , however, that the police have not lost control of the gangs and that the main task is to stop the growth in the number of young criminals. “For every young man who gets shot, there are 10-15 new ones ready to step in,” he said. Only a few days later, however, he added that Swedes will have to get used to the shootings for the foreseeable future:

    “We think this [the shootings and the extreme violence] might continue for five to ten years in the particularly vulnerable areas,” Thornberg said. “It is also about drugs. Drugs are established in society, and ordinary people buy them. There is a market that the gangs will continue to fight over”.

    The leader of the opposition party Moderaterna, Ulf Kristersson, called the situation, “extreme for a country that is not at war”.

    Bombed buildings and shootings are not all that is plaguing Sweden. In addition, cars are regularly set on fire. The small picturesque university town of Lund, close to Malmö, has recently been suffering from extensive car fires. The police have not yet identified the suspects. “We see an increase in car fires right now, it is clearly worrying”, said Patrik Isacsson, local police area manager in Lund. He noted that car fires usually increase during the summer months, but have also been increasing over the years. “We do not know yet who the perpetrators are, so I can only speculate, but this type of arson is usually set by young people. That it happens during summertime can be because young people are unemployed and out there a lot”.

    “I definitely think that these are young people who have not found their place in society, who know they are not accepted,” commented a sociologist of law at Malmö University, Ingela Kolfjord, “that the climate has hardened and that they are constantly seen as ‘the other’. Car fires are not just a way of showing their displeasure but a way of showing that they are frustrated, desperate and angry.”

    Swedish author Björn Ranelid disagreed. “Sweden is at war and it is the politicians who are responsible” he wrote in Expressen.

    “Five nights in a row, cars have been set on fire in the university town of Lund. Such insane acts have occurred on hundreds of occasions in various places in Sweden over the past fifteen years. From 1955 to 1985, not a single car was torched in Malmö, Gothenburg, Stockholm or Lund. …When a female sociologist at Malmö University explains the crimes [as a consequence] of youths being frustrated… she speaks nonsense… She repeats things that could have been said by a parrot. None of these criminals is starving or lacking in access to clean water. They have a roof over their heads and they have been offered free schooling for nine or twelve years. They do not live in dilapidated houses. All of them… have had a higher material standard in their homes than several thousands of the children and young people who grew up at Ellstorp in Malmö where I lived with my parents and two siblings, in 47 square meters in two small rooms and a kitchen from 1949 to 1966”.

    Ranelid concluded:

    “It is called upbringing and this is missing for thousands of girls and boys in Swedish homes today. It’s not about money or where you happen to be born in the world. It has nothing to do with politics or ideology. It is about ethics, morality and co-existence between people”.

    Car fires, frequent and widespread, are just one of the new aspects of living in the formerly idyllic city of Lund. In January, a so-called unaccompanied minor from Afghanistan, Sadeq Nadir, sought to murder several people in the city by ramming into them with a stolen car. Although he claimed to have converted to Christianity, material found in his apartment showed that he wanted to wage jihad and become a martyr. He told the police that his intention had been to kill. The event was initially classified as an attempt at a terrorist crime but then changed to a charge of ten attempted murders. Although Sadeq had admitted that his intention was to kill, the Swedish district court did not find that Sadeq could be convicted for either terrorism or attempted murder. The court argued that he had not been driving “fast enough” to cause a concrete risk of death. In the same vein, although Sadeq was found to have written texts about jihad and martyrdom and claimed to be acting for Allah, the court did not find that he had acted from any religious terrorist motives. He was convicted of merely causing danger to others and threatening them.

    What is the Swedish government’s assessment of the violent and volatile situation? Swedish Prime Minister Stefan Löfven, condemned the recent shootings:

    “We have tightened several penalties considerably, including the punishment for illegally possessing weapons and explosives such as hand grenades. We have also given the police increased powers for… camera surveillance and information collection”.

    On July 2, the government presented proposals for combating gun violence, including harsher penalties for improper possession of explosive materials and new powers for customs officials to block packages suspected of containing weapons or explosives. According to the opposition, the proposals have come too late. “This could have been done a year ago, too. There have never been so many shootings in Sweden. I think it is obvious to most people that what the government has done is not enough”, said Johan Forssell from the opposition party, Moderaterna.

    As late as June 6, on Sweden’s National Day, Prime Minister Stefan Löfven, while acknowledging that Sweden “still has serious societal problems” remarked, “Very few things were better in Sweden” before:

    “But even though we can think of old times as an idyll with red cottages and green meadows, very few things were better before. During a national day celebration, I think we should celebrate just that, how much we have achieved as a country. We have built a strong country, where we take care of each other. Where society takes responsibility and no man is left alone”.

    Sadly, many Swedes probably feel terribly left alone in a country that increasingly resembles a war zone.

  • Channel 4's "Inside Idlib" – The Last Gasp Of A Dying Fake News Campaign

    Authored by Kit Knightly via Off-Guardian.org,

    Channel 4 just announced a new addition to their on-going “Iside Idlib” report: a 10-minute video which – they claim – is evidence of the Russian and Syrian governments committing a war crime.

    The war-crime itself is said to be a “double-tap” airstrike, ie. An airstrike, waiting for the first responders to arrive, and then another airstrike. (The term actually originates from US drone strikes in Yemen, Somalia and Pakistan…I don’t know if C4 had any special reports about that.)

    Watch the video, do you see evidence of a war crime?

    Here’s what I saw:

    • Fairly quiet countryside.

    • Men in White Helmets running around some fig trees.

    • Men in White Helmets shouting in Arabic.

    • A dust cloud.

    • A damaged van/ambulance.

    • An injured man/a man pretending to injured/a dummy (You can never be sure with the WH).

    • More running and shouting.

    • One more dust cloud, much further away.

    • People in white helmets looking sad.

    Here’s what I didn’t see:

    • Any Russian or Syrian planes.

    • Any Russian or Syrian military personnel.

    • Any Russian or Syrian military equipment.

    • Any evidence of the “first airstrike”.

    • Any bombs falling.

    • Any evidence of a war crime.

    If this is really the best they have, then they have nothing. It is, frankly, embarrassing.

    THE REPORT

    The written report that accompanies the video isn’t much better – it’s essentially just a Cliff Notes version of Jon Snow’s rather simpering commentary, but there’s some interesting language to deconstruct, and omissions to take note of.

    An investigation by Channel 4 News has obtained evidence of possible war crimes in Syria

    I just love this beginning part. So up itself, so pompous.

    We KNOW there was no “investigation”, they didn’t dig this up or ferret it out – the people who made it want it to be on TV. That’s the reason they made it. Channel 4’s “investigation” was checking their email.

    Either GCHQ directly dumped it into their inbox one morning, or some NGO proxy did it for them…either way, there was no “investigation”. At best – at best – there were some fact checks AFTER they got the video, just to make sure they weren’t going to make fools of themselves. (Spoiler alert: they did).

    As a general rule, with Western mainstream media, when they say “an investigation has obtained” they honestly do mean “someone emailed this to us”. That goes double for bellingcat. That’s just how it works.

    …with airstrikes that appear to deliberately target rescuers.

    Er…no they don’t. There are five “airstrikes” in the video (according to them, I only saw 2 at most). Of these five, only one (allegedly) hit anywhere even vaguely near an ambulance. If the Syrian airforce have a miss-rate of 80% how on earth are they winning this war?

    Footage caught on multiple cameras allegedly shows a so-called ‘double-tap’ operation in Idlib province

    They keep coming back to this “multiple cameras” angle, I don’t know why. I think it might be a pre-emptive defence against accusations of fakery, maybe? Which would be pretty revealing in and of itself.

    Oh, by the by, the “multiple cameras” are the go-pros and bodycams being worn by the White Helmets. I don’t know if they always wear them, or if they just wore them to that scene. Either way, it’s weird.

    If they always wear them…well, they must be expensive, and given the White Helmets are just plucky little volunteers that’s a hell of an investment. (Also, if the white Helmets are always wearing portable cameras, you’d think – five years into their existence – they’d have some pretty solid evidence of war crimes in Syria by now. But apparently this is the best they’ve got. Funny that).

    If they put them on for this event especially, well, that’s obviously fishy.

    Evidence of this kind has rarely been seen before; a complete incident caught on multiple cameras.

    …there they go with the multiple cameras thing again. It’s really nothing like as compelling as they seem to think it is.

    Oh, and “evidence of this type” has been seen MANY times before.

    I can’t tell you how many videos of dusty men screaming into walkie talkies I’ve seen. Each and every one labelled “daring rescue caught on camera” or “Syrian war crimes exposed”. This is no different. (In fact, it’s worse, because the field of fig trees is actually quite nice, compared with Indistinguishable Pile of Rubble #6).

    It’s not a “complete incident” either, because even by their own admission we never saw the initial “strike”, supposing it actually happened.

    But, if proven, the so-called “double-tap” tactic is a war crime.

    Yes, and the Flat Earth theory if proven, would totally and irreversibly change our understanding of the universe.

    “If proven” is a great phrase that way…it sounds serious, like it means something. It carries the implication of “and it will be soon”, but what it actually means – is that it’s not even close to being proven yet.

    The war crime isn’t proven to have even happened, let alone to have been carried out by the Russian Syrian Air Force. And it won’t beproven, because the video has no evidence in it.

    The footage is barely evidence, let alone proof. It could be recreated with 2 Go Pros, a barrel of dust and some discount fireworks.

    WHITE HELMETS

    Interestingly, though he’s obviously a man sincerely concerned about human rights and truth and all that good stuff, Mr Snow leaves out a fair amount of information about the White Helmets.

    For example, he says that “Assad’s government considers [the White Helmets] enemy combatants.” But he doesn’t say what that’s the case.

    Just to fill you all in, Assad’s government “considers the White Helmets enemy combatants” because they are directly funded by the American and British governments and because they regularly support – and even take part in – terrorist activities.

    He says that “over 250” of the White Helmets have been killed, but doesn’t say that they claim to have a staff of over 3000 (paid) volunteers.

    So, despite being just “carpenters and bakers”, and despite being constantly deployed to war-zones, and despite being the victims of the murderous Assad regime’s nefarious “double-tap” tactics….only 8% of them have been killed. In five years. Less than one per week.

    Considering the sheer number of hospitals the Syrians and Russians are alleged to have bombed – well into triple figures by now – that’s actually remarkable. Almost impossible, you might say. Those white helmets must really work.

    My favourite part is when Snow has to describe the trick of “smearing mud on the ambulances to hide the White Helmets logo”, without once pausing to question:

    1) Where these plucky little ex-bakers managed to get all these modern ambulances customised with their own logo.

    2) Why they don’t just stop painting the logo on in the first place.

    Just reflect for a second – they have a logo.

    How bonkers is that? They’re supposed to be a destitute resistance movement, helping the poor victims of Assad’s brutality. Volunteer bakers and carpenters and school teachers who just want to help…and someone, at some point, is supposed have said “Guys, we should get a logo done,”.

    That’s insane.

    Did the French Resistance get a logo designed and then tool around occupied Paris in vans with their name painted on the side?

    It’s just so…Western. So focus group. So public relations. So modern. The logo has to exist because that’s the brand. They need the logo to help sell the message. It’s the only way they know how to work.

    It’s been done to death, but the White Helmets – as the media paint them – just don’t make any sense. They are a narrative beyond ridiculous, that simply can’t exist in the real world, and watching media pundits earnestly describing the Looney Tunes madhouse they’re trying to sell us has become funny.

    *  *  *

    I honestly don’t know what the point of this exercise was. It says nothing new, it shows nothing new. It’s a news story from two years ago, warmed up and repackaged.

    The public is well past the White Helmets’ schtick, we all know what they are by now. The White Helmets are what you get when you give Al Qaeda a makeover. The result of a Western PR agency tasked with rebranding the unrebrandable.

    This fight is over, and our side won. I don’t know what C4, or whoever supplied them this video, were hoping to achieve, but I can tell you they won’t achieve it.

    This is the best evidence they have, the best they’ve ever had, they say that themselves. And it’s nothing. The information war for Syria is over. The White Helmets’ PR push failed. Turns out Assad didn’t have to go after all.

    It’s really time the UK media woke up to this fact.

    At this point it’s just getting sad.

  • These Are The Best And Worst States To Start A Small Business

    Building a small business from inception to the point where its thriving and set up for long-term success is no small feat.

    According to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, about 1/5th of all startups don’t survive to their first birthday. And nearly half will never make it to their fifth.

    But as Wallethub points out, there are different reasons why startups fail. Among them, a bad location is one of the most commonly cited. But beyond situating the business in a popular thoroughfare, choosing the right state to launch your business can also make a huge difference in its odds of success.

    States that offer the right conditions for success, such as access to cash, skilled workers, affordable office space and other factors, can be critical in helping a business thrive.

    In a recent study, WalletHub compared the 50 states across 26 metrics for startup success, assigning each state a number in each category, then computing which states are the most business-friendly overall.

    The results are hardly surprising: High-tax, Democrat-controlled states in the northeast offer some of the worst conditions for businesses, while low-tax states, Republican-controlled states in the Sun Belt have some of the best conditions.

    Source: WalletHub

    See the complete ranking below:

    1. Texas 
    2. Utah   
    3. Georgia   
    4. North Dakota 
    5. Oklahoma   
    6. Florida   
    7. Arizona   
    8. California   
    9. Montana   
    10. Colorado   
    11. Idaho   
    12. Washington   
    13. Mississippi
    14. North Carolina
    15. Louisiana
    16. Kansas
    17. Minnesota
    18. Michigan
    19. Nebraska
    20. Tennessee
    21. Kentucky
    22. South Dakota
    23. Maine
    24. Indiana
    25. Nevada
    26. Oregon
    27. New Mexico
    28. Alaska
    29. Alabama
    30. Wisconsin
    31. Arkansas
    32. Missouri
    33. Wyoming
    34. Ohio
    35. Illinois
    36. Massachusetts
    37. Iowa
    38. South Carolina
    39. Virginia
    40. Maryland
    41. West Virginia
    42. New York
    43. Vermont
    44. Delaware
    45. Pennsylvania
    46. Connecticut
    47. Hawaii
    48. New Hampshire
    49. New Jersey
    50. Rhode Island

  • Turkey's Erdogan Vows To "Significantly" Cut Rates As Trump Set To Roll Out Sanctions Over S-400 Purchase

    Lately not a week passes without some dismal news involving Turkey hitting the tape, and yet the lira continues to levitate, blissfully ignorant of the storm clouds headed for Ankara, levitating on hopes the Fed will cut rates and sprinkle golden showers on emerging markets. However, in light of the two latest developments, the Mrs Watanabe sellers of USDTRY may finally pay attention.

    On Sunday, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan – who last weekend fired the head of the central bank for not cutting rates fast enough, and who has now become the de facto head of the CBRT – promised “significantly lower interest rates by the end of the year“, Bloomberg reported.

    “We aim to reduce inflation to one digit by the end of this year,” Erdogan told journalists in Istanbul, according to the state-run Anadolu news agency. “As we achieve this, we will achieve our year-end interest rate target as well.” Of course, should interest rates drop to one digit, the USDTRY will promptly collapse to two, as the rate differential between the lira and the dollar collapses, removing the main incentive to go long the lira at a time when the Turkish economy remains in crisis.

    Having founded the economic school of Erdoganomics, according to which inflation can be achieved only by lowering rates, the Turkish president and his US counterpart have quickly become kindered spirits when it comes to monetary policy. And just as Trump heaps pressure and insults on Fed Chair Powell, Erdogan has frequently accused the central bank of keeping borrowing costs too high. Last month, he complained that while the Fed was moving toward a rate cut, Turkey’s policy rate of 24% “is unacceptable.”

    Then, the last trace of any pretense that Turkey under Erdogan will forever be a banana republic came on July 6, when Erdogan unexpectedly dismissed the former central bank head, Murat Cetinkaya and made it clear that he expects his replacement as central bank governor to follow the government’s line on monetary policy. Cetinkaya had held rates steady for more than nine months.

    Meanwhile, even as Trump and Erdo may be BFFs when it comes to firing head of central banks, the US president and his advisors have reportedly settled on a sanctions package to punish Turkey for receiving parts of a Russian S-400 missile defense system and plans to announce it in the coming days, Bloomberg wrote in a separate report.

    News of the imminent sanctions was somewhat unexpectedly considering that when Trump and Erdogan met at the G-20 summit in Japan in June, the U.S. president suggested possible leniency on sanctions. He sought to blame the Obama administration for Turkey’s decision to buy the Russian equipment, saying the impasse is “not really Erdogan’s fault.”

    According to Bloomberg, the administration “chose one of three sets of actions devised to inflict varying degrees of pain under the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act, the people said, without identifying which set had been chosen. The plan needs Trump’s approval.”

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Russian Il-76, carrying the first batch of equipment of S-400 missile defense system, arrives at Murted Air Base in Ankara, Turkey on July 12, 2019.

    Trump is said to unveil the sanctions late next week, and – in an unexpected act of courtesy to Ankara – intends to wait until after Monday’s anniversary of a 2016 coup attempt against Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan to avoid fueling further speculation that the U.S. was responsible for the uprising. And while we don’t know the details of the prepared sanctions, we know the following:

    The plan was developed after days of discussions between officials at the State and Defense departments and the National Security Council. It awaits a sign-off by Trump and his top advisers, the people said, requesting anonymity to discuss a sensitive matter. A State Department spokeswoman declined to comment.

    While not nearly as bad as that with other non-Saudi middle-eastern nations, the relationship between the U.S. and Turkey has deteriorated over the course of the civil war in Syria, where U.S. backing for Kurdish militants frustrated Turkey, which considers the group an extension of the separatists it’s fighting at home. Erdogan has also criticized the US for not extraditing Gulen, whom he accuses of masterminding the fake attempted “coup” the served as the launchpad for Erdogan’s transformation to an “executive president” last year, read quasi dictator.

    Acting U.S. Defense Secretary Mark Esper said Friday that Washington’s position that Turkey can’t have both the F-35 and the Russian missile system “has not changed.” Esper spoke with Defense Minister Hulusi Akar in the afternoon, and the Turkish government said in a statement that a U.S. delegation would visit next week to keep discussing the issue.

  • Here’s How Much The Top CEOs Of S&P 500 Companies Get Paid

    Submitted by Jeff Desjardins of Visual Capitalist

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    How much do the CEOs from some of the world’s most important companies get paid, and do these top CEOs deliver commensurate returns to shareholders?

    Today’s infographic comes to us from HowMuch.net and it visualizes data on S&P 500 companies to see if there is any relationship between CEO pay and stock performance.

    For Richer or Poorer

    To begin, let’s look at the highest and lowest paid CEOs on the S&P 500, and their associated performance levels. Data here comes from a report by the Wall Street Journal.

    Below are the five CEOs with the most pay in 2018:

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Last year, David Zaslav led top CEOs by taking home $129.4 million from Discovery, Inc., the parent company of various TV properties such as the Discovery Channel, Animal Planet, HGTV, Food Network, and other non-fiction focused programming. He delivered a 10.4% shareholder return, when the S&P 500 itself finished in negative territory in 2018.

    Of the mix of highest-paid CEOs, Bob Iger of Disney may be able to claim the biggest impact. He helped close a $71.3 billion acquisition of 21st Century Fox, while also leading Disney’s efforts to launch a streaming service to compete with Netflix. The market rewarded Disney with a 20.4% shareholder return, while Iger received a paycheck of $65.6 million.

    Now, let’s look at the lowest paid CEOs in 2018: 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    On the list of lowest paid CEOs, we see two tech titans (Larry Page and Jack Dorsey) that have each opted for $1 salaries. Of course, they are both billionaires that own large amounts of shares in their respective companies, so they are not particularly worried about annual paychecks.

    Also appearing here is Warren Buffett, who is technically paid $100,000 per year by Berkshire Hathaway plus an amount of “other compensation” that fluctuates annually. While this is indeed a modest salary, the Warren Buffett Empire is anything but modest in size – and the legendary value investor currently holds a net worth of $84.3 billion.

    Finally, it’s worth noting that while J. Jayson Adair of Copart was one of the lowest paid CEOs at $203,000 in 2018, the company had the best return on the S&P 500 at 82.2%. Today, the company’s stock price still sits near all-time highs.

    Maxing Returns

    Finally, let’s take a peek at the CEOs that received the highest shareholder returns, and if they seem to correlate with compensation at all.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Interestingly, three of highest performing CEOs – in terms of shareholder returns – actually took home smaller amounts than the median S&P 500 annual paycheck of $12.4 million. This includes the aforementioned A. Jayson Adair, who raked in only $203,000 in 2018.

    That said, there is a good counterpoint to this as well.

    Of the five CEOs who had the worst returns, four of them made less than the median value of $12.4 million, while one remaining CEO took home slightly more. In other words, both the best and worst performing CEOs skew towards lower-than-average pay to some degree.

  • The US Housing Bust In 20 Charts

    In “Where The American Dream Goes To Die“, we published some of the most recent, concerning observations on the current state of the US housing market. Now, courtesy of Deutsche Bank, for our lazier readers, here is a visual recap of the recent turning point in US housing, in which DB’s Torsten Slok uses an array of charts to demonstrate that “US Housing is cooling down” as the the negative SALT impact is overshadowing low mortgage rates, high consumer sentiment, and record-low unemployment rate.

    Here are the main highlights:

    Single-family starts and permits rolling over despite lower mortgage rates and low unemployment rate

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Existing single-family home sales and new single-family home sales not rebounding despite very low mortgage rates

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Single-family starts cooling down, multi-family sideways

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Lower mortgage rates and low unemployment not doing much to boost consumer plans to buy a house

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Residential investment is shrinking despite low mortgage rate and low unemployment rate

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Year-over-year growth in housing components contribution to GDP

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Interest in home buying rolling over

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Home price appreciation trending down

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Fewer subprime borrowers today. And more people with top credit scores. And still housing is cooling down

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    30% of the population have a subprime credit score

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Almost no distressed home sales

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Homeownership rate still far below its peak despite low mortgage rate and low unemployment rate

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Since the homeownership rate peaked in 2006 the number of households renting has increased by roughly 10 million

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Fewer people plan to buy a home within 12 months despite low unemployment rate and low mortgage rate

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Mortgage refi application activity up but not much when taking into account how much mortgage rates have declined

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Purchase applications up but not much when taking into account how much mortgage rates have fallen

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Manhattan home prices falling at the fastest rate since the financial crisis

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Lumber prices down recently

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Home ownership rates still below pre-crisis level across age groups

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Geographical distribution of housing boom/bust

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

     

  • "A 6th Grader Should Know America’s Foreign Policy Is Ridiculous"

    Authored by Bill Rice, Jr.

    Policies which can ensure peace or ignite wars are important. Given this, one might think more Americans would critically examine the basic assumptions which form the basis of our nation’s foreign policy. 

    As best I can tell, only three such assumptions or premises exist:

    1. To defend America and its borders, our government must posses the world’s strongest military. It should also not be reticent about using – or threatening to use – said military.
    2. The freedoms Americans cherish are fragile, and bad actors are plotting to steal them from us.
    3. If reasons 1 and 2 are not persuasive enough, or do not apply to every geopolitical situation, America must still be willing to use its military to protect its “national interests.”

    All three of these assumptions are ridiculous, a fact any bright 12-year-old should recognize.

    Regarding Assumption 1 – Surely any American with a 6th grade education is aware of the fact that the world’s two largest oceans happen to  “guard” the east and west coasts of the American mainland. Furthermore, any 12-year-old should know that the probability America’s neighbors to the north and south would attack our country is zero.point.zero. What this means to you and me is that if America proper is going to be attacked (and subdued), it’s going to have to be attacked by a nation a vast distance from our borders.

    By the time a conscientious student reaches 10th grade he or she should be able to identify the tiny number of nations that might possess the means to occupy or “take over” America. These nations can be counted on three fingers – Russia, China and (if we really want to stretch things) Germany.

    However, plenty of high school students should be inquisitive enough to ask a common-sense question: Why would these nations attempt to do such a thing?

    Hopefully every American high school has at least a few students who know that occupying a nation with a land mass as vast as America, and with a militarily as powerful as America’s, would require a massive and sustained military operation.

    Given that America has 320 million citizens – and if one assumes that a good portion of these citizens are feisty, armed and will be a tad put out at being occupied – subduing and securing America will not be a quick nor easy task.  As a guess, such a commitment might require at least 12 million troops, troops rotating in and out of America over, say, a 20-year-period.

    Leaving aside the massive costs of such a mission,  how many nations actually have 12 million troops to spare? 

    China might. But before China could deploy these 12 million troops into “theater,” would not America’s government have already fired 1,000 nuclear missiles into China (and any nation allied with China)? And would these nations not respond in kind?

    That is, by the time all the mushroom clouds evaporated, it’s unlikely a single “military power” would possess even 150,000 troops to guard its own ruins (much less possess the planes or ships to transport scores of divisions to America).

    No – any way you war-game it – invading and occupying America is a non-starter. This is the case for every government on the planet. (And is doubly true for China, which would have obliterated the bulk of its international customers).

    Regarding real “national security,” America is in fact the most secure nation on the face of the earth. One could go further. It’s probably the most secure nation in the history of the world … that is, if our government would simply follow Switzerland’s example and quit stirring up hornet nests all over the world. Or: Simply follow the “Golden Rule.”

    In truth, the only nation that requires a massive military is a nation that is either surrounded by potential enemies, or a nation that seeks to use its military to expand its empire and/or its “spheres of meddling influence.” I leave it to the reader to decide which description best fits America over recent decades.

    Assumption 2 – that our nation’s pro-active military “protects our freedoms” – is equally absurd. 

    Apparently the fear here is that if America does NOT invade and/or attack Iraq (or Iran or Syria or Libya or North Korea or Venezuela or Cuba or Afghanistan) these “enemies” will somehow eliminate our freedoms. (Surely a sizable percentage of Americans believe that one of the main reasons our troops are in all of these countries is to “protect our freedoms,” ergo these nations must be a “threat” to these freedoms.)  

    However, a bright 10th grade civics student should be astute enough to ask an obvious question: How exactly would a nation eradicate our freedoms? 

    Wouldn’t these nations also have to put millions of “boots on the ground?”  Wouldn’t this nation(s) have to occupy hundreds of thousands of square miles of U.S. territory and take control of every level of our government, our courts, our police forces, our newspapers, the places we work?

    Consider just one of our nation’s freedoms, the “right to bear arms.” To eliminate this freedom/right, these nations would have to figure out a way to take away my brothers’ or your father’s pistols, shot guns, hunting rifles and semi-automatics. Good luck with that, Iran.

    To this day I don’t understand how Saddam Hussein or Muammar Gaddafi jeopardized my freedom to worship as I see fit, or was going to stop me from making one of my contrarian posts on the Internet. Still, according to the thinking of most Americans, this is exactly what these suckers were scheming to do. 

    Plus, as any bright 10th grade civics students should know (at least those who have read George Orwell’s 1984), it is our own government that’s far more likely to take away our liberties and freedoms than a hodgepodge group of terrorists located in impoverished nations 10,000 miles from our borders.

    Assumption 3 –  the only way America can defend its “national interests” is to start wars and change regimes all over the globe, or threaten to do these things – is a tougher nut to crack with satire. (This is largely because “national interest” is such a vague, subjective and ever-changing term). But I’ll try.

    Yes, our neocon policies certainly advance the “interests” of some Americans. These Americans basically include military contractors, who become richer from these policies, and politicians, who get to feel even more important by creating new “threats” that tough and wise politicians get to eliminate. 

    On the financing end, mega banks benefit. I guess a few psychopaths who enjoy killing people might relish participating in a new war. 

    But excluding the 100,000 or so people in these categories,  319.9 million other Americans do not profit a dime from this quest to pursue “America’s (alleged) interests.”

    In reality, wars and gargantuan military budgets send America’s government deeper into the red. The only way to pay for such a “policy” is to print even more money, a process which ultimately causes even greater inflation, and the standard of living of millions of Americans to decline even more. This policy, continued ad infinitum, will also require even more taxes, which further erodes Americans’ “freedom” to keep their own money. 

    And the above applies only to those of us who who will not be killed, wounded or become suicidal after returning from these global missions to “protect our freedoms” or, if one prefers, “advance our national interests.”

    So to sum up:

    • No nation is going to invade America.
    • No nation’s government (except our own) is going to take away our freedoms.
    • The only American “interest” in pursuing these wars is to give more money or power to a handful of people and institutions who are already rich and powerful.

    That is, every assumption that justifies our nation’s foreign policy is nonsensical, bogus and ridiculous. Any bright high school student who has been exposed to the concept of critical thinking should be able to cut through the propaganda and recognize these arguments as specious.

    One must therefore ask why more Americans don’t recognize this and demand that our leaders abandon these policies, policies that make America less secure, policies implemented by a government that seeks to expand its control over our lives (a condition that is the opposite of freedom)?

    The answer is as simple as it is depressing. Most Americans do NOT recognize these points as true or valid. Not only do most Americans reject these arguments, they often smear those who make them as unpatriotic or naive. 

    Instead, the vast majority of Americans listen to the policy-makers with ph D’s in international relations,  or “experts” in government and the CIA, or “authorities” at think tanks who purport to understand “the way the world really works.”

    That is, “We the People” have made a colossal mistake. We’ve listened to, and trusted, the wrong people.

  • China Reports Slowest GDP Growth On Record, As Retail Sales, Industrial Output And Fixed Investment All Beat

    The Chinese goalseek-o-tron was in perfect working order on Monday morning, when moments ago Beijing reported that China’s Q2 Y/Y GDP rose at 6.2%, once again precisely as consensus had expected, down from 64% in Q1 and the lowest since “modern” records started to be kept 27 years ago in 1992, dipping below even the financial crisis low of 6.4$

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Additionally, 2Q cumulative GDP rose 6.3% y/y, also matching the consensus estimate, and down from 6.4% in Q1.

    “We expect Beijing to ramp up stimulus measures in the second half despite more limited policy room, though markets should not put too high expectations on the scale and duration of these stimulus measures,” Nomura’s China economist Lu Ting wrote in a recent research note. “Domestic policies will to a large extent be dependent on the U.S.-China trade tensions.”

    The disappointing GDP print comes just day after another miss, this time in the value of exports, which sharnk by 1.3% in dollar terms in June, after inching up in May despite the tensions with the US.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Property investment moderated to 10.9 per cent in the first six months, compared with growth of 11.2 per cent in the year to May. Strong property sales helped brighten the economy into April, but the sector lost momentum in the second quarter.

    But while the record Chinese slowdown was widely as expected, there was an unexpected silver lining to the lowest Chinese GDP print on record, as all three core June economic indicators – retail sales, industrial output and fixed investment – beat sharply lowered expectations, to wit:

    • Retail Sales: 9.8%, Exp. 8.5%, up from 8.6%
    • Industrial Output: 6.3%, Exp. 5.2%, up from 5.0%
    • Fixed Asset Investment: 5.8%, Exp. 5.5%, up from 5.6%

    And visually:

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The fact that retail sales growth strengthened to 9.8% in June from 8.6% a month earlier, is an encouraging sign that domestic consumption has remained robust (that, or Beijing is now grossly manipulating every economic datapoint). Retail sales remained strong throughout the second quarter, as non-food inflation remained modest.

    So while on one hand, the more widely followed GDP print indicates continued slowdown in the overall economy and adds to the pressure Chinese policy makers face as they attempt to negotiate a deal with the US – and while Chinese negotiators are talking with their U.S. counterparts again, there is no certainty that a deal will be reached – the sharp rebound in all three more contemporaneous indicators suggests that Beijing may finally be regaining control of China following some of the biggest credit injections on record as we discussed on Saturday.

    Heading into today’s data, China’s Citi Econ surprise index was already down to a four year low, so with the improvement in today’s non-GDP reports, we are confident that many will speculate tomorrow that China may have finally hit the bottom of its recent slowdown and is finally turning the corner.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Whether that is true, or merely trade war propaganda to avoid the impression that China’s economy is truly hurting, remains to be seen.

    As a reminder, Beijing has set a target of doubling the size of its economy by 2020 compared vs 2010. Amid fears that the trade war will dent China’s formidable export industry, Beijing has maintained a loose monetary policy and introduced industrial policies meant to stimulate investment. And now, to telegraph to the market that its policies are finally gaining traction, it is hardly a surprise that most non-GDP econ data solidly beat expectations.

     

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Today’s News 14th July 2019

  • US Naval Coalition In Gulf – A Provocation Too Far

    Via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

    America’s top General Joseph Dunford this week announced plans for a US-led naval coalition to patrol the Persian Gulf in order to “protect shipping” from alleged Iranian sabotage.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The move is but the latest in a series of efforts by the Trump administration to mobilize Arab allies into a more aggressive military stance towards Iran. It follows recent visits to the region by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and National Security Adviser John Bolton, both of whom have been urging a more organized military front led by the US to confront Iran.

    The latest naval coalition proposed by General Dunford will be charged with escorting oil tankers as they pass through the Strait of Hormuz exiting the Persian Gulf to the Indian Ocean, and also through the Bab al Mandab entrance to the Red Sea on the Western side of the Arabian Peninsula. The former conduit serves oil supply to Asia, while the latter position between Yemen and Eritrea leads shipping to the Suez Canal on the way to the Mediterranean and Europe.

    Both narrow sea passages are strategic chokepoints in global oil trade, with some 20-30 per cent of all daily shipped crude passing through them.

    The apparently chivalrous motives of the US to “guarantee freedom of navigation” sounds suspiciously like a pretext for Washington to assert crucial military control over international oil trade. That is one paramount reason for objecting to this American proposal.

    Secondly, the very idea of sending more military vessels to the Persian Gulf under Pentagon command at this time of incendiary tensions between the US and Iran is a reckless provocation too far.

    In the same week that the Pentagon called for a naval coalition, the US and Britain were blaming Iranian forces for trying to block a British oil tanker near the Strait of Hormuz. Iran has dismissed the allegations that its naval vessels interfered in any way with the British tanker. Both London and Washington claimed that a British Royal Navy frigate had to intervene to ward off the Iranian vessels. Iran’s Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif dismissed the accusations as “worthless”.

    The latest incident follows a string of sabotage attacks against oil tankers in the Persian Gulf by unidentified assailants. The US has blamed Iran. Iran has vehemently denied any involvement. Tehran has countered by saying that tensions are being inflamed by “malicious conspiracies”.

    One can easily foresee in this already supercharged geopolitical context in the Persian Gulf and the wider region how any additional military forces would be potentially disastrous, either from miscalculation, misunderstanding or more malign motive.

    Furthermore, media reports indicate a heightened wariness among some Gulf Arab states about being pushed into confrontation with their neighbor Iran. US policy is recklessly fomenting regional tensions against the better judgement of proximate countries.

    The Washington Post reported this week:

    The escalating tensions in the Persian Gulf have exposed differences between the United States and its regional allies, in part over how aggressively the Trump administration should confront Iran…

    With these countries likely to find themselves on the front lines of any military conflict with Iran, some of the smaller states are hesitant to support the more combative stance of the United States and regional heavyweights Saudi Arabia and the UAE.”

    The report goes on:

    “The more-assertive approach championed by Saudi Arabia – and in particular by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman – puts the kingdom at odds with some of the smaller US allies in the region, which want to see the crisis settled through negotiations. Kuwait and Oman, which have pursued bilateral relations with Iran, have long resented Saudi attempts to pressure them to adopt a more confrontational foreign policy, analysts say.”

    Qatar is another important regional player which is bound to have misgivings about the growing tensions. The gas-rich emirate has been roughed up by Saudi Arabia and the UAE with a two-year blockade on trade and political links. While Qatar is a US ally and a Sunni Arab neighbor traditionally aligned with Saudi Arabia, the country also shares the region’s close historical trading ties with Shia Iran to the North. Centuries of overlapping cultural ties belie the attempt by the US and its Saudi and UAE allies of trying to polarize the region into an anti-Iran axis.

    Aware of the danger of a catastrophic war erupting, several regional states are right to be even more alarmed by the latest proposition of a naval coalition led by the US. Washington is arrogantly over-stepping its presumption to control global oil trade, and it is pushing tensions in the region with a provocation too far. Hopefully, reckless US-led antagonism will be rebuffed by wiser regional states who stand to lose much more than Generals and warmongers sitting comfortably in Washington.

    Moreover, the correct way to calm and resolve tensions in the region is for the Trump administration to halt its aggression towards Iran and to respect the 2015 international nuclear accord which it unilaterally trashed last year. Remove sanctions and warships from the region and – for a fundamental change – respect international law, diplomacy and peaceful negotiations.

  • Poker-Bot Designed By Facebook "Decisively" Beats Human Poker Pros

    A poker-bot that was designed by researchers from Facebook and Carnegie Mellon University has consistently beat some of the world’s top human players in a series of six person no limit Texas Hold’Em poker games, according to The Verge.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The AI system, named Pluribus, played over 10,000 hands over the course of 12 days. In one situation, it played alongside five human players and in another, it played along five additional AI players. The bot won, on average, five dollars per hand with hourly winnings of about $1000, which researchers called a “decisive margin of victory”.

    Noam Brown, a research scientist at Facebook AI Research said:

     “It’s safe to say we’re at a superhuman level and that’s not going to change.”

    Chris Ferguson, a six-time World Series of Poker champion said: “Pluribus is a very hard opponent to play against. It’s really hard to pin him down on any kind of hand.”

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    In a paper recently published, the scientist behind the bot said that the victories are a significant milestone in AI research. Other computers have mastered games like Chess and Go, but six person Texas Hold Em was always a higher benchmark to accomplish.

    This is because information needed to win the game is often hidden from players – it involves multiple players and complex victory outcomes. A game like Go is easier for AI despite having more possible board combinations than atoms in the observable universe, because all the information is at least available to see. This makes it easier for AI to train on.

    Back in 2015, a machine learning system beat human pros at two player Hold Em, but raising the number to five opponents increased the complexity of the game significantly. A few different crucial strategies were deployed to address this:

    • First, they taught Pluribus to play poker by getting it to play against copies of itself — a process known as self-play. This is a common technique for AI training, with the system able to learn the game through trial and error; playing hundreds of thousands of hands against itself. This training process was also remarkably efficient: Pluribus was created in just eight days using a 64-core server equipped with less than 512GB of RAM. Training this program on cloud servers would cost just $150, making it a bargain compared to the hundred-thousand-dollar price tag for other state-of-the-art systems.

    • Then, to deal with the extra complexity of six players, Brown and Sandholm came up with an efficient way for the AI to look ahead in the game and decide what move to make, a mechanism known as the search function. Rather than trying to predict how its opponents would play all the way to the end of the game (a calculation that would become incredibly complex in just a few steps), Pluribus was engineered to only look two or three moves ahead. This truncated approach was the “real breakthrough,” says Brown.

    Pluribus was “remarkably good at bluffing its opponents” and those who played against it praised it for its relentless consistency and the way it could squeeze profits out of thin hands. It was also “predictably unpredictable”, and did so just by playing the cards it was dealt, without looking at facial recognition or spotting tells.

    Brown says that bluffing can be an art that can be reduced to mathematically optimal strategies: “The AI doesn’t see bluffing as deceptive. It just sees the decision that will make it the most money in that particular situation. What we show is that an AI can bluff, and it can bluff better than any human.”

    The fact that AI has now bested humans in six person Hold Em means that there is now much that humans can learn from computers when it comes to playing Hold Em.

    Researchers also hope that techniques used to create the AI bot can be transferable to other situations, like cyber security, fraud prevention and financial negotiations.

  • Do You Truly Have Free Will?

    Authored by Chris Martenson via PeakProsperity.com,

    How we’re constantly at war with our biological programming…

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Until you make the unconscious conscious, it will direct your life and you will call it fate.

                ~ Carl Jung

    I love that Jung quote.  I’ve used it generously in conversation, seminars and writings throughout the years.

    Initially, I assumed that the “unconscious” he referred to the place in our brains where our experiences, beliefs and memories are undetectably stored.  You know, psychology stuff:  ego, subconscious, id. Old memories from childhood lurking beneath the conscious frame of reference, directing thoughts and coloring our current experiences.

    In other words, post-birth experiences that came from nurture; the environment in which we were raised. As if we’re born as blank slates written upon by our parents, friends and the larger culture we grow up in.

    Perhaps given the state of science at the time, that’s all that Jung did mean.

    But now we have a lot more science to expand that quote out into some truly mind-boggling territory. In my mind, it’s now a case of including both nature and nurture into the equation.

    More and more scientific research is revealing that our slates are only partially blank at birth, ready to accept whatever chalk lines might get drawn by life. But the majority of the remaining territory is already marked at conception with engraved instructions.

    What Makes You “You”

    For me personally, it has been incredibly liberating to discover that only some of my unconscious scripts were installed after birth.

    The person that I call “I” or “Me” is a bundle of reactions, some of which were pre-programmed and some of which have been learned, and most of which are a combination of both.  The same is true for you. Our lives are a complex combination of both nature and nurture mixing like fluids to influence our experience of life.

    This knowledge offers extraordinary power to those who can master their wiring, understanding which cerebral hacks and hijacks exist to create a richer and more engaged experience of life.  When applied at the collective level, these insights offer a helpfully predictive ‘most likely’ view of the future.

    Bluntly, the odds of a group of humans rising above their core programming is pretty low, especially when various self-interested entities have learned to hijack the programming for fun and profit (and other often nefarious motivations).  This encompasses the media (both mainstream and social), politics and advertising.

    So back to the Jung quote.

    I now more broadly interpret “unconscious” to mean anything that you aren’t aware of that’s causing you to respond with certain actions, or experience things in a certain way.  It could be something from your past long buried (nurture) or it could be hard-wired into your neurochemical response set (nature).

    Similarly, as long as it’s operating undetected by your conscious mind, yet resulting in certain responses, I’m calling that the “unconscious”, too.

    Simply knowing that such scripts are running in your brain is truly life changing once you become aware of them.

    As a topical reference, the current Epstein sexual predator case just reminds us that many men often live out their lives thoroughly subject to the biology of sexual hormones and the drive to reproduce, with about as much free will as a rutting elk during mating season.

    The book Sex At Dawn presents a number of such science-based examples of the role of our genes in directing our behaviors.

    In one famous experiment, men wore t-shirts for three days, then took them off and placed them in zip-lock bags. Randomly selected women of childbearing age were then asked to open the bags, sniff the contents and rate the men’s attractiveness from one to ten.  Their rankings were based solely on smell, no other information was given.

    The women all had very clear preferences.  Some smells attracted them, some repulsed them.  The t-shirts were ‘hot or not.’

    When the researchers then genotyped both the women and men, they discovered that the women’s noses had unerringly selected potential mates whose specific genetic make-up would yield offspring with particularly robust immune system combinations (via MHC typing for the science-wonks reading this).  Using just their sense of smell, the women were able to accurately determine very important information about a potential mate’s DNA.

    Wow.  Go science!

    It turns out we can tell something about the elemental molecular constituency of the people around us, all the way to decoding an algorithm as ridiculously complex as the combination of two dissimilar immune systems. Well, at least women can.

    But who knows what else we’re going to discover with the passage of time?

    The invitation here is to keep a very open mind, and a strong sense of humility, for the genius of 3.8 billion years of evolution and for what we humans are going to further decode over the next 100 years — should we make it that far.

    Free Will?

    Okay, so women can somehow detect better genetic matches using their noses.  But where the study got really interesting — and made the Jung quote explode in many directions for me — is when it further revealed that women who are on birth control pills lose this nose-DNA-detecting superpower.  The pharmaceuticals act as a disrupting agent.

    Now imagine the poor woman who gets married, decides it’s time to have children, goes off her birth control pill and then, once her hormones have shifted back to her natural baseline, wakes up one day thinking “Crikey, who is this loser?” Somewhere deep and ancient inside her, the former ‘man of her dreams’ now smells entirely wrong.  A bad match.

    So, they break up, at great emotional, logistical and financial disturbance.  She moves on, goes back on the pill, marries another great guy and then repeats the whole process.  Again, the new man just smells wrong.

    Lacking the proper frame for what is happening, she manufactures all sorts of stories to match the experience.  “He’s a bad provider.  Doesn’t share my interests.  Doesn’t speak my love language.  Has bad hygiene…”

    The unconscious operation running, however, is none of those things.  It’s that he’s a bad genetic match and her biological hardware — which was blocked from operating correctly earlier — has now finally been able to detect that.

    Perhaps after the second ‘failure’ this woman has concluded that her luck is bad.  Fate has ruled against her.  She’s cursed in some way, destined to fail at love.  But it wasn’t fate at all. Rather, it was a biological response generated from the root code of her mammalian programming; unseen and undetected.

    The unconscious had not been made conscious. It had directed her life, and she’d called it fate.

    Had she known about the effect of birth control pills on mate selection, and been properly instructed in it by her MD at the time of first going on them, she would have been in a position to know to go off the pill while dating a potentially serious mate to determine if that changed how she felt about them.

    It was only because she and her partner(s) were unaware of the silent biological, genetic script running in the background that so much “fate” happened to them.

    Again:

    Until you make the unconscious conscious, it will direct your life and you will call it fate.

    ~ Carl Jung

    There are literally hundreds of studies coming out all the time that reveal the subtle and powerful ways that both our genetics and epigenetics encode all sorts of pre-programmed and even acquired/learned behaviors into us, and we’re learning more all the time.

    Would it surprise you to learn that evolution had found a way to encode PTSD-inducing experiences into a parent’s DNA to pass on to their own offspring (and subsequent generations)?  Well it has and this has been proven out in both humans (here also) and mice.

    Quite to the surprise of scientists and students everywhere who thought the Darwin vs. Lamarck (nature vs nurture) debate was a decisive first round knock-out for Darwin, it turns out that mice and humans (and presumably many other creatures) can encode experiences into their DNA and pass them along to their offspring.

    Rather than waiting for a random mutation to confer a new behavior that improves survival (Darwin) both mice and humans can encode a traumatic experience and pass that right along to their children.  Babies born to war-starved women store fat with miserly fanaticism and experience far higher rates of chronic health issues.  Children of holocaust survivors are prone to anxiety and have elevated stress hormones throughout their own lives.  The sons of Union war prisoners were far more likely to die early than the sons of soldiers who were not prisoners.

    In other words, our DNA is busy talking with the world around us and storing what seems to be useful information to pass along and/or use.  The DNA is the hardware, that’s the part Darwin got right. And epigenetics is the software, which is the part that Lamarck understood.

    Carl Jung perhaps understood more of this duality than I’ve appreciated:

     

    Without knowing any of this, the children of women deprived of nutrition during gestation shame themselves as fat and unhealthy.  Fate has dictated that they be this way.  Fate has also frowned on children born to holocaust survivors and other similarly traumatized people.  The children of the tens of thousands of war-wounded US soldiers will be similarly afflicted.

    (Self-) Knowledge Is Power

    Knowledge is truly power if one is interested in moving towards free will and away from unconscious choice.

    I’ve given up the fantasy of making it all the way to pure free will, but I can certainly move myself closer to it along the spectrum.

    “Making the unconscious conscious” has been an area of great interest for me for many years, and I consider it to be incredibly liberating each time a new awareness can be brought into the light of consciousness.  “Fate” can be transformed into identifiable behavior patterns, that once recognized, can be embraced or abandoned at will.

    If you share the life goal to operate with as much conscious intent as you can, then we are fellow travelers.  After many years of inner exploration and outer scientific curiosity I can report significant progress in my awareness and command of my own inner programming, though I remain constantly surprised by the many ways I’m still hard-wired for stimulus-response.

    An important part of my progress resulted with the discovery that it’s possible to partially immunize myself to the dopamine-hijacking methods employed by advertisers and social media.  In some cases,  I’ve determined that I’m simply unable to resist, that my wiring is fixed and ‘they’ are simply too adept at juicing the pathways, and so my best defense is to limit my exposure.  Similarly, I’m currently wrestling with admitting my biological limitations and giving up my smartphone in favor of reverting to a much more basic flip phone.

    Huge benefits have also resulted from understanding the ways in which emotionally manipulative language (a.k.a. “propaganda” or most of what passes for mainstream news) operates.  Once you’re able to spot it, you’ll see it everywhere and it will no longer sway you. In fact, it might even elicit the opposite reaction.  I wrote a long piece on this which is well worth re-reading.

    More broadly, I’m keenly interested in how our pre-programmed behaviors are nudging us as a society closer towards certain futures.  These play out in economics, finance, energy and environmental issues.  Evolution has saddled us with both a severe time bias favoring the immediate over the distant, and a default setting for linear vs. complex (or systems) thinking. These preferences combine to strongly compromise our ability to respond intelligently to the really big predicaments the world faces today.

    For instance, there are countries (Pakistan35 others) and massive cities (Chennai India, and 19 others) that are close to or have already run out of water.  That predicament was in plain view several decades ago. Yet the societal response in every single instance was to continue population growth and hope for the best.

    Farming is becoming more uncertain as weather-weirdness piles up.  Soils are degrading slowly and steadily, mined for macro and micro nutrients that can only be replaced by geological processes (over millennia) or continued use of affordable fossil fuel energy (which is depleting).

    Global debts are piling up far faster than economic growth. And economic growth cannot continue as it has for resource-based reasons.  Stocks and bonds are priced as if that were not the case, and perpetual exponential economic growth were assured.  Nobody cares.  The Fed has rescued stocks for another few weeks or months.  Whew!

    All in all, there’s huge change being thrust upon us. But our social skills are optimized for collaborating on a hunt or remembering where the berries ripen next.  The social cooperation skills necessary for elegantly navigating the massive, complex, and systemic issues facing us may not be coded in our default neural programming.  They remain latent if they exist at all, perhaps requiring a severe population bottleneck to arise to provide the right epigenetic stress to turn these genes on.

    Knowing that we’re not well-suited to the tasks at hand is the first step on the path to recovery and repair.  Both psychological and biological scripts are operating at the unconscious level. Being aware of and alert to this truth is a critical early step towards claiming real agency in our own individual lives and hope for our collective future.

    Until and unless we do that, it will be business-as-usual until a painful systemic crash of some sort.  And what a doozy the next one will be.

    As the data stands, you need to be ready for business-as-usual to be the most likely path society chooses to pursue, right up until things fall apart.

    But that doesn’t mean you have to be so blind. More and more people are waking up to reality; especially younger folks, who are increasingly losing any interest in following in their parent’s footsteps.

    If we really apply ourselves, and with a little luck, our biology doesn’t have to be our destiny.  It all begins with each of us becoming “conscious of the unconscious”.

    In Part 2: The Choice Facing Us: Greatness or Oblivion?, we delve into how to do just that. What are the keys to “hacking” our biological programming and re-wiring it to better work in our long-term interest?

    The scientific learnings here are exploding right now. And they provide the keys to our salvation in this story, as individuals and as a species.

    Click here to read Part 2 of this report (free executive summary, enrollment required for full access).

  • AI Pores Over Old Scientific Papers, Makes Discoveries Overlooked By Humans

    When AI isn’t busy taking our jobs, it’s making brand new scientific discoveries that our clunky human brains somehow overlooked. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Researchers from Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory trained an AI called Word2Vec on scientific papers to see if there was any “latent knowledge” that humans weren’t able to grock on first pass. 

    The study, published in Nature on July 3, reveals that the algorithm found predictions for potential thermoelectric materials which can convert heat into energy for various heating and cooling applications. 

    The algorithm didn’t know the definition of thermoelectric, though. It received no training in materials science. Using only word associations, the algorithm was able to provide candidates for future thermoelectric materials, some of which may be better than those we currently use. –Motherboard

    “It can read any paper on material science, so can make connections that no scientists could,” said researcher Anubhav Jain. “Sometimes it does what a researcher would do; other times it makes these cross-discipline associations.

    The algorithm was designed to assess the language in 3.3 million abstracts from material sciences, and was able to build a vocabulary of around half-a-million words. Word2Vec used machine learning to analyze relationships between words. 

    “The way that this Word2vec algorithm works is that you train a neural network model to remove each word and predict what the words next to it will be,” said Jain, adding that “by training a neural network on a word, you get representations of words that can actually confer knowledge.

    Using just the words found in scientific abstracts, the algorithm was able to understand concepts such as the periodic table and the chemical structure of molecules. The algorithm linked words that were found close together, creating vectors of related words that helped define concepts. In some cases, words were linked to thermoelectric concepts but had never been written about as thermoelectric in any abstract they surveyed. This gap in knowledge is hard to catch with a human eye, but easy for an algorithm to spot.

    After showing its capacity to predict future materials, researchers took their work back in time, virtually. They scrapped recent data and tested the algorithm on old papers, seeing if it could predict scientific discoveries before they happened. Once again, the algorithm worked. –Motherboard

    As one example, researchers fed publications from before 2009 into the algorithm and were able to predict one of the most effective modern-day thermoelectric materials four years before it was actually discovered in 2012

    The technology isn’t restricted to materials science either – as it can be trained on a wide variety of disciplines by retraining it on literature from whichever subject for which one wants to provide a deeper analysis. 

    “This algorithm is unsupervised and it builds its own connections,” said the study’s lead author, Vahe Tshitoyan, adding “You could use this for things like medical research or drug discovery. The information is out there. We just haven’t made these connections yet because you can’t read every article.”

  • The Quake To Make Los Angeles A Radioactive Dead Zone

    Authored by Harvey Wasserman via CommonDreams.org

    Had the previous Friday’s 7.1 earthquake and other ongoing seismic shocks hit less than 200 miles northwest of Ridgecrest/China Lake, ten million people in Los Angeles would now be under an apocalyptic cloud, their lives and those of the state and nation in radioactive ruin.    

    The likely human death toll would be in the millions. The likely property loss would be in the trillions. The forever damage to our species’ food supply, ecological support systems, and longterm economy would be very far beyond any meaningful calculation. The threat to the ability of the human race to survive on this planet would be extremely significant. The two cracked, embrittled, under-maintained, unregulated, uninsured, and un-inspected atomic reactors at Diablo Canyon, near San Luis Obispo, would be a seething radioactive ruin.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant. Image source: Wikimedia

    Their cores would be melting into the ground. Hydrogen explosions would be blasting the site to deadly dust. One or both melted cores would have burned into the earth and hit ground or ocean water, causing massive steam explosions with physical impacts in the range of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The huge clouds would send murderous radioactive isotopes into the atmosphere that would permanently poison the land, the oceans, the air… and circle the globe again and again, and yet again, filling the lungs of billions of living things with the most potent poisons humans have ever created.

    In 2010, badly maintained gas pipes run by Pacific Gas & Electric blew up a neighborhood in San Bruno, killing eight people. PG&E’s badly maintained power lines have helped torch much of northern California, killing 80 people and incinerating more than 10,000 structures.

    Now in bankruptcy, with its third president in two years, PG&E is utterly unqualified to run two large, old, obsolete, crumbling atomic reactors which are surrounded by earthquake faults. At least a dozen faults have been identified within a small radius around the reactors. The reactor cores are less than fifty miles from the San Andreas fault, less than half the distance that Fukushima Daiichi was from the epicenter that destroyed four reactors there.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Diablo cannot withstand an earthquake of the magnitude now hitting less than 200 miles away. In 2014, the Associated Press reported that Dr. Michael Peck, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s site inspector at Diablo, had warned that the two reactors should be shut because they can’t withstand a seismic shock like the one that has just hit so close. The NRC tried to bury Peck’s report. They attacked his findings, then shipped him to Tennessee. He’s no longer with the Commission.

    All major reactor disasters have come with early warnings. A 1978 accident at Ohio’s Davis-Besse reactor presaged the 1979 disaster at Three Mile Island. The realities were hidden, and TMI spewed radiation that killed local people and animals in droves.   

    Soviet officials knew the emergency shut-down mechanism at Chernobyl could cause an explosion — but kept it secret. Unit Four exploded the instant the rods meant to shut it down were deployed.

    Decades before disaster struck at Fukushima Daiichi, millions of Japanese citizens marched to demand atomic reactors NOT be built in a zone riddled by fault lines, washed by tsunamis.

    In California, ten thousand citizens were arrested demanding the same.  Diablo’s owners hid the existence of the Hosgri Fault just three miles from the site. A dozen more nearby fault lines have since been found, capable in tandem of delivering shocks like the ones shaking Ridgecrest. No significant structural improvements have been made to deal with the newfound fault lines.

    The truly horrifying HBO series on Chernobyl currently topping all historic viewership charts shows just a small sample of the ghastly death and destruction that can be caused by official corruption and neglect.

    Like Soviet apparatchiks, the state of California has refused to conduct independent investigations on the physical status of the two Diablo reactors. It has refused to hold public hearings on Dr. Peck’s warnings that they can’t withstand seismic shocks like the ones now being experienced so dangerously nearby. If there are realistic plans to evacuate Los Angeles and other downwind areas during reactor melt-downs/explosions, hearings on them have yet to be held.

    In the wake of the 2011 explosions at Fukushima, the NRC staff compiled critical reforms for American reactors, including Diablo. But the Commission killed the proposed regulations. So nothing significant has been done to improve safety at two coastal reactors upwind of ten million people that are surrounded by earthquake faults in a tsunami zone like the one where the four Fukushima reactors have already exploded.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant is due to stay operational till the mid-2020’s. Image via LA Times

    There are no excuses. These seismic shocks will never stop. Diablo is scheduled to shut in 2024 and 2025. But massive advances in wind, solar, batteries and efficiency have already rendered the nukes’ power unnecessary. A petition demanding Governor Newsom and the state independently investigate Diablo’s ability to operate safely is at www.solartopia.org.

    That petition began circulating before these latest quakes. The continued operation of these two reactors has now gone to a whole new level of apocalyptic insanity.

  • The Best And Worst States For Retirees

    Census data show that 4 out of 10 Americans over the age of 65 have moved at least once, which is hardly surprising: retirees must adjust to living on a fixed income, and sometimes that requires moving somewhere more affordable.

    Ideally for many, that place will be somewhere along the sun belt with warm weather year round. But what state is truly the best option for America’s retirees?

    Well, Bankrate.com decided to rank every state according to an aggregation of 10 categories, and it came up with an answer – and it’s probably one that most retirees wouldn’t expect, or even appreciate: Nebraska.

    Not exactly known as a mecca for aging Americans, the Cornhusker state lagged behind on weather compared with other states, but it fared well on the other measures in the ranking: affordability, crime, culture and wellness.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>Omaha

    The state’s Wellness score was notably high, ranking No. 8 out of 50 states. When it comes to health care specifically, Nebraska had 61% of the health measures met, according to the National Healthcare Quality and Disparities Report, a higher percentage than about two-thirds of the other states, the data show.

    After Nebraska, the highest ranking states were Iowa, Missouri, South Dakota and, finally, Florida.

    Here’s a full list of the top ten best states…

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>SS

    …and ten worst states.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>SS

    On the other end of the spectrum, Maryland came in dead last in BR’s rankings, making Maryland the worst state for retirees. New York and Alaska took second- and third-to-worst, respectively.

    For this study, Bankrate looked at affordability, weather and a number of other factors important to retirees.

    When choosing where to live, retirees most value proximity to family and friends, low cost of living, access to excellent health care and hospitals, good weather and a low crime rate, Bank Rate found.

    “Obviously, a primary area of concern for older Americans is health care costs,” said Mark Hamrick, Bankrate’s senior economic analyst. “The older we get, the more likely it is we’re going to have an increasing need for health care services. In some cases, there will be illness and, in some cases, there will catastrophic illness. That can be very expensive.”

    Of course, not everybody has the same priorities. If you find that your priorities are markedly different than the above ranking, BankRate has created an interactive tool allowing prospective retirees to weigh how important each category is to them. The tool will then show them which states would be the best, and which would be the worst, according to their standards.

  • Manhattan Goes Dark: Major Power Outage Hits NYC On Anniversary Of 1977 Great Blackout

    Update: Manhattan, from Midtown south, remains in darkness. The following ‘before’ and ‘after’ images show the extent of the blackout…

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

    And all those billionaires are stuck in their penthouses…

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

    *  *  *

    Exactly 42 years after a massive blackout caused by a lightning strike at an electrical substation plunged New York City into darkness for 25 hours (with looters raiding 1,600 stores and over a thousand fires set across the city)…

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

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Manhattan is tonight in darkness as a widespread power outage has disrupted traffic lights, plunging several subway stations, businesses and tourist centers all across Midtown and Upper West Side into darkness as night falls.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Source: Live outages

    Several subway stations are blacked out…

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Many people have reportedly been stuck in the elevators across the city’s high-rises.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The iconic giant monitors at the Times Square are also pitch black, with half of the area affected.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The cause of the power cuts has yet to be determined. ComEd utility company has so far only acknowledged that it was “responding to extensive outages,” providing no further details.

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

    Bars and restaurants are still open… so there’s that!

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    In yet another crazy coincidence, tonight is Manhattan-henge…

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

    Some reports suggested a transformer fire and explosion could have caused to blackout as several witnesses hears a loud bang before the area went dark…

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

  • Steve Mnuchin's Wife Is A "Bisexual Psychopath Killer" In Upcoming Erotic Film

    It was only last week when we revealed US Secretary of the Treasury Steven Mnuchin posing in a risqué poolside photo with his 38-year-old wife, Louise Linton.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Linton is an “Instagram-disgraced” millennial who has used social media to brag about luxury fashion brands she was wearing while de-boarding a government plane, and more importantly, on the taxpayers’ dime.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Many have said Mnuchin’s risqué poolside photo op at a mega-mansion in LA last week, and Linton’s past social media history is more evidence to just how out of touch the Trump administration is with their base.

    And it appears things have just gotten a lot weirder, a new report from The Cut – details how Linton is filming a “sex thriller” with Ed Westwick.  Yes, that means Mnuchin’s wife will be headlining in an erotic film.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Mnuchin’s wife will be playing a “bisexual psychopath killer” who is “uninhibited” and “very carnal and confident in her sexuality.” Seems very fitting considering President Trump’s base is mostly god-fearing conservatives situated in the Heartland of America that would be shocked if they saw this very progressive film.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

     

    The movie is called Me, You, Madness, stars a young thief (Westwick) who has a knack for robbing homes of the rich, robs a mansion of a serial killer (Linton). The movie started filming in 2018 in Malibu was delayed by last year’s Woolsey Fire before resuming after the fire was extinguished.

    “Thanks to my killer crew and cast, the movie is every bit the playful 80’s homage I dreamed of when I wrote it,” Linton said recently. “It was a joyful set, even under pressure. Ed Westwick is a phenomenal actor, collaborator, friend and creative force who became my co-pilot on many creative aspects of the film.”

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Last week was the movie’s final day of filming. Linton shared Instagram posts of behind the scenes. In one, she was doing her own makeup “One of the challenges I face when you’re acting and directing in a movie, is not having time to sit in hair and makeup,” she said.

    //www.instagram.com/embed.js

     

    And maybe an Instagram critic was right: 

    “Steve looks like the type of dude that enjoys watching his wife getting banged by another dude. #CuckoldLif.” an Instagram critic said.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Living a luxurious lifestyle, staring in an erotic film, and posting about it all over social media shows just how the Mnuchin’s are out of touch with their base. 

  • Healthcare Providers In Canada Turn To CBD To Help Difficult Dementia Symptoms

    Authored by Mac Slavo via SHTFplan.com,

    Healthcare teams in Canada have turned to CBD (cannabidiol) oil to help patients relieve their difficult dementia symptoms. Some disruptive behaviors have become increasingly hard to treat, and many say CBD is the answer.

    According to CTV News, aggression and other disruptive behaviors linked to Alzheimer’s disease are notoriously difficult to treat, sometimes leading to patients being restrained or medically sedated. But now, there could be some relief in sight as some doctors are investigating the potential for success with a new strategy: CBD oil. Family members of dementia patients are saying CBD oil is helping their loved onesand “making a world of difference.”

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    At an Ontario long term care facility in Fenelon Falls, David Scholey’s screams and yelling used to permeate the hallways.  However,  since he triedCBD oil two months ago, the 76-year-old’s dementia-related disruptions have declined.

    “Within a couple of days you could tell it was working because of the fact that he was a lot quieter, he was a lot calmer,” said Catherine Mantle, a registered nurse and care director at Fenelon Court.

    David’s brother, William Scholey also noticed a major improvement. “I think it is wonderful for not only David but for people and family just to see that he is not… as anxious and frustrated,” he said. Sedatives just weren’t quite working for David either, making CBD an easy choice.

    William Scholey says “the problem” with sedatives for his brother was that they made it more difficult for David to communicate simple things like which movies he wants to watch. “He’s a movie buff and he is constantly looking for new titles. He likes the old war and cowboy movies and stuff and David has a great memory in that regard,”Scholey said according to CTV News.

    Scholey joked that his brother is now a “pothead,” but also said that the therapy doesn’t appear be making David “high.” That’s likely because CBD is not the chemical in cannabis that makes people feel euphoric. The “high” comes mainly from Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC).

    Is CBD Oil a Good Choice for Your Bug-Out-Bag?

    Betty Wiggle’s family has also turned to CBD oil. Her son, James Tripp, says the drug shifted his 92-year-old mother’s mood from anxious and depressed to cheerful.

    As her caregiver, Tripp says the CBD therapy has been a godsend.

    “I was so worn out from looking after her. It is hard enough looking after seniors but an Alzheimer’s patient is literally a 24/7 job. I was sleeping two hours a day. I was exhausted dealing with my own health issues,” he said.

    “When we got her on the (CBD) therapy it solved so many of the volatility issues,” Tripp added. –CTV News

    Of course, there is no “miracle cure” out there for very many ailments or diseases, but many are having success with CBD oil, and considering the ever-rising prices of Big Pharma’s side-effect inducing “cures”, CBD oil usage has become an easy decision for many.

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Today’s News 13th July 2019

  • Trump's Huawei Reprieve Is A National Security Debacle

    Authored by Gordon Chang via The Gatestone Institute,

    Tuesday, Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross outlined the scope of exemptions to be granted to sales and licenses to Huawei Technologies, the Chinese telecom giant.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    At the end of last month, President Donald Trump publicly promised to give the Chinese company a reprieve from newly implemented U.S. restrictions.

    Trump’s move, announced after his meeting with Chinese ruler Xi Jinping at the conclusion of the Osaka G20 summit, was a strategic mistake. Moreover, it was a humiliation for the United States, almost an acknowledgment of Beijing’s supremacy.

    The U.S. Commerce Department, effective May 16, added Huawei, the world’s largest networking equipment manufacturer and second-largest smartphone maker, to its Entity List. The designation means that no American company, without prior approval from the Bureau of Industry and Security, is allowed to sell or license to Huawei products and technology covered by the U.S. Export Administration Regulations.

    Beijing then demanded the Trump administration withdraw the designation. On June 27, the Wall Street Journal reported that Huawei’s removal from the Entity List was one of China’s three main preconditions to a comprehensive trade deal.

    Trump, incredibly, complied with the demand from Beijing. At his June 29 press conference, the American president said he was granting the reprieve.

    Trump was not specific about the reprieve’s scope, and since then administration officials have tried to walk back his comments. Trade advisor Peter Navarro, for instance, this month told CNN that sales to Huawei for its 5G products — 5G is the fifth generation of wireless communication — would be forbidden. Earlier, there were suggestions that waivers for smartphones would be allowed.

    Should any waivers be granted? “It is their mechanism for spying,” Senator Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), referring to Huawei, told Fox News on Sunday.

    She is right. Huawei is in no position to resist Beijing’s demands to illicitly gather intelligence. For one thing, Beijing owns Huawei. The Shenzhen-based enterprise maintains it is “employee-owned,” but that is an exaggeration. Founder Ren Zhengfei holds a 1 percent stake, and the remainder is effectively owned by the state. Moreover, in the Communist Party’s top-down system, no one can resist a command from the ruling organization. Furthermore, Articles 7 and 14 of China’s National Intelligence Law, enacted in 2017, requires Chinese nationals and entities to spy if relevant authorities make a demand. Ren has maintained the company would not snoop on others, but that claim, in view of the above, is not credible.

    Huawei has, in fact, been implicated in stealing tech almost from the moment it was formed in 1987. The company was built on stolen Cisco Systems technology, and according to recent allegations, Huawei has never stopped stealing. The Justice Department in January unsealed an indictment against the company for the theft of intellectual property from T-Mobile. The FBI, according to a Bloomberg report, is investigating Huawei for pilfering smartphone glass technology from Akhan Semiconductor, an Illinois-based firm.

    Huawei’s rampant theft has been effective in injuring its competition. For instance, many consider the company’s campaign to take tech was largely responsible for the 2013 failure of Nortel Networks, the Canadian company.

    Additionally, Beijing has used Huawei servers to surreptitiously download datafrom others, most notably the African Union from 2012 to 2017.

    Not surprisingly, Huawei is laying the groundwork for grabbing tomorrow’s data.

    First, Christopher Balding’s study of résumés of Huawei employees reveals that some of them claim concurrent links with units of the Chinese military, in roles that look as if they involve intelligence collection. As he writes in his study, “there is an undeniable relationship between Huawei and the Chinese state, military, and intelligence gathering services.”

    Second, recent analyses show Huawei software to have an unusually high number of security flaws. According to Finite State, a cybersecurity firm, a scan of nearly 10,000 Huawei firmware images showed that “55% had at least one potential backdoor. These backdoor access vulnerabilities allow an attacker with knowledge of the firmware and/or with a corresponding cryptographic key to log into the device.” Huawei, according to the survey, ranked the lowest among its competitors in this regard.

    Theft is not the only risk. As Sen. Blackburn pointed out to Fox News, Huawei will also serve as Beijing’s mechanism for controlling the networks operating the devices of tomorrow. The concern is that the Chinese government and military will be able to use Huawei equipment to remotely manipulate devices networked on the Internet of Things (IoT), no matter where those devices are located. So, China may be able to drive your car into oncoming traffic, unlock your front door, or turn off or speed up your pacemaker.

    On Tuesday, Secretary Ross echoed earlier administration comments when he promised his department would only issue exemptions “where there is no threat to U.S. national security.”

    That sounds reassuring, but it is not possible to divide Huawei into threatening and non-threatening components. Huawei management can take profits from innocuous-looking parts of the business to support the obviously dangerous parts. Money is fungible, so the only safe course would be to prohibit all transactions with the company.

    Ross on Tuesday implied that licenses would be granted for items available from other countries, saying “we will try to make sure that we don’t just transfer revenue from the U.S. to foreign firms.” At first glance, sales of those items appear non-objectionable, but, as the New York Times reported on Tuesday, U.S. companies seeking exemptions acknowledge that their products are often more advanced than those from Japan, South Korea, and other countries.

    Therefore, the better course would be to get all American suppliers to stop all sales and licenses and to rally Tokyo, Seoul, and other capitals to do the same. That would severely disrupt Huawei, perhaps forcing it out of business or at least impeding its progress. In short, Ross is underestimating America’s leverage.

    As Eli Lake, writing on the Bloomberg site, points out, American policy on Huawei looks like it had “collapsed” after the bilateral meeting with Xi. Lake is right. Beijing, buoyed by the talk of the American climb-down, is now fast selling Huawei equipment around the world, which means, in the normal course of events, the Chinese will soon control the world’s 5G backbone.

    Think of the consequences.

    “Imagine a world dominated by China,” Jonathan Bass of PTM Images told Gatestone. “Close your eyes and pretend to wake up in a world controlled by Xi Jinping, militarily, economically, politically, culturally.”

    This is the world, thanks to Huawei, that we will soon face.

  • These Are The Cities With The Most Billionaires And Most Expensive Luxury Homes

    New York City has been unveiled as home to the most billionaires, which has helped the city’s luxury housing prices rise, according to Barron’s

    There are 85 billionaires who make New York City their main residence, including former mayor Michael Bloomberg and David Koch. Their presence in the city has helped push luxury property prices up 15% over the last five years to $3,220 per square foot. But New York is actually still considered a discount compared to Hong Kong and Tokyo, where luxury homes cost nearly twice as much.

    In US dollars, it cost $8,370 per square foot for luxury property in Hong Kong, which is home to 79 billionaires and the most expensive real estate in the world. Luxury housing prices have soared 51% over the last five years in Hong Kong.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Sophie Chick, head of Savills World Research said:

    “It is no coincidence that many of the cities with the largest number of billionaires are also among the most expensive cities in the world for ultra-prime residential property.”

    Beijing is an exception because luxury prices haven’t yet caught up with the pace of billionaires. Beijing has 61 billionaires, but the city remains one of the less expensive places to buy a luxury home at about $1,780 per square foot. This is still double what it was five years ago. Shanghai, which hosts 45 billionaires, has an average price of $2740 per square foot.

    A Savills World Research report said:

    “China’s relatively recent growth in wealth is also reflected in the average age of its billionaires—56 years. This compares with 66 for the U.S. and 64 globally.”

    The cheapest home to billionaires was revealed to be Dubai, where despite luxury home prices increasing 13% over the past year, they are still at $750 per square foot. Dubai is home to 15 billionaires.

  • Is This Project Mayhem Or Project Epstein?

    Authored by Tom Luongo,

    Only Donald Trump knows…

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    From the moment I heard Jeffrey Epstein had been arrested I knew none of us had anything close to the real story. And, by the time this is over, I don’t think we’ll have anything close to the real story either.

    That shouldn’t, however, keep us from picking through the bread crumbs and see where they lead us. I wrote previously that I thought this story would lead to Hillary Clinton. The MAGA crowd loved that.

    Regardless of whether Hillary winds up being the target is irrelevant. What I wrote the other day I still feel is the most likely situation.

    I was cautiously optimistic that Trump would turn the corner on his presidency now that Mueller, impeachment and the rest of it would lift from his shoulders. His foreign policy maneuvers didn’t fill me with much, if any, confirmation of this hope.

    But domestically signs were there that he had stabilized the battlefield.

    Epstein’s arrest tells me he’s now out for blood.

    That was, frankly, my gut instinct talking when I wrote that. It fit the sequence of events and the changes we’ve seen in D.C. over the past four months since Attorney General William Barr shut down the Mueller investigation.

    What was done to Trump went far beyond egregious. It went far beyond even lawlessness. It was an operation that spanned multiple governments, showed complete contempt not only for procedure but the people themselves.

    It was, in short, a supremely arrogant attempted coup that expected to get away with it all because they always had in the past. It was also amatuerish as hell.

    The reason I’ve never believed any of the arguments that Trump is simply a bait and switch pitch man for the Deep State is because that description defies reality.

    It doesn’t pass Occam’s Razor. The people Jeffrey Epstein represents hate Trump holding power because they have nothing of substance on him. Sure he’s bribed building contractors or paid off unions to get his buildings finished. Whatever.

    No one other than the squeakiest of wheels would get upset over that. Everyone accepts that to do business in a corrupt world like New York you swim with some of it because that’s simply how things are done, like it or not.

    But using fourteen-year-old girls as blackmail agents and prostitutes to run guns, drugs, topple governments and steal weapons research is another level of corruption. It’s orders of magnitude worse. And to Trump’s credit it seems like he’s never dabbled in that particular thing.

    Because if he had, he would never have become President and the Deep State would have never organized a coup attempt against him.

    Occam’s Razor, folks. They don’t have anything of substance on him. At best they’ve got a few pictures of him at an Epstein party and then he’s gone.

    Watch a few minutes of this report by George Webb and tell me this doesn’t sound exactly like what we’ve been presented as evidence that Trump is one of Epstein’s perverts.

    We know Trump helped a case against Epstein in 2009. We know that Trump threw Epstein out of Mar-a-Lago for hitting on a young girl. What we don’t know is left to our imagination to reinforce our view of Trump one way or the other.

    For the past six days it has been wall to wall, “Epstein is a pervert. Trump went to a few parties. Acosta, Trump’s guy, let Epstein off.”

    Now Acosta resigns as Secretary of Labor.

    But Epstein is most definitely an asset. The breadcrumbs are everywhere for you to find. The last thing Acosta did before resigning was letting it be known that he thought Epstein was connected to intelligence.

    “Is the Epstein case going to cause a problem [for confirmation hearings]?” Acosta had been asked. Acosta had explained, breezily, apparently, that back in the day he’d had just one meeting on the Epstein case. He’d cut the non-prosecution deal with one of Epstein’s attorneys because he had “been told” to back off, that Epstein was above his pay grade. “I was told Epstein ‘belonged to intelligence’ and to leave it alone,” he told his interviewers in the Trump transition, who evidently thought that was a sufficient answer and went ahead and hired Acosta. (The Labor Department had no comment when asked about this.)

    And now he resigns because of the 2009 plea deal? Something doesn’t pass the sniff test here. This is the biggest revelation of the entire week.

    It’s also easily inferred from simply looking at the magnitude of the crimes committed and the final deal that was signed.

    The news comes at us so fast, just like in a good action movie, that sometimes we forget to step back and ask basic plot questions, like “If this guy is that connected why are we hearing about this now at all?”

    “Why did the FBI kick in the door of his home?”

    “Why is this even news?”

    “Who ordered the judge to unseal the records from the previous case?”

    Because if this is that big a cover-up – implicating everyone from the CIA, to the State Dept. and Dyncorp to the Israeli Mossad — none of this should be in the news.

    No way would these people risk exposing Epstein to this level of scrutiny if they were just trying to run a ‘nuts and sluts’ operation on Trump to impeach him.

    And all of those questions, again using Occam’s Razor, lead to one answer. Donald Trump.

    I think Trump started this thing and is now going to watch it play out to the end. Acosta was chum, sent out to fall on his sword and keep the story moving quickly to make it look like Trump is in cahoots with Epstein.

    This first act is to go all out in attacking Trump. The intense focus on the sex-trafficking, the ‘nuts and sluts’ angle, is your key to understanding the stakes here. This is Alinsky 101, accuse your target of that which you are guilty of and make it personal. Guilt by association to put Trump on the defensive.

    But to do that they also have to hand over the Clintons. And this is what I was getting at the other day. Hillary is over-extended here. Trump knows the way to take her and the rest of them down is to get to them through Epstein.

    And most importantly, notice how no one in D.C. is out in front of the cameras, clutching their pearls about how horrible it all is. That silence you don’t hear is fear. Chuck Schumer, who was all over the news in December/January when it looked like Mueller was going to get Trump impeached is now nowhere to be found.

    Pelosi, as I mentioned the other day, is fighting an internal battle within her party and not joining the #MeToo chorus. The outrage is simmering. And the Swamp can’t contain this by hoping to sweep this under the rug.

    Notice how Epstein asked for immunity the other day. But have you heard anything about it since? No.

    What did they get from Harvey Weinstein? Remember him?

    There comes a point where a line is crossed, morality is truly compromised and people look at themselves and ask, “Is this the world I want to live in? Is this what we’ve been reduced to?”

    Act I is the outrage and the attempt to keep the focus on the pervie side of things. Keep people focused on their disgust circuit and, hopefully, off the man behind the curtain.

    But, as I said on Fault Lines, we live in a post-Dorothy Oz where the curtain was pulled back and reveals the weird little man with the levers and we realize yes, this is what we’ve been reduced to.

    And that’s when the anger starts and Act II begins.

    *  *  *

    Join my Patreon if you can’t stand government corruption. Install Brave if you hateBig Tech censorship.

  • Harley Davidson Unveils "LiveWire" Electric Motorcycle That Goes 0-60 In 3 Seconds

    Harley Davidson looks like it will be the first company to market with a mainstream electric motorcycle, according to engadget. The company’s LiveWire electric motorcycle will soon be on the road and will have a longer range than expected, at 140 miles of city driving on a single charge. But, like any other electric vehicle, you’ll still need to hook it up to a charger once in a while.

    According to Harley Davidson’s website, the bike will be “available in select dealerships through North America and Western Europe in the fall of 2019. Select additional markets will follow.”

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The motorcycle has been in the works for more than four years now. You’ll be able to charge it with a Level 1 charger at home, or with a quicker Level 2 or 3 DC fast chargers, that’ll be available at Harley Davidson dealerships. 

    The bike comes with seven riding modes that tune the suspension and electric drivetrain differently. It sports anti-lock brakes and a traction control system, along with a color touchscreen for navigation and Bluetooth connectivity. 

    Harley Davidson is offering free charging for its new US customers. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The motorcycle is soon going to be available at a limited number of dealerships and will cost about $30,000. It can go from 0 to 60 mph in just three seconds. There is no clutch and no shifting.

    Harley Davidson is looking to revitalize its business after struggling with declining sales and an aging client base both in the United States and abroad. Sales of its motorcycles were down 4.2% and international sales were down 3.3% in the first quarter of 2019.

  • Watch 4K Drone Footage Of Epstein's 'Pedo Island' 

    Following the arrest of Jeffrey Epstein, interest in his 75-acre island, Little St. James, has hit an all time high. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Purchased in 1998 for $7.95 million, Epstein visited the island up to three times a month up until 2008, when he struck his infamous ‘sweetheart’ deal with just-resigned (fired) Secretary of Labor, Alexander Acosta. 

    All sorts of debauchery is said to have taken place on ‘orgy island,’ as the locals call it (‘pedo island’ is also acceptable). In addition to an alleged sex-trafficking hotbed, Epstein accuser Virginia Roberts told her lawyers in 2011 that she saw former President Bill Clinton with “two young girls,” saying “I remember asking Jeffrey, ‘What’s Bill Clinton doing here?‘ kind of thing, and he laughed it off and said, ‘Well, he owes me a favor.‘” 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Clinton has denied ever being on the island, or having much of a connection with Epstein at all – despite the financier bragging that he helped conceive the Clinton Global Initiative, as well as contributing $25,000 to the Clinton Foundation. 

    According to Fox News, Epstein had a dedicated team of workers on the island who trafficked girls as young as 12 to his clients. Sarah Ransome, one of his alleged victims, said she tried to swim off the island only to be found by a search party that included Epstein and his cohort Ghislaine Maxwell. Ransome also said that they kept her passport so she couldn’t leave.

    Though the specifics of the visits are unclear, one former employee told Bloomberg that Epstein would fly young women into St. Thomas, whom he would then ferry over to his private island via a boat named “Lady Ghislaine.” –The Cut

    Epstein loved collecting “pirate treasure” from all over his island – paying staffers between $100 and $1,000 if they discovered old rum bottles, plates and other relics from the property. 

    Odd structures

    Since purchasing the island, Epstein has had all manner of roads and buildings constructed – including the infamously weird cube-shaped building which used to sport a copper dome (until Hurricane Irma knocked it off in 2017). 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    At present it appears to be under construction, and has what looks to be two stripped mattresses inside

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The estate also features a strange sun dial in the middle with benches and rocks around the perimeter. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Drone footage

    With all of the newfound interest in ‘pedo island,’ someone took several minutes of 4K drone footage, which can be seen below:

  • Epstein Has 'Secret' Steel Safe In Off-Limits Room On 'Pedo Island'

    With all eyes on Jeffrey Epstein following his Saturday arrest on charges of underage sex-trafficking, we now turn our attention to the mysterious island owned by the pedophile financier. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Little St. James – or as locals call it “Pedophile Island” or “Orgy Island,” sits to the east of Puerto Rico right next to St. Thomas island. Epstein reportedly preferred the nickname “Little St. Jeff’s.” 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The ‘temple’ in better days:

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Epstein purchased the island for $7.95 million in 1998 – visiting the island up to three times a month for a few days at a time up until his 2008 ‘sweetheart’ deal for 13 months in prison with partial work-release, brokered by now-fired (‘resigned’) Labor Secretary Alexander Acosta. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Back in his heyday, before his 2008 guilty plea in Florida, Epstein would visit his piece of the Virgin Islands archipelago about two or three times a month for stays of three or four days, according to the former staffer, who asked not to be named because Epstein insisted on secrecy from his employees. He described it as a Zen-like retreat when Epstein was there, padding around shirtless in shorts and flip-flops, with meditative music piped into the area around the main house, the cabanas and the pool, where women would sometimes sunbathe topless or in the nude. –Bloomberg

    Shortly after he purchased the island, Epstein began construction on the 72-acre property, according to Bloomberg – carving roads, planting palm trees, and building a massive stone mansion and a weird temple-like structure which had its gold-colored dome blown off by Hurrican Irma in 2017. 

    Tourists still take boats out to get a glimpse of the island, where, according to a former employee, Epstein hosted young women who flew into St. Thomas with him and were ferried over in groups aboard a 38-foot vessel called the “Lady Ghislaine,” apparently named for his friendGhislaine Maxwell. –Bloomberg

    Epstein also installed a secret safe in his office, which was off-limits aside from the occasional housekeeper. 

    The only unusual aspect of the main residence the former worker said he was aware of were the security boxes in two offices. The level of secrecy around a steel safe in Epstein’s office, in particular, suggested it contained much more than just money, he said. Outside of an occasional visit by a housekeeper, no one was allowed in those rooms. –Bloomberg

    With the source of Epstein’s wealth a longstanding mystery, and rumors swirling that Epstein may have been backed by a “state sponsor” for a honeypot blackmail operation, the contents of Epstein’s off-limits safe should be of the utmost interest to US prosecutors. 

  • "Playing With Fire": China's Military Warns US Over Taiwan Arms Sales

    China’s military has predictably slammed Washington’s recent approval to send $2.2 billion in arms to Taiwan, announced Monday. The PLA warned among other things that the move “severely undermined Sino-US military-to-military relations” at an already sensitive juncture in relations. Additionally, as we reported previously, Beijing authorities are preparing potential sanctions against any US firms found to be involved in future Taiwan weapons sales. 

    “The People’s Liberation Army is strongly dissatisfied by and resolutely opposes Washington’s recent approval of a $2.2 billion arms deal for Taiwan, an action that has seriously undermined Sino-US military relations,” according to Senior Colonel Wu Qian, a spokesman for the Ministry of National Defense, as reported in Chinese state media

    Earlier this week the US State Department approved the possible sale to Taiwan of M1A2T Abrams tanks, Stinger missiles and related equipment at an estimated value of $US2.2 billion despite vocal Chinese criticism of the deal.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    A U.S. M1A2 SEP Abrams battle tank in a live-fire exercise, via Axios/Getty

    The PLA’s Friday statements continued: “China’s adamant opposition against US arms sales to Taiwan has always been clear and consistent,” Colonel Qian said.

    “The wrongful actions by the US have seriously violated the one-China principle and the three Sino-US joint communiques, and they have interfered with China’s domestic affairs and violated its sovereignty and security interests.”

    As a reminder, one month ago China’s Foreign Ministry urged the United States to halt the sales to avoid harming bilateral ties, saying it was “seriously concerned”.

    And now Beijing appears to be taking more aggressive action

    Beijing said on Friday it will issue sanctions against the US companies involved in the latest arms sale to Taiwan, as tensions between China and the United States continue to rise.

    The foreign ministry said in a brief statement that the move by Washington had violated China’s territorial sovereignty and national security.

    “To protect our national interest, China will impose sanctions on the US companies involved in the arms sale,” ministry spokesman Geng Shuang was quoted as saying.

    And separately, China’s Foreign Minister Wang Yi said during a state visit to Budapest on Friday that the US must stop “playing with fire”.

    “We urge the US to fully recognise the gravity of the Taiwan question … [and] not to play with fire on the question of Taiwan,” the foreign minister told a news conference.

    The proposed sale also comes at a perilously sensitive moment: at the start of June, during the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore, China’s Defense Minister Wei Fenghe warned the United States not to meddle in security disputes over Taiwan and the South China Sea.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    File photo of Ministry of National Defense spokesman Wu Qian, via SCMP

    He had also launched into a bellicose attack on opponents to China’s expansionist plans towards the South China Sea and Taiwan, declaring: “If they want to fight, we will fight till the end”.

    Though long seen by Beijing as China’s “renegade province,” the United States remains Taiwan’s primary arms supplier, despite having no “official” or formal ties other than the crucial Taiwan Relations Act (TRA), which has loomed large in Sino-US relations of the past decades. 

  • The Economics Of South Park

    Authored by Emmanuel Sessegnon via The American Institute for Economic Research,

    People love South Park.

    In an age where shows attempt to avoid controversy at all costs, South Park co-creators Trey Parker and Matt Stone practically go out of their way to find it. 

    When asked by the Huffington Post which group they have angered the most their answer was fast: mainstream progressives. 

    This should come as no surprise. It’s no secret that the two friends are strong supporters of free markets and free speech, neither of which are supported by the modern Left. And their episodes always hinted at their healthy distrust of the government. But more importantly it’s because the shows reveal a confidence in the capacity of human beings to adapt to difficult situations without the seeming aid of legislation and imposition by know-it-alls at the top.

    Last year at an award ceremony they officially announced that they were Republicans, though they later clarified they were more libertarian.

    So, in extremely belated honor of their announcement, here are five (hilarious) episodes that showcase their views and hopefully caused their viewers to trust the government just a little bit less.

    1- Cartmanland (Season 8 Episode 6)

    This episode teaches that capitalism works despite human selfishness. 

    When Cartman, an extremely selfish boy, inherits a million dollars from his grandmother, he immediately uses the money to buy an amusement park. His plan? To take the park for himself and not allow anyone else in. 

    But without security, he can’t keep people from coming. Eventually he has to let people into the amusement park in order to make enough money for security, keeping the rides in good condition, etc. 

    In the end, the free market produced the best result.

    2-  Goobacks (Season 8 Episode 6)

    Originally aired back in 2004, this episode is more relevant now than ever. 

    In Goobacks, a portal suddenly opens allowing millions of time travelers to come to South Park. These immigrants are poor, and are coming through the portal in order to better their lives. However, many of the locals start saying that the time immigrants took their jobs. In fact, the boys themselves lose their snow shoveling job because immigrants would do it for 25 cents.

    In the end, the two groups learn to listen to each other and eventually make peace – something people today need to learn how to do. 

    3-  Stunning and Brave (Season 19, Episode 1)

    No list about South Park would be complete without PC Principal, its most famous antagonist. 

    In this first appearance PC Principal, a frat boy with shades on, decides that the school is not politically correct enough. The episode focuses on society’s increasingly strict policing of language. When Kyle refuses to say that Caitlyn Jenner is ‘stunning and brave’, he gets suspended. 

    This episode is one of the funniest the show has to offer – and easily one of the most relevant.

    4 – Margaritaville (Season 13, Episode 3)

    Airing in 2009, this episode deals with the Great Recession and public ignorance of economics. 

    Stan gives money to a bank but it is immediately lost because the bank decides to put it in a “money-market mutual fund” which goes belly up. Led by Randy, the town decides that the best course of action is to spend money only on the bare essentials in order to appease the economy (viewed as a god). 

    After a series of shenanigans, including Kyle using a credit card to pay off everyone’s debts, the economy gets better and stores start opening once more. 

    5- Starvin Marvin (Season 1 Episode 8)

    When a famine devastates Ethiopia, the boys decide to donate to a charity. After a series of misunderstandings, the government brings Cartman to Africa and Marvin to America instead of sending over the money.

    Though it all works out in the end – with Cartman learning gratitude and Marvin bringing food back for his people – the episode is an amusing story of government incompetence 

    These episodes and many others can be watched in full on South Park’s website.

  • Drugmaker Pays Largest Opioid Settlement In History To Make Investigations Go Away

    A UK-based drugmaker has agreed to pay a record $1.4 billion settlement to the US government in order to end criminal and civil probes into allegations of illegal marketing of opioid addiction treatment medication, according to the Justice Department. 

    The settlement with Reckitt Benckiser Group (RB Group) will include multiple investigations into a subsidiary, Indivior (formerly Reckitt Benckiser Pharmaceuticals Inc.). 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    “Opioid withdrawal is difficult, painful, and sometimes dangerous; people struggling to overcome addiction face challenges that can often seem insurmountable,” said assistant Attorney General Jody Hunt of the DOJ’s Civil Division. “Drug manufacturers marketing products to help opioid addicts are expected to do so honestly and responsibly.”

    Suboxone, which proved to be a blockbuster-selling drug for Indivior, is an addiction-fighting medication that also contains opioids. Indivior was spun off into a separate company from the RB Group in December 2014, but the exposure and looming litigation and probes related to Suboxone were still attached to the parent company.

    On April 9, a federal grand jury in Virginia indicted Indivior for “allegedly engaging in an illicit nationwide scheme to increase prescriptions of Suboxone,” according to the DOJ. The company denied the charges and trial is scheduled to start in May 2020.

    Federal prosecutors charged that Indivior allegedly marketed a version of Suboxone (Suboxone Film) to medical professionals as less addictive and safer than other drugs containing its active ingredient, the opioid buprenorphine, according to the DOJ statement. –ABC News

    According to the indictment, Indivior’s “Here to Help” web and phone resources actually funneled opioid-addicted patients to doctors who were actively prescribing Suboxone and other opioids “to more patients than allowed by federal law, at high doses, and in a careless and clinically unwarranted manner.”

    The company was also accused of discontinuing its tablet form of Suboxone “based on supposed ‘concerns regarding pediatric exposure’ to tablets, despite Indivior executives’ knowledge that the primary reason for the discontinuance was to delay the Food and Drug Administration’s approval of generic tablet forms of the drug.” 

    Included in the settlement is an immunity agreement, while RB Group will forfeit $647 million of proceeds from the sale of Indivior – nor will it manufacture, market or sell Schedule 1 – 3 controlled substances for three years. 

    That said, it’s not over for Invidior.

    The trial against the RB Group’s former subsidiary Invidior is still slated to start next May. Thursday’s settlement was only with RB Group, and not Indivior.

    In addition, the company also agreed to pay $700 million in civil settlements to the federal government and six states, as well as $50 million to the Federal Trade Commission.

    RB issued a statement denying any wrongdoing.

    “While RB acted lawfully at all times and expressly denies all allegations that it has engaged in any wrongful conduct, after careful consideration, the board of RB determined that the agreement is in the best interests of the company and its shareholders,” they said. 

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Today’s News 12th July 2019

  • AI-Trained Robots Set To Automate Recycling Centers, Will Displace Countless Jobs

    AMP Robotics, an artificial intelligence and robotics company that is automating the recycling industry, has rolled out new trash-picking robots for recycling centers that will replace countless low-skilled jobs, reported The WSJ.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Single Stream Recyclers (SSR) in Sarasota, Florida, which processes 350 tons of waste per day, said last week that it would add eight AMP trash-picking robots to its already six. “Robots are the future of the recycling industry. Our investment with AMP is vital to our goal of creating the most efficient recycling operation possible, while producing the highest value commodities for resale,” said John Hansen co-owner of SSR.

    AMP robots are more productive than humans, can sort garbage more accurately and faster, are set to eliminate most human sorter jobs at SSR’s Florida facility in the coming years.

    “AMP’s robots are highly reliable and can consistently pick 70-80 items a minute as needed, twice as fast as humanly possible and with greater accuracy. This will help us lower cost, remove contamination, increase the purity of our commodity bales, divert waste from the landfill, and increase overall recycling rates,” said Eric Konik co-owner of SSR.

    Hanson said, “It’s 95 degrees, they’re [human sorters] standing on a platform and sorting,” adding that AMP robots are “twice as fast and they don’t make mistakes.”

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Kerry Sandford, a senior consultant with Resource Recycling Systems in Ann Arbor, Michigan, told the Journal that less than 5% of the residential recycling centers in North America are automated.

    AMP robots are controlled by the AMP Neuron AI platform to perform tasks. AMP Neuron uses cameras and machine learning to identify different colors, textures, shapes, sizes, and patterns to identify material characteristics.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The robots have been trained to pick out water bottles, beer cans, milk jugs, food cartons, and other items—whether they are intact, dented, or crushed.

    Using computer vision, sensors scan the trash on a conveyor belt to detect materials. The robot uses a suction cup that can throw the recyclables into the appropriate bin by using reverse air pressure to blow them out.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    “Anything a person can identify, our system can be taught to identify,” said AMP’s chief executive and founder, Matanya Horowitz.

    “All of the systems can learn collectively. All robots are learning from different robots around the country.”

    AMP has approximately 24 systems running across the US, Canada, and Japan, and the company believes more robots will be brought online in 2H19.

    SSR’s Hansen said it could take a recycling plant about 1.5 to four years to recover the cost of its AMP investment.

    “SSR has built a world-class facility that sets the bar for modern recycling. John, Eric and their team are at the forefront of their industry and we are grateful to be a part of their plans,” said Horowitz. “SSR represents the most comprehensive application of AI and robotics in the recycling industry, a major milestone not only for us, but for the advancement of the circular economy.”

    A new wave of automation investments in recycling facilities across the US could displace tens of thousands of jobs in the next decade. Overall, robots could replace 20% to 25% of current jobs by 2030 — equivalent to 40 million job losses.

  • The Obama Ukrainian Nightmare Seems To Be Ending, At Last

    Authored by Eric Zuesse via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

    Finally, the process of ending the war in Ukraine seems to be starting in earnest. But to understand how the war can now realistically end, the basic history of how it began needs first to be acknowledged, and this history is something that will be very difficult for U.S-and-allied media to report, because it violates what their ‘news’-reports, ever since the time of the war’s start, had said was happening. So, what will be reported here (like the truth was, when it was news) will far likelier be simply ignored, than ever reported in the US and its allied countries. That’s why this news-report and analysis is being submitted to all mainstream news-media in those countries, which until now have unanimously reported, and accepted as being true, the authorized lies, which everyone in the US and allied countries has read, as if those lies were instead the history.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    For one thing: This war did not start with the 16 March 2014 breakaway of Crimea from Ukraine, as Western ‘news’-media have always been claiming; but, instead, it started by what had sparked the overwhelming desire of the vast majority of Crimeans to want to break away from Ukraine. This urge had to do with the three-week-earlier February 2014 bloody coup d’etat in Ukraine, illegally overthrowing Ukraine’s democratically elected President, Viktor Yanukovych, for whom 75% of Crimeans had voted. The vast majority of Crimeans refused to accept Obama’s selected replacement-leaders and their new and US-imposed far-rightwing regime, which made clear, as soon as they took over, what they were intending to do to Crimeans.

    The key period in the Ukrainian uprising against the coup, during which the residents in Ukraine’s far east — where the voting percentages for Yanukovych had ranged from 80% to over 90% — blocked Ukraine’s tanks and took over the government’s buildings, was the week of 2 through 9 May 2014, and that’s when the farthest eastern region, Donbass, which had voted over 90% for Yanukovych, were so resistant to the imposed fascist regime, that they actually broke away from Ukraine, despite all the efforts by the US-imposed fascist regime to conquer them — Ukraine’s bombing them for months and intentionally driving them out into Russia. The new regime did this so as to regain the land but without the people on it. Obama’s agents — the appointees to the new regime, which were selected by Obama’s US agents — didn’t want those voters to remain in Ukraine’s electorate, because the residents there would vote against the US-imposed regime’s candidates, who then would lose power. Obama wanted the land, but not the people who lived on it, and that’s what this war was and is all about — seizing the land, from the people who live there.

    The US and allied media presented the overthrow of Ukraine’s democratically elected President Viktor Yanukovych in February 2014 as having been a democratic revolution, but it was actually a US coup d’etat that was hidden behind anti-corruption demonstrations, which had started to be organized on 1 March 2013, inside the US Embassy in Kyiv; and the US regime hired, for this coup, snipers from several countries, such as Georgia and Lithuania, some of which snipers have since admitted publicly that they had been hired by agents for the United States, to perpetrate this coup. Once inside Ukraine, Georgia’s snipers were introduced, at 9:40 in the Part One video, to “an American military guy, who will be your instructor. This American’s name was Brian Christopher Boyenger. … We were always in touch with this person, Bryan.” The Lithuanian snipers were mentioned at 1:40 in the Part Two video, because those snipers happened to have been assigned to be shooting down, into the crowd, from the same room inside the hotel. Obama’s State Department (under Hillary Clinton at the time) had started, by no later than 2011, to plan this operation. Then, after the coup, and after Crimea broke away on 16 March 2014, rebellions farther east started, in other regions that had likewise voted overwhelmingly for Yanukovych. And this is how the war started, which now finally (after the election of Trump in America, and then of Zelensky in Ukraine) seems likely to end fairly soon. (Neither of those two leaders has a personal commitment to continuing this invasion by Ukraine. From now on, Ukraine’s leaders will need to satisfy the EU far more than the US)

    On 17 September 2014, was hidden in Western ‘news’-media — and so I was the first to report and headlined the historic news that — “Russia’s Leader Putin Rejects Ukrainian Separatists’ Aim to Become Part of Russia”. This historically important news was notreported in The West (though my news-report was sent to virtually all media) because America’s President had all along been claiming that Putin was trying to grab ‘more’ territory in Ukraine (Donbass); so, Putin’s rejection of Donbass’s request to be accepted into Russia (as Crimea had been) was too blatant a disproof of The West’s lies to be reported in The West. Eleven days later, on 28 September 2014, Britain’s Telegraphheadlined “Putin and Obama exchange barbs on Ukraine; Vladimir Putin and Barack Obama accuse each other of fomenting Ukraine crisis that has plunged Russia’s relations with the West to lowest point since Cold War.” This report said nothing at all about Putin’s refusal to take that land which The West was continuing to imply he was trying to grab. Their supposed cause de guerre was gone, but it lives on, even now, in the Western myths about the war’s start (i.e., that it started on 16 March 2014 instead of 20 February 2014, and that it started because ‘Russia was invading Ukraine’ to grab land there’, and not because of Obama’s coup in Ukraine — which coup The West continues to hide).

    So, with that background about The West’s lies (versus the reality), here is the reason why Ukraine now seems finally inclined to accept the Donbassers back into Ukraine as full citizens, with equal rights as all others (and no longer as their being ‘terrorists’).

    The West is finally tapped-out on spending for Ukraine’s ongoing invasion of Donbass. If Ukraine fails to stop this war soon, then Ukraine’s Government will have less and less realistic hope of ever being able to join the EU. Putin knows this. Furthermore, Ukraine’s regime had worn out the patience even of the residents in the anti-Russian parts of Ukraine, and so Volodymyr Zelensky, a candidate who was no part of that regime and had had no responsibility for its actions, won the 21 April 2019 Presidential election with an astounding 73% of the votes — by far the biggest win in Ukraine’s history.

    On 4 July 2019, the Kyiv Post bannered “Putin calls on Zelensky to talk with Russian-backed militants in Donbas”.

    The next day, on July 5th, Deutsche Welle, German radio and television, headlined “Ukraine ready for peace, President Volodymyr Zelenskiy tells DW”, and sub-headed “With conflict simmering in the east, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy is hoping to secure a political solution to end a separatist insurgency. He told DW that he has the support of German Chancellor Angela Merkel.” This news-report opened: “Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy on Friday welcomed the withdrawal of Ukrainian and separatist forces from front line positions in Stanitsa Luhanska in eastern Ukraine, marking a new step towards ending the conflict. In the eastern Ukrainian city of Kramatorsk, Zelenskiy told DW that his government is committed to finding a political solution to the conflict.” An accompanying DW news-story was “Why Putin wants to make ‘new Russians’ out of Ukrainians”, and it reported that, “Margarita Simonyan, editor-in-chief of the state-controlled broadcaster [like DW is itself, and BBC, and NPR, and PBS, they all are state-controlled, instead of directly controlled by the billionaires] RT, posted on Facebook that if nothing is done, the population would change so much that by 2040 Russia will be a ‘Muslim country.’ She added that people from the Donbass regions, as well as other migrants, could help maintain the ‘fragile status quo of the dominance of Russian Orthodox Christianity.’” Putin had been able to defeat the Saudi effort to spread its Wahhabist-extremist form of Islam into Russia only by using extreme measures to stop its spread. Whereas Russian Orthodox Christianity is compatible with democracy, the Sauds’ fundamentalist-Sunni faith simply is not. Russia needs more citizens who won’t be vulnerable to the Sauds’ pro-jihadist effort. Russia’s Government is strongly anti-jihadist. By contrast, the US, under Obama, was using Al Qaeda to train the jihadist groups that, led by the United StatesThe West armed to overthrow the secular Government of Syria. The EU is now, at long last, separating itself from the US regime’s control.

    Zelensky needs to rely now far more on pleasing the EU than on pleasing America. Do you remember when Obama’s agent running Ukraine famously said “Fuck the EU” (or “F—k the EU”)? That was because most European leaders weren’t as nazi as Obama was. They didn’t even know about Obama’s coup in Ukraine until it was already over.

  • The United States Of Fascism Hysteria

    Authored (Satirically) by CJ Hopkins via The Unz Review,

    So it’s been an exciting few weeks for Antifa and the rest of the neoliberal Resistance. OK, they haven’t yet managed to overthrow the Putin-Nazi occupation government (hereinafter “POG”), but they’ve definitely got “the Fash” on the run. “Fascism” hysteria is spreading like wildfire. Liberal Twitter mobs are out for blood. At this point, it’s only a matter of time until the sleeping giant of normality awakens and purges America of the fascist filth that have Putin-Nazified this once great nation.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Antifa has been at the vanguard of the fight, smashing the Fash on both East and West Coasts. In Portland, where a gang of neo-fascist anti-masturbationists known as the “Proud Boys” had assembled for a self-promotional street fight they were billing as the “Battle of Portland 2,” Antifa militants positively identified and preventatively beat the living snot out of a journalist named Andy Ngo. To prevent him from snitching to the fascist cops (who are allegedly working hand in hand with POG), they self-defensively robbed him, sprayed him with silly string, and pelted him with vegan milkshakes.

    Now, before you get all up in arms about Antifa assaulting and robbing journalists, you need to know a couple of things.

    First, according to Antifa spokespersons, and those bloodthirsty liberal Twitter mobs, Andy Ngo is a “fascist adjacent,” and possibly even a card carrying fascist. Antifa representative Alexander Reid Ross claims that Ngo is personally responsible for putting people’s names on a Nazi “kill-list” (or at least that Ngo’s writing has been published by Quillette, which published an article by someone else that some fascists read and copied people’s names from), so, basically, he deserves to die.

    Also, assaulting and robbing Ngo was technically “preemptive self-defense (you know, the same as when we invaded Iraq to defend ourselves from those WMDs). Despite their helmets and body armor, and the fact that Ngo is a doughy little gay guy, his presence among them on a public street was making Antifa feel “unsafe.” So, they had no choice but to beat him senseless, steal his camera, and vegan milkshake him. As Antifa expert Mark Bray explains, when you’re Antifa, “fighting back is always self-defense, even if [you] strike the first blow.” (This logic only applies to anti-fascists, of course, like Antifa and the U.S. military, and not to, you know, gangs of thugs, or the perpetrators of wars of aggression.)

    Antifa’s self-defensive mugging of a journalist apparently scared the crap out of POG, because one week later, back in Washington, D.C., President Hitler called in the tanks, and the Luftwaffe, and announced that he was going to stage a reenactment of a Nuremberg Rally right in front of the Lincoln Memorial. The liberal intelligentsia went apeshit. This was really it this time! Putin had given Trump the green-light to declare martial law and pronounce himself Führer. The long-awaited Putin-Nazi Apocalypse was finally about to begin!

    Unfortunately, Trump’s Fourth of July Jamboree turned out to be a rather tame affair. He even almost made it through his speech without making an ass of himself. This was extremely disappointing for liberals, who were hoping he would go full-Hitler, paint “death’s heads” on the turrets of the Bradleys and a Swastika on the tail of Air Force One, and order ICE to start rounding up the Jews.

    The weekend wasn’t a total let-down, however. The Proud Boys (who are clearly gluttons for punishment), staged another self-promotional event, this one billed as “Defend Free Speech.” A few hundred people turned up to listen to speeches by a handful of alt-right clowns desperately trying to reignite their careers. They were outnumbered 2 to 1 by Antifa, Black Lives Matter, assorted drag queens, and an indigenous, two-spirited transperson of color, who reportedly “performed a spoken word” on the meaning of the term “latinx.”

    The D.C. police (who are even more fascist than the Portland police who stood by and watched as Antifa beat up and robbed a journalist) fascistically prevented Antifa militants from storming into the Alt-right rally and beating the snot out of everyone in sight. So, the anti-fascists had no choice but to preemptively attack a newspaper dispenser, which was presumably making them feel “unsafe,” or disseminating POG propaganda, or something. One of them tried to burn a flag, but he couldn’t figure out how to operate his matches. Assorted other hilarious acts of revolutionary direct action followed. Apparently, Antifa’s strategy was to smash the Fash by amusing them to death.

    Meanwhile, militant Resistance actions against the POG “concentration camps” continue. New York City, San Francisco, and other liberal metropolitan areas have almost completely emptied out as liberals flock to the southern border to liberate the surviving prisoners. Conditions in the camps are now beyond inhuman. According to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, migrants are being forced to drink out of toilets, and otherwise subjected to “systematic cruelty,” (so you can understand why liberals are physically putting their bodies on the line to bring an end to this horrifying sadism, and not just sitting around on the Internet shrieking about “concentration camps” as they travel to their summer holiday rentals on Martha’s Vineyard, or the Hamptons, or wherever).

    No, these Putin-Nazi “concentration camps” are nothing at all like the “detention facilities” the Obama administration operated, even though they look exactly the same. Sure, thousands of migrant children were separated from their parents, in cages, and there were tens of thousands of incidents of rape, sexual abuse, beatings, and so on, but, otherwise, these Obama “detention facilities” were more like great big 2-star hotels, or like student dorms at a state university, so there was no need for liberals to get all worked up and start comparing them to places like Dachau and Buchenwald.

    Plus, here’s a picture of dead people! Look at this picture! These people are dead! So just shut up about Obama already! Enough with history, and critical thinking, and the practical aspects of immigration policy! It’s time to abolish all national borders, issue everyone a U.S. passport, and transcend the whole concept of national sovereignty … or at least to provide the capitalist ruling classes with an endless supply of cheap, undocumented, extremely compliant unskilled labor. Those Bel Air lawns aren’t going to mow themselves!

    Jesus, I can’t believe I just wrote that. Concentration camps and dead people are nothing to joke about. It’s OK, however, to cynically use them to whip people up into a paroxysm of manufactured mass fascism hysteria.

    Not that the neoliberal ruling classes and the corporate media would ever do that.

    No, they would never repeatedly attempt to evoke our hatred of the actual Nazis (and their actual concentration camps … which people were dragged out of their homes, loaded onto trains, and shipped away to, and which you could not voluntarily depart) in order to short circuit our critical thinking, or otherwise emotionally manipulate us into supporting their War on Populism.

    No, the Putin-Nazi occupation government is not just manufactured mass hysteria concocted by the neoliberal ruling classes. Donald Trump is really a Nazi. There’s a portrait of Hitler in the Oval Office. Putin really controls America. Putin, and his cabal of Russian Nazis. They’re everywhere. They own the banks. They control the media. They control elections. They are the “International Invisible Government.” (Is any of this sounding vaguely familiar?) They are devising the Final Solution to the Immigrant Problem right this minute. They are doing this at Mar-a-Lago, where Trump has had a big “Black Sun” etched into the marble floor.

    So, if you’re serious about your anti-fascism, now’s the time to load up on silly string, ski goggles, masks, hard knuckle gloves, and whatever you make those milkshakes with. POG might be on the run at the moment, but there’s an election season coming up, so we need to be prepared for anything. The important thing is to remain hysterical, and to be ready to respond to whatever emotional stimuli the ruling classes wave in our faces. The fate of democracy hangs in the balance.

    Oh, and watch out for those fascist newspaper dispensers!

  • Visualizing The Extreme Temperatures Of The Universe: From Coldest To Hottest

    For most of us, temperature is a very easy variable to overlook.

    Our vehicles and indoor spaces are climate controlled, fridges keep our food consistently chilled, and with a small twist of the tap, we get water that’s the optimal temperature. Of course, as Visual Capitalist’s Nick Routley notes, our concept of what’s hot or cold is actually very narrow in the grand scheme of things.

    Even the stark contrast between the wind-swept glaciers of Antarctica and the blistering sands of our deserts is a mere blip on the universe’s full temperature range. Today’s graphic, produced by the IIB Studio, looks at the hottest and coldest temperatures in our universe.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    But First: What is Temperature Anyway?

    Before looking at this top-to-bottom view of extreme temperatures, it helps to remember what temperature is actually measuring – kinetic energy, or the movement of atoms.

    Hypothetically, atoms would simply stop moving as they reach absolute zero. As matter heats up, it begins to “vibrate” more vigorously, changing states from solid to gas. Eventually, plasma forms as electrons wander away from the nuclei.

    With that quick primer, let’s dig into some of the hottest insights in this cool data visualization.

    Highs and Lows on Planet Earth

    Earth’s lowest air temperature, -135ºF (-93ºC), was recorded in Antarctica in 2010. Since then, scientists have discovered that surface ice temperatures can dip as low as -144ºF (-98ºC).

    The conditions need to be just right: clear skies and dry air must persist for several days during the polar winter. In surroundings this cold, human lungs would actually hemorrhage within just a few breaths.

    On the other end of the spectrum of extreme temperatures, the hottest surface reading on Earth of 160ºF (71ºC) occurred in Iran’s Lut Desert in 2005. In fact, the Lut Desert clocked the highest surface temperature in 5 out of 7 years during a 2003-2009 study, making it the world’s hottest location. The desert’s dark pebbles, dry soil, and lack of vegetation create the perfect conditions for blistering heat.

    There are very few organisms that can withstand such temperatures, but one fascinating phylum makes the cut.

    The Amazing Tardigrade

    Commonly known as a “moss pig” or “water bear”, the one-millimeter long tardigrade is extremely resilient. While most organisms need water to survive, the tardigrade gets around this by entering a “tun” state, in which metabolism slows to just 0.01% of its normal rate.

    When water is scarce, the creature curls up and synthesizes molecules that lock sensitive cell components in place until re-hydration occurs. Beyond dry conditions, the tardigrade can also survive both freezing and boiling temperatures, high radiation environments, and even the vacuum of space.

    This video courtesy of TEDEd explains more about the hardy critter:

    Testing the Limits

    For better or worse, humans have pushed the limits of temperature here on Earth.

    At MIT, scientists cooled a sodium gas to half-a-billionth of a degree above absolute zero. In the words of the Nobel Laureate Wolfgang Ketterle, who co-led the team: “To go below one nanokelvin (one-billionth of a degree) is a little like running a mile under four minutes for the first time.”

    Not all experiments are conducted out of simple curiosity. Conventional bombs already explode at around 9,000ºF (5,000ºC), but nuclear explosions take things much further. For a split second, temperatures inside a nuclear fireball can reach a mind-bending 18,000,000ºF (10,000,000ºC).

    The highest man-made temperature ever recorded is 9,900,000,000,000ºF (5,500,000,000,000ºC), created in the Large Hadron Collider at CERN in Switzerland. It was achieved by accelerating heavy lead ions to 99% the speed of light and smashing them together.

    Highs and Lows of the Universe

    While humans have been able to manufacture extremely hot and cold temperatures, the universe has created these extremes naturally.

    Undoubtedly, the creation of the universe is made of the hottest stuff of all. The temperature of the universe at 10⁻³⁵ seconds old was a whopping 1 octillion ºC. Moments later, it “cooled down” to 1,800,000,000ºF (1 billion ºC) when the universe was less than two minutes old.

    On the other end of the spectrum, the coolest natural place currently known in the universe is the Boomerang Nebula at -457.6ºF (-272ºC). It’s found 5,000 light years away from us in the constellation Centaurus, and it is currently in a transitional phase as a dying star.

    As space exploration goes further than ever, these extreme temperatures may one day reach even hotter or colder heights than we can imagine.

  • UN Launches All-Out War On Free Speech

    Authored by Judith Bergman via The Gatestone Institute,

    • In other words, forget everything about the free exchange of ideas: the UN feels that its ‘values’ are being threatened and those who criticize those values must therefore be shut down.

    • Naturally, the UN assures everyone that, “Addressing hate speech does not mean limiting or prohibiting freedom of speech. It means keeping hate speech from escalating into something more dangerous, particularly incitement to discrimination, hostility and violence, which is prohibited under international law”.

    • Except the UN most definitely seeks to prohibit freedom of speech, especially the kind that challenges the UN’s agendas. This was evident with regard to the UN Global Compact on Migration, in which it was explicitly stated that public funding to “media outlets that systematically promote intolerance, xenophobia, racism and other forms of discrimination towards migrants” should be stopped.

    • In contrast to the UN Global Migration compact, the UN’s action plan against hate speech does contain a definition of what the UN considers to be “hate” and it happens to be the broadest and vaguest of definitions possible: “Any kind of communication in speech, writing or behaviour, that attacks or uses pejorative or discriminatory language with reference to a person or a group on the basis of who they are, in other words, based on their religion, ethnicity, nationality, race, colour, descent, gender or other identity factor”. With a definition as broad as this, all speech could be labelled “hate”.

    • The new action plan plays straight into the OIC’s decades-long attempts to ban criticism of Islam as ‘hate speech’. In the wake of the launch of Guterres’ action plan, Pakistan has already presented a six-point plan “to address the new manifestations of racism and faith-based hatred, especially Islamophobia” at the United Nations headquarters. The presentation was organized by Pakistan along with Turkey, the Holy See and the UN.

    In January, United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, tasked his Special Adviser for the Prevention of Genocide, Adama Dieng, to “present a global plan of action against hate speech and hate crimes on a fast-track basis”. Speaking at a press conference about the UN’s challenges for 2019, Guterres maintained, “The biggest challenge that governments and institutions face today is to show that we care — and to mobilize solutions that respond to people’s fears and anxieties with answers…

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Pictured: Antonio Guterres. (Image source: Fiona Goodall/Getty Images)

    One of those answers, Guterres appeared to suggest, is shutting down free speech.

    “We need to enlist every segment of society in the battle for values that our world faces today – and, in particular, to tackle the rise of hate speech, xenophobia and intolerance. We hear troubling, hateful echoes of eras long past” Guterres said, “Poisonous views are penetrating political debates and polluting the mainstream. Let’s never forget the lessons of the 1930s. Hate speech and hate crimes are direct threats to human rights…”

    Guterres added, “Words are not enough. We need to be effective in both asserting our universal values and in addressing the root causes of fear, mistrust, anxiety and anger. That is the key to bring people along in defence of those values that are under such grave threat today”.

    In other words, forget everything about the free exchange of ideas: the UN feels that its ‘values’ are being threatened and those who criticize those values must therefore be shut down. Not only that, but — disingenuously — the UN is comparing dissent from its agendas with the rise of fascism and Nazism in the 1930s.

    Now the action plan that Guterres spoke of in January is ready. On June 18, Guterres presented the United Nations Strategy and Plan of Action on Hate Speech:

    “Hate speech is…an attack on tolerance, inclusion, diversity and the very essence of our human rights norms and principles,” Guterres said. He also wrote in an article on the subject, “To those who insist on using fear to divide communities, we must say: diversity is a richness, never a threat…We must never forget, after all, that each of us is an “other” to someone, somewhere”.

    According to the action plan, “Hate is moving into the mainstream – in liberal democracies and authoritarian systems alike. And with each broken norm, the pillars of our common humanity are weakened”. The UN sees for itself a crucial role: “As a matter of principle, the United Nations must confront hate speech at every turn. Silence can signal indifference to bigotry and intolerance…”.

    Naturally, the UN assures everyone that, “Addressing hate speech does not mean limiting or prohibiting freedom of speech. It means keeping hate speech from escalating into something more dangerous, particularly incitement to discrimination, hostility and violence, which is prohibited under international law”.

    Except the UN most definitely seeks to limit freedom of speech, especially the kind that challenges the UN’s agendas. This was evident with regard to the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration in which it was explicitly statedthat public funding to “media outlets that systematically promote intolerance, xenophobia, racism and other forms of discrimination towards migrants” should be stopped.

    Whatever constitutes intolerance, xenophobia, racism or discrimination was naturally left undefined, making the provision a convenient catchall for governments who wish to defund media that dissent from current political orthodoxy on migration.

    In contrast to the UN Global Migration compact, the UN’s action plan against hate speech does contain a definition of what the UN considers to be “hate” and it happens to be the broadest and vaguest of definitions possible:

    “Any kind of communication in speech, writing or behaviour, that attacks or uses pejorative or discriminatory language with reference to a person or a group on the basis of who they are, in other words, based on their religion, ethnicity, nationality, race, colour, descent, gender or other identity factor”. With a definition as broad as this, all speech could be labelled “hate”.

    The action plan, “aims to give to the United Nations the room and the resources to address hate speech, which poses a threat to United Nations principles, values and programmes. Measures taken will be in line with international human rights norms and standards, in particular the right to freedom of opinion and expression. The objectives are twofold: Enhance UN efforts to address root causes and drivers of hate speech [and] enable effective UN responses to the impact of hate speech on societies”.

    The UN makes it clear in the plan that it “will implement actions at global and country level, as well as enhance internal cooperation among relevant UN entities” to fight hate speech. It considers that “Tackling hate speech is the responsibility of all – governments, societies, the private sector” and it envisages “a new generation of digital citizens, empowered to recognize, reject and stand up to hate speech”. What a brave new world.

    In the plan, the UN sets up a number of areas of priority. Initially, the UN will “need to know more to act effectively” and it will therefore let “relevant UN entities… recognize, monitor, collect data and analyze hate speech trends”. It will also seek to “adopt a common understanding of the root causes and drivers of hate speech in order to take relevant action to best address and/or mitigate its impact”. In addition, the UN will “identify and support actors who challenge hate speech”.

    UN entities will also “implement human rights-centred measures which aim at countering retaliatory hate speech and escalation of violence” and “promote measures to ensure that the rights of victims are upheld, and their needs addressed, including through advocacy for remedies, access to justice and psychological counselling”.

    Disturbingly, the UN plans to put pressure directly on media and influence children through education:

    “The UN system should establish and strengthen partnerships with new and traditional media to address hate speech narratives and promote the values of tolerance, non-discrimination, pluralism, and freedom of opinion and expression” and “take action in formal and informal education to … promote the values and skills of Global Citizenship Education, and enhance Media and Information Literacy”.

    The UN is acutely aware that it needs to leverage strategic partnerships with an array of global and local, governmental and private actors in order to reach its goal. “The UN should establish/strengthen partnerships with relevant stakeholders, including those working in the tech industry. Most of the meaningful action against hate speech will not be taken by the UN alone, but by governments, regional and multilateral organizations, private companies, media, religious and other civil society actors” the action plan notes. “UN entities,” it adds, “should also engage private sector actors, including social media companies, on steps they can take to support UN principles and action to address and counter hate speech, encouraging partnerships between government, industry and civil society”. The UN also says that, “upon request” it will “provide support to Member States in the field of capacity building and policy development to address hate speech.”

    The action plan also reveals that the first concrete initiative is already planned. It is an “international conference on Education for Prevention with focus on addressing and countering Hate Speech which would involve Ministers of Education”.

    The new action plan plays straight into the decades-long attempts of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) to ban criticism of Islam. In the wake of the launch of Guterres’ action plan, Pakistan has already presented a six-point plan “to address the new manifestations of racism and faith-based hatred, especially Islamophobia” at the United Nations headquarters. The presentation was organized by Pakistan along with Turkey, the Holy See and the UN.

    According to news reports, the plan was proposed by Pakistan’s Permanent Representative to the UN, Ambassador Maleeha Lodhi at a session titled “Countering terrorism and other acts of violence based on religion or belief”.

    “A particularly alarming development is the rise of Islamophobia which represents the recent manifestation of the age-old hatred that spawned anti-Semitism, racism, apartheid and many other forms of discrimination,” the ambassador saidin her speech. She added, “My Prime Minister Imran Khan has recently again called for urgent action to counter Islamophobia, which is today the most prevalent expression of racism and hatred against ‘the other'”.

    “We are fully committed to support the UN’s strategy on hate speech,” said the Pakistani ambassador, “This is a moment for all of us to come together to reverse the tide of hate and bigotry that threatens to undermine social solidarity and peaceful co-existence.”

    In 2017, Facebook’s Vice President of Public Policy, Joel Kaplan, reportedly agreed to requests from Pakistan’s Interior Minister Nisar Ali Khan, to “remove fake accounts and explicit, hateful and provocative material that incites violence and terrorism” because “the entire Muslim Ummah was greatly disturbed and has serious concerns over the misuse of social media platforms to propagate blasphemous content”.

    At the UN, Pakistan’s Ambassador Lodhi called for government interventions to fight hate speech, including national legislation, and reportedly “called for framing a more focused strategy to deal with the various expressions of Islamophobia. A ‘whole of government’ and a ‘whole of society’ approach was needed. In this regard, the Pakistani envoy urged the secretary-general to engage with a wide range of actors, including governments, civil society and social media companies to take action and stop social media users being funneled into online sources of radicalization”.

    The UN’s all-out war on free speech is on.

  • Dozens Of Mercedes "Totaled, Stripped Of Parts" After 75 Cars Stolen From Chicago Ride-Sharing Company

    Ridesharing company Car2Go experienced a significant theft of its high end cars, including dozens of Mercedes CLA sedans and GLA sport utility vehicles, on what should have otherwise been a dull Monday in April in Chicago, according to Bloomberg.

    Demand for Car2Go’s high end vehicles mysteriously spiked one Monday and, instead of these Benz’ being returned, they wound up congregated together on several blocks in West Chicago. When the company’s employees went to retrieve the vehicles, they found a group of thieves had claimed them as their own. Some blocked the vehicles in to prevent repossession while others threatened the company’s employees.

    And while Car2Go has the ability to remotely disable vehicles, the situation made it difficult for them to figure out which ones to disable. After the theft, Facebook videos begin showing up of Mercedes’ around Chicago being joyridden, totaled and stripped of parts. Kendell Kelton, a Car2Go spokeswoman said: 

    “This was a unicorn incident for us as a company. We’ve never seen this type of fraudulent activity at this scale ever, ever.”

    Once Car2Go was unable to retrieve the cars on their own, they asked the Chicago Police Department for help. By the middle of the week, the company had suspended service in Chicago altogether, tacitly acknowledging that they couldn’t figure out the difference between legitimate customers from theives. A total of 75 cars were compromised and all were eventually recovered, despite the fact that some of them have been destroyed.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Although rare, this incident highlights one of the major risks inherent to shared internet-connected vehicles. As scooter sharing services are also finding out, lending out a bunch of luxury vehicles to almost anybody that wants them is a great way to wind up with them vandalized or stolen.

    Ride sharing networks have struggled in general of late, especially with the rise of Uber and Lyft. Car2Go recently merged with BMWs car sharing network, ReachNow, in hopes of strengthening their operations and broadening their appeal. Together, they operate in a total of nine cities. Car2Go had traditionally subjected all of its users to background checks conducted by humans, but quicker sign ups became a “must have” for ride sharing companies that wanted to bring on more new members faster.

    “You see Uber or Lyft, or Airbnb, or all the scooters—they all have instant verification,” Kelton said.

    The executive team in Europe, where fraud is much less prevalent, was also eager to lower barriers to entry. So in April, the company stopped conducting manual background checks in favor of automated ones – and almost immediately, about 20 people orchestrated the Mercedes theft by setting up 80 phony accounts using fake or stolen credit cards as payment methods. It’s still unclear whether the theft was a direct result of the policy change or not.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    And oddly, the thieves didn’t seem to have much more than joyriding in mind. Many of the vehicles still had their Car2Go stickers on them, functional GPS trackers and license plates. Officers patrolling the area had little trouble spotting the vehicles, because nothing had been modified on them. On one day, police arrested almost 2 dozen joyriders. Only one person was charged with a felony: a 19-year-old who was found with a pocket full of fake credit cards.

    This type of attack was unprecedented, but there has been an ongoing stream of smaller incidents in years past. Enterprise, for instance, stopped operating its car sharing service in Chicago in 2017 due to high rates of fraud and vandalism. ReachNow had to wrap up service in Brooklyn in 2018 after many vehicles begin disappearing after the company implemented an automated approval process.

    Also, for Car2Go, it hasn’t been unusual for people to sublease vehicles after they order them from the service. The practice is in violation of Car2Go’s rules and has been an issue in Chicago since the company started operating there. Car2Go has since reverted back to manually reviewing new accounts in Chicago and says it hasn’t had any serious issues since then.

  • Giraldi: Did Pedophile Jeffrey Epstein Work For Mossad?

    Authored by Philip Giraldi via The American Herald Tribune,

    The extent of Israeli spying directed against the United States is a huge story that is only rarely addressed in the mainstream media.

    The Jewish state regularly tops the list for ostensibly friendly countries that aggressively conduct espionage against the U.S. and Jewish American Jonathan Pollard, who was imprisoned in 1987 for spying for Israel, is now regarded as the most damaging spy in the history of the United States.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Last week I wrote about how Israeli spies operating more-or-less freely in the U.S. are rarely interfered with, much less arrested and prosecuted, because there is an unwillingness on the part of upper echelons of government to do so. I cited the case of Arnon Milchan, a billionaire Hollywood movie producer who had a secret life that included stealing restricted technology in the United States to enable development of Israel’s nuclear weapons program, something that was very much against U.S. interests. Milchan was involved in a number of other thefts as well as arms sales on behalf of the Jewish state, so much so that his work as a movie producer was actually reported to be less lucrative than his work as a spy and black-market arms merchant, for which he operated on a commission basis.

    That Milchan has never been arrested by the United States government or even questioned about his illegal activity, which was well known to the authorities, is just one more manifestation of the effectiveness of Jewish power in Washington, but a far more compelling case involving possible espionage with major political manifestations has just re-surfaced.

    I am referring to Jeffrey Epstein, the billionaire Wall Street “financier” who has been arrested and charged with operating a “vast” network of underage girls for sex, operating out of his mansions in New York City and Florida as well as his private island in the Caribbean, referred to by visitors as “Orgy Island.” Among other high-value associates, it is claimed that Epstein was particularly close to Bill Clinton, who flew dozens of times on Epstein’s private 727.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    *(Alex Acosta (L) Jeffrey Epstein (R))

    Epstein was arrested on July 8th after indictment by a federal grand jury in New York. It was more than a decade after Alexander Acosta, the top federal prosecutor in Miami, who is now President Trump’s secretary of labor, accepted a plea bargain involving similar allegations regarding pedophilia that was not shared with the accusers prior to being finalized in court. There were reportedly hundreds of victims, some 35 of whom were identified, but Acosta deliberately denied the two actual plaintiffs their day in court to testify before sentencing.

    Acosta’s intervention meant that Epstein avoided both a public trial and a possible federal prison sentence, instead serving only 13 months of an 18-month sentence in the almost-no-security Palm Beach County Jail on charges of soliciting prostitution in Florida. While in custody, he was permitted to leave jail for sixteen hours six days a week to work in his office.

    Epstein’s crimes were carried out in his $56 million Manhattan mansion and in his oceanside villa in Palm Beach Florida. Both residences were equipped with hidden cameras and microphones in the bedrooms, which Epstein reportedly used to record sexual encounters between his high-profile guests and his underage girls, many of whom came from poor backgrounds, who were recruited by procurers to engage in what was euphemistically described as “massages” for money. Epstein apparently hardly made any effort to conceal what he was up to: his airplane was called the “Lolita Express.”

    The Democrats are calling for an investigation of the Epstein affair, as well as the resignation of Acosta, but they might well wind up regretting their demands. Trump, the real target of the Acosta fury, apparently did not know about the details of the plea bargain that ended the Epstein court case. Bill and Hillary Clinton were, however, very close associates of Epstein. Bill, who flew on the “Lolita Express” at least 26 times, could plausibly be implicated in the pedophilia given his track record and relative lack of conventional morals. On many of the trips, Bill refused Secret Service escorts, who would have been witnesses of any misbehavior. On one lengthy trip to Africa in 2002, Bill and Jeffrey were accompanied by accused pedophile actor Kevin Spacey and a number of young girls, scantily clad “employees” identified only as “massage.” Epstein was also a major contributor to the Clinton Foundation and was present at the wedding of Chelsea Clinton in 2010.

    With an election year coming up, the Democrats would hardly want the public to be reminded of Bill’s exploits, but one has to wonder where and how deep the investigation might go. There is also a possible Donald Trump angle. Though Donald may not have been a frequent flyer on the “Lolita Express,” he certainly moved in the same circles as the Clintons and Epstein in New York and Palm Beach, plus he is by his own words roughly as amoral as Bill Clinton. In June 2016, one Katie Johnson filed lawsuit in New York claiming she had been repeatedly raped by Trump at an Epstein gathering in 1993 when she was 13 years old. In a 2002 New York Magazine interview Trump said  “I’ve known Jeff for fifteen years. Terrific guy… he’s a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side. No doubt about it – Jeffrey enjoys his social life.”

    Selective inquiries into wrongdoing to include intense finger pointing are the name of the game in Washington, and the affaire Epstein also has all the hallmarks of a major espionage case, possibly tied to Israel. Unless Epstein is an extremely sick pedophile who enjoys watching films of other men screwing twelve-year-old girls the whole filming procedure smacks of a sophisticated intelligence service compiling material to blackmail prominent politicians and other public figures. Those blackmailed would undoubtedly in most cases cooperate with the foreign government involved to avoid a major scandal. It is called recruiting “agents of influence.” That is how intelligence agencies work and it is what they do.

    That Epstein was perceived as being intelligence-linked was made clear in Acosta’s commentswhen being cleared by the Trump transition team. He was asked “Is the Epstein case going to cause a problem [for confirmation hearings]?” … “Acosta had explained, breezily, apparently, that back in the day he’d had just one meeting on the Epstein case. He’d cut the non-prosecution deal with one of Epstein’s attorneys because he had ‘been told’ to back off, that Epstein was above his pay grade. ‘I was told Epstein belonged to intelligence and to leave it alone.’”

    Questions about Epstein’s wealth also suggest a connection with a secretive government agency with deep pocketsThe New York Times reports that “Exactly what his money management operation did was cloaked in secrecy, as were most of the names of whomever he did it for. He claimed to work for a number of billionaires, but the only known major client was Leslie Wexner, the billionaire founder of several retail chains, including The Limited.”

    But whose intelligence service? CIA and the Russian FSB services are obvious candidates, but they would have no particular motive to acquire an agent like Epstein. That leaves Israel, which would have been eager to have a stable of high-level agents of influence in Europe and the United States. Epstein’s contact with the Israeli intelligence service may have plausibly come through his associations with Ghislaine Maxwell, who allegedly served as his key procurer of young girls. Ghislaine is the daughter of Robert Maxwell, who died or possibly was assassinated in mysterious circumstances in 1991. Maxwell was an Anglo-Jewish businessman, very cosmopolitan in profile, like Epstein, a multi-millionaire who was very controversial with what were regarded as ongoing ties to Mossad. After his death, he was given a state funeral by Israel in which six serving and former heads of Israeli intelligence listened while Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir eulogized: “He has done more for Israel than can today be said” 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    *(Trump  (left) with Robert Maxwell (right) at an event.)

    Epstein kept a black book identifying many of his social contacts, which is now in the hands of investigators. It included fourteen personal phone numbers belonging to Donald Trump, including ex-wife Ivana, daughter Ivanka and current wife Melania. It also included Prince Bandar of Saudi Arabia, Tony Blair, Jon Huntsman, Senator Ted Kennedy, Henry Kissinger, David Koch, Ehud Barak, Alan Dershowitz, John Kerry, George Mitchell, David Rockefeller, Richard Branson, Michael Bloomfield, Dustin Hoffman, Queen Elizabeth, Saudi King Salman and Edward de Rothschild.

    Mossad would have exploited Epstein’s contacts, arranging their cooperation by having Epstein wining and dining them while flying them off to exotic locations, providing them with women and entertainment. If they refused to cooperate, it would be time for blackmail, photos and videos of the sex with underage women.

    It will be very interesting to see just how far and how deep the investigation into Epstein and his activities goes. One can expect that efforts will be made to protect top politicians like Clinton and Trump and to avoid any examination of a possible Israeli role. That is the normal practice, witness the 9/11 Report and the Mueller investigation, both of which eschewed any inquiry into what Israel might have been up to. But this time, if it was indeed an Israeli operation, it might prove difficult to cover up the story since the pedophile aspect of it has unleashed considerable public anger from all across the political spectrum. 

    Senator Chuck Schumer, self-described as Israel’s “protector” in the Senate, is loudly calling for the resignation of Acosta. He just might change his tune if it turns out that Israel is a major part of the story.

  • Volvo CEO Says Company May Leave Sweden Partly Due To Rise in Violent Crime

    Authored by Paul Joseph Watson via Summit News

    The CEO of Volvo warns that the company is considering moving its headquarters out of Sweden in the future, partly due to a rise in violent crime.

    Håkan Samuelsson told a conference that the car maker was losing its appeal to foreign experts and engineers and further explained his concerns during an interview with SVD Näringsliv.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    “We are building cars, we cannot solve the other problems, someone else must do that,” the CEO said, adding that it is becoming more difficult to attract workers due to Sweden’s worsening reputation.

    “It’s definitely not helping when people read about shootings in Gothenburg and wonder if they really dare to move to Gothenburg,” said Samuelsson.

    If the situation does not improve, the CEO warned that the company may even have to consider leaving Sweden in the future.

    “Often people believe that decisions like these are taken by senior management or in China. But the fact is that we will only place our headquarters in a country where things work. At the moment, we are not close to such a discussion. But yes, it is something that might happen in the future,” said Samuelsson.

    However, Chief of Police in Gothenburg County Erik Nord denied there was a problem, accusing Samuelsson of getting misinformation from social media.

    As we have previously highlighted, surveys show that migrants are vastly overrepresented in violent crime and rapes in Sweden, but the government stopped gathering official statistics back in 2005.

    This was long before the problem was exacerbated by the arrival of over 150,000 new “refugees” mainly from Islamic countries from 2015 onwards.

    Swedish author Björn Ranelid recently warned that the level of crime and violence the previously sedate country is experiencing amounts to a “small scale war”.

    ———————————————————————————————————————

    Follow on Twitter @PrisonPlanet

    There is a war on free speech. Without your support, my voice will be silenced.

    Please sign up for the free newsletter here. Donate to me on SubscribeStar here.

    ———————————————————————————————————————

  • Many Americans Will Never Stop Working

    Authored by Fred Dunkley via SafeHaven.com,

    The word “retirement” used to describe the well-deserved free time that one earned after a long and productive work life. Not anymore.   Today, 23 percent of Americans say they will never retire despite the grim realities of aging, according to a new poll from the Associated Press – NORC Center from Public Affairs Research.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The poll, conducted among 1,423 adults using a sample drawn from NORC’s probability-based AmeriSpeak Panel designed to be representative of the U.S. population, shows a disconnect between individuals’ retirement plans and the realities of aging in the workforce, suggesting that 23 percent of workers, including nearly two in ten of those over 50, don’t expect to stop working. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    (Click to enlarge)

    Source: AP-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research

    Money was the primary reason for the delayed retirement; the poll shows that only 14 percent of Americans under the age of 50 and 29% over 50 say they feel extremely or very prepared. Also, 56 percent of younger adults say they don’t feel prepared for retirement.

    Of those who had already retired,  38 percent said they felt they had been very or extremely prepared when they retired, while 25 percent said they had felt not very or not at all prepared.

    “The average retirement age that we see in the data has gone up a little bit, but it hasn’t gone up that much,” says Anqi Chen, assistant director of savings research at the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College.

    “So people have to live in retirement much longer, and they may not have enough assets to support themselves in retirement.”

    A survey from Northwestern Mutual shows similar figures. Nearly half of Americans say they expect to work past age 65 and 18 percent of baby boomers and generation X say they plan to work until age 75 and beyond. The background of these figures once again shows that Americans are short on savings–56 percent of the respondents don’t even know how much  money they should be saving, the Northwestern Mutual survey found. 

    Those who still think they know how much they should be saving, according to Charles Schwab survey, believe they need $1.7 million on average to retire, but most of them are still not even close to that number. 

    “That’s a pretty good number if you average out age and median salary across the U.S.,” said Nathan Voris, a managing director at Schwab Retirement Plan Services.

    However, “the bulk of folks do not get there,” he said.

    The estimate for 2016 from the U.S. Government Accountability Office released this March shows that 48 percent of those 55 and older had nothing put away in a 401(k)-style defined contribution plan or an individual retirement account, which is an improvement from the 52 percent without retirement money in 2013.

    The Employee Benefit Research Institute found that Americans from households headed by someone age 35 to 64 face a combined retirement deficit of $3.83 trillion. EBRI estimates that 41 percent of these Americans are likely to run out of money in retirement, which is down 1.7 percentage points since 2014. 

    But what is really the average retirement age in the U.S.? 

    Using microdata on labor force participation from the U.S. Census Bureau, Smartasset data from 2017 found that national retirement age hasn’t changed and that by age 63 nearly half of the population is no longer working.  

    Many retirements are unexpected due to unforeseen circumstances such as health problems, disability or layoffs. Rare are those who are able to retire early because of an inheritance or diligent saving.  

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Today’s News 11th July 2019

  • Watch: Autonomous Plane Makes First Successful Landing In Germany 

    German researchers at Technische Universität München (TUM), located in Munich, Germany, have designed and tested an autonomous system that can land a small civilian plane without relying on ground systems. This technology could open up a new era of autonomous flight — and take the human error out of landings, reported TechCrunch

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Commercial passenger planes heavily rely on ground-based systems that aid pilots in locating the runway on the final approach. This system is called the Instrument Landing System (ILS), guides a commercial aircraft to the runway. Pilots use ILS to verify their alignment and glide slope with the runway but rarely use it for an automated landing.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The new automated landing system is called C2Land, uses a set of cameras and sensors mounted in the nose of the plane to guide the airplane for final approach. The plane’s computers take over and land the aircraft on the centerline of the runway, without human reaction nor any help from ground systems. The automated system was installed on a Diamond DA42 Twin Star, a twin-engine plane that seats four, for experimental testing.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The first test flight was conducted in May as the Diamond DA42 made a successful automatic landing at the Diamond Aircraft airfield.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Test pilot Thomas Wimmer was amazed by the new landing system:

    “The cameras already recognize the runway at a great distance from the airport. The system then guides the aircraft through the landing approach on a completely automatic basis and lands it precisely on the runway’s centerline.”

    Automated landings without ground-based systems is a significant milestone for the proliferation of automated flight, expected to revolutionize the transportation industry in the 2020s and beyond. This means computerized landings that aren’t possible at smaller airports because ILS isn’t installed could soon have the ability to see automated landings in the coming years.

    Vision-assisted navigation systems like C2Land will likely become standard on all aircraft in the future; the technology is still its infancy.

  • Danish History Professor Says It's Time To Build A Wall Around Europe

    Authored by Paul Joseph Watson via Summit.news,

    Danish history professor Uffe Østergaard says it’s time to build a wall around Europe because integration of migrants has failed and, “Protecting borders is necessary, otherwise the population will rebel against the government”.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Østergaard is a Jean Monnet professor of European civilisation and integration at Aarhus University and professor of European and Danish history at Copenhagen Business School. He specializes in European identity history and has studied multicultural and multiethnic states such as Austria-Hungary and the Ottoman Empire and their successor states.

    Writing in an opinion piece for the Politiken newspaper, Østergaard admits that he used to be heavily in favor of multiculturalism but has since reversed his position.

    “The time has come to build walls with wire fences in four lanes, floodlights and guard posts,” states the headline of his piece, which argues that if this doesn’t take place there will be a split between western and eastern Europe based on adversarial ideas on the management of immigration.

    “Protecting borders is necessary, otherwise the population will rebel against the government,” writes Østergaard, asserting that the rise of no-go ghettos across Europe is a clear sign that integration has failed.

    “Ghettos are a good example of parallel societies that arise. The integration has not failed for everyone, but for relatively many people,” writes the professor, demanding that “assimilation” and not “integration” should be the goal.

    It is simply not possible to absorb such large numbers of people into welfare states, according to Østergaard.

    The professor’s tone is somewhat similar to comments made by Russian President Vladimir Putin last month.

    “The ruling elites have broken away from the people,” Putin told the Financial Times, adding that the “so-called liberal idea has outlived its purpose” and some western leaders had acknowledged that “multiculturalism” is “no longer tenable”.

    *  *  *

    There is a war on free speech. Without your support, my voice will be silenced. 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.

  • John Whitehead Exposes America's Heart Of Darkness: Sexual Predators Within The Power-Elite

    Authored by John Whitehead via The Rutherford Institute,

    As political and economic freedom diminishes, sexual freedom tends, compensating, to increase. And the dictator (unless he needs cannon fodder and families with which to colonize empty or conquered territories) will do well to encourage that freedom.

    – Aldous Huxley, Brave New World

    Power corrupts.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Anyone who believes differently hasn’t been paying attention.

    Politics, religion, sports, government, entertainment, business, armed forces: it doesn’t matter what arena you’re talking about, they are all riddled with the kind of seedy, sleazy, decadent, dodgy, depraved, immoral, corrupt behavior that somehow gets a free pass when it involves the wealthy and powerful elite in America.

    In this age of partisan politics and a deeply polarized populace, corruption – especially when it involves sexual debauchery, depravity and predatory behavior – has become the great equalizer.

    Take Jeffrey Epstein, the hedge fund billionaire / convicted serial pedophile recently arrested on charges of molesting, raping and sex trafficking dozens of young girls.

    It is believed that Epstein operated his own personal sex trafficking ring not only for his personal pleasure but also for the pleasure of his friends and business associates. According to The Washington Post, “several of the young women…say they were offered to the rich and famous as sex partners at Epstein’s parties.” At various times, Epstein ferried his friends about on his private plane, nicknamed the “Lolita Express.”

    This is part of America’s seedy underbelly.

    As I documented in the in-depth piece I wrote earlier this year, child sex trafficking—the buying and selling of women, young girls and boys for sex, some as young as 9 years old—has become big business in America. It is the fastest growing business in organized crime and the second most-lucrative commodity traded illegally after drugs and guns.

    Adults purchase children for sex at least 2.5 million times a year in the United States.

    It’s not just young girls who are vulnerable to these predators, either.

    According to a 2016 investigative report, “boys make up about 36% of children caught up in the U.S. sex industry (about 60% are female and less than 5% are transgender males and females).”

    Who buys a child for sex?

    Otherwise ordinary men from all walks of life. “They could be your co-worker, doctor, pastor or spouse,” writes journalist Tim Swarens, who spent more than a year investigating the sex trade in America.

    Ordinary men, yes.

    But then there are the extra-ordinary men, such as Jeffrey Epstein, who belong to a powerful, wealthy, elite segment of society that operates according to their own rules or, rather, who are allowed to sidestep the rules that are used like a bludgeon on the rest of us.

    These men skate free of accountability by taking advantage of a criminal justice system that panders to the powerful, the wealthy and the elite.

    Over a decade ago, when Epstein was first charged with raping and molesting young girls, he was gifted a secret plea deal with then-U.S. Attorney Alexander Acosta, President Trump’s current Labor Secretary, that allowed him to evade federal charges and be given the equivalent of a slap on the wrist: allowed to “work” at home six days a week before returning to jail to sleep. That secret plea deal has since been ruled illegal by a federal judge.

    Yet here’s the thing: Epstein did not act alone.

    I refer not only to Epstein’s accomplices, who recruited and groomed the young girls he is accused of raping and molesting, many of them homeless or vulnerable, but his circle of influential friends and colleagues that at one time included Bill Clinton and Donald Trump. Both Clinton and Trump, renowned womanizers who have also been accused of sexual impropriety by a significant number of women, were at one time passengers on the Lolita Express.

    As the Associated Press points out, “The arrest of the billionaire financier on child sex trafficking charges is raising questions about how much his high-powered associates knew about the hedge fund manager’s interactions with underage girls, and whether they turned a blind eye to potentially illegal conduct.”

    In fact, a recent decision by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals allowing a 2,000-page document linked to the Epstein case to be unsealed references allegations of sexual abuse involving “numerous prominent American politicians, powerful business executives, foreign presidents, a well-known Prime Minister, and other world leaders.”

    This is not a minor incident involving minor players.

    This is the heart of darkness.

    Sex slaves. Sex trafficking. Secret societies. Powerful elites. Government corruption. Judicial cover-ups.

    Once again, fact and fiction mirror each other.

    Twenty years ago, Stanley Kubrick’s final film Eyes Wide Shut provided viewing audiences with a sordid glimpse into a secret sex society that indulged the basest urges of its affluent members while preying on vulnerable young women. It is not so different from the real world, where powerful men, insulated from accountability, indulge their base urges.

    These secret societies flourish, implied Kubrick, because the rest of us are content to navigate life with our eyes wide shut, in denial about the ugly, obvious truths in our midst.

    In so doing, we become accomplices to abusive behavior in our midst.

    This is how corruption by the power elite flourishes.

    For every Epstein who is—finally—called to account for his illegal sexual exploits after years of being given a free pass by those in power, there are hundreds (perhaps thousands) more in the halls of power and wealth whose predation of those most vulnerable among us continues unabated.

    While Epstein’s alleged crimes are heinous enough on their own, he is part of a larger narrative of how a culture of entitlement becomes a cesspool and a breeding ground for despots and predators.

    Remember the “DC Madam” who was charged with operating a phone-order sex business? Her clients included thousands of White House officials, lobbyists, and Pentagon, FBI, and IRS employees, as well as prominent lawyers, none of whom were ever exposed or held accountable.

    Power corrupts.

    Worse, as 19th-century historian Lord Acton concluded, absolute power corrupts absolutely.

    It doesn’t matter whether you’re talking about a politician, an entertainment mogul, a corporate CEO or a police officer: give any one person (or government agency) too much power and allow him or her or it to believe that they are entitled, untouchable and will not be held accountable for their actions, and those powers will eventually be abused.

    We’re seeing this dynamic play out every day in communities across America.

    A cop shoots an unarmed citizen for no credible reason and gets away with it. A president employs executive orders to sidestep the Constitution and gets away with it. A government agency spies on its citizens’ communications and gets away with it. An entertainment mogul sexually harasses aspiring actresses and gets away with it. The U.S. military bombs a civilian hospital and gets away with it.

    Abuse of power—and the ambition-fueled hypocrisy and deliberate disregard for misconduct that make those abuses possible—works the same whether you’re talking about sex crimes, government corruption, or the rule of law.

    It’s the same old story all over again: man rises to power, man abuses power abominably, man intimidates and threatens anyone who challenges him with retaliation or worse, and man gets away with it because of a culture of compliance in which no one speaks up because they don’t want to lose their job or their money or their place among the elite.

    It’s not just sexual predators that we have to worry about.

    For every Jeffrey Epstein (or Bill Clinton or Harvey Weinstein or Roger Ailes or Bill Cosby or Donald Trump) who eventually gets called out for his sexual misbehavior, there are hundreds—thousands—of others in the American police state who are getting away with murder—in many cases, literally—simply because they can.

    The cop who shoots the unarmed citizen first and asks questions later might get put on paid leave for a while or take a job with another police department, but that’s just a slap on the wrist. The shootings and SWAT team raids and excessive use of force will continue, because the police unions and the politicians and the courts won’t do a thing to stop it.

    The war hawks who are making a profit by waging endless wars abroad, killing innocent civilians in hospitals and schools, and turning the American homeland into a domestic battlefield will continue to do so because neither the president nor the politicians will dare to challenge the military industrial complex.

    The National Security Agency that carries out warrantless surveillance on Americans’ internet and phone communications will continue to do so, because the government doesn’t want to relinquish any of its ill-gotten powers and its total control of the populace.

    Unless something changes in the way we deal with these ongoing, egregious abuses of power, the predators of the police state will continue to wreak havoc on our freedoms, our communities, and our lives.

    Police officers will continue to shoot and kill unarmed citizens. Government agents—including local police—will continue to dress and act like soldiers on a battlefield. Bloated government agencies will continue to fleece taxpayers while eroding our liberties. Government technicians will continue to spy on our emails and phone calls. Government contractors will continue to make a killing by waging endless wars abroad.

    And powerful men (and women) will continue to abuse the powers of their office by treating those around them as underlings and second-class citizens who are unworthy of dignity and respect and undeserving of the legal rights and protections that should be afforded to all Americans.

    As Dacher Keltner, professor of psychology at the at the University of California, Berkeley, observed in the Harvard Business Review, “While people usually gain power through traits and actions that advance the interests of others, such as empathy, collaboration, openness, fairness, and sharing; when they start to feel powerful or enjoy a position of privilege, those qualities begin to fade. The powerful are more likely than other people to engage in rude, selfish, and unethical behavior.”

    After conducting a series of experiments into the phenomenon of how power corrupts, Keltner concluded: “Just the random assignment of power, and all kinds of mischief ensues, and people will become impulsive. They eat more resources than is their fair share. They take more money. People become more unethical.They think unethical behavior is okay if they engage in it. People are more likely to stereotype. They’re more likely to stop attending to other people carefully.”

    Power corrupts.

    And absolute power corrupts absolutely.

    However, it takes a culture of entitlement and a nation of compliant, willfully ignorant, politically divided citizens to provide the foundations of tyranny.

    As researchers Joris Lammers and Adam Galinsky found, those in power not only tend to abuse that power but they also feel entitled to abuse it: “People with power that they think is justified break rules not only because they can get away with it, but also because they feel at some intuitive level that they are entitled to take what they want.”

    As I point out in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, for too long now, Americans have tolerated an oligarchy in which a powerful, elite group of wealthy donors is calling the shots. They have paid homage to patriotism while allowing the military industrial complex to spread death and destruction abroad. And they have turned a blind eye to all manner of wrongdoing when it was politically expedient.

    We need to restore the rule of law for all people, no exceptions.

    Here’s what the rule of law means in a nutshell: it means that everyone is treated the same under the law, everyone is held equally accountable to abiding by the law, and no one is given a free pass based on their politics, their connections, their wealth, their status or any other bright line test used to confer special treatment on the elite.

    This culture of compliance must stop.

    The empowerment of petty tyrants and political gods must end.

    The state of denial must cease.

    Let’s not allow this Epstein sex scandal to become just another blip in the news cycle that goes away all too soon, only to be forgotten when another titillating news headline takes its place.

    Sex trafficking, like so many of the evils in our midst, is a cultural disease that is rooted in the American police state’s heart of darkness. It speaks to a far-reaching corruption that stretches from the highest seats of power down to the most hidden corners and relies on our silence and our complicity to turn a blind eye to wrongdoing.

    If we want to put an end to these wrongs, we must keep our eyes wide open.

  • US Fast-Food Drive-Thrus Will Soon Use License Plate And Facial Recognition Technology

    License plate recognition could be the new big thing at American drive-thrus, according to FT. Chains are now looking to deploy cameras that recognize license plates and help identify customers, personalizing digital menus and speeding up sales.

    Starbucks began a pilot program in Korea last year with customers who voluntarily pre-registered their cars and now restaurants in the United States are looking to also give it a try. License plate recognition has existed since the 1970s but has mostly been associated with law-enforcement. Cameras attached to police cars or street fixtures read the license plates of passing vehicles and compare results to databases.

    But as the cost of the software comes down, uses for LPR have grown. For retailers, LPR can help identify repeat customers, allowing businesses to link a customer’s credit card and order history up to a vehicle.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Customers who are signed up to loyalty programs or apps can load their information in voluntarily and cameras in the drive-thru lanes can also take photos of car plates. Software will then determine whether or not it belongs to a recurring customer that the restaurant has information for.

    LPR start up 5Thru said that several chains in the U.S. and Canada were trying out its technology. It is expected to sign its first major contract by the end of the year.

    Chief executive Daniel McCann said:

    5Thru’s technology helped restaurants process around an extra 30 cars a day, by reducing order time. The artificial intelligence-driven system also improves upselling by recommending items based on a customer’s past orders, the weather and how busy a store’s kitchen is.”

    Tracking customers using cameras is just another way stores are seeking to become more efficient in the age of online shopping. Recall, we posted a couple months ago a story about how are malls were tracking people’s locations using their smartphones in order to help bolster business.

    In March, McDonald’s bought a company called Dynamic Yield for $300 million that specialized in “decision logic” to help make food and upselling suggestions to drive-thru customers. Drivers are given options based on the time of day, the weather and their eating preference history. In 2017, KFC partnered with Baidu to develop facial recognition to predict someone’s order based on their age and their mood.

    AT&T has reportedly received numerous requests from fast food chains looking to deploy these types of technologies via its 5G network. Michael Colaneri, vice-president of retail and restaurants at AT&T said: “We are at the advent of these capabilities, though nobody has quite pulled it all off.”

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    In addition to technical expertise, data driven personalization relies on information about customers. Many have criticized license plate recognition for being overly invasive and the United States has a litany of different rules, depending on the state, governing the technology.

    Jason Spielfogel, director of product management at security company Identiv said:

    “Although no drive-through chains in the US have yet rolled out LPR at scale, there are a lot of conversations going on.”

    LPR can also take into account a vehicle’s age, make and condition to help recommend orders. McDonald’s has said, post acquisition, that the company could use LPR in the future to personalize smart menus. Xerox filed a patent in 2012 for a drive-thru tool to help track repeat customers using “vehicle and facial information”. The company hasn’t advertised that product, but Xerox offers LPR services and passenger detection tools to police. The system uses cameras to identify a vehicle and how many people are in it, while claiming to redact facial images for privacy purposes.

  • Two Years Later, Trump Has Failed To Reverse America's Decline

    Authored by Dilip Hiro via TomDispatch.com,

    President Donald Trump was partly voted into office by Americans who felt that the self-proclaimed greatest power on Earth was actually in decline – and they weren’t wrong. Trump is capable of tweeting many things, but none of those tweets will stop that process of decline, nor will a trade war with a rising China or fierce oil sanctions on Iran.

    You could feel this recently, even in the case of the increasingly pressured Iranians. There, with a single pinprick, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei effectively punctured Trump’s MAGA balloon and reminded many that, however powerful the U.S. still was, people in other countries were beginning to look at America differently at the end of the second decade of the twenty-first century.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Trump wearing MAGA cap in 2016. (Gage Skidmore, CC BY-SA 2.0,via Wikimedia Commons)

    Following a meeting in Tehran with visiting Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, who brought a message from Trump urging the start of U.S.-Iranian negotiations, Khamenei tweeted, “We have no doubt in [Abe’s] goodwill and seriousness; but regarding what you mentioned from [the] U.S. president, I don’t consider Trump as a person deserving to exchange messages with, and I have no answer for him, nor will I respond to him in the future.” He then added: “We believe that our problems will not be solved by negotiating with the U.S., and no free nation would ever accept negotiations under pressure.”

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

    A flustered Trump was reduced to briefly tweeting: “I personally feel that it is too soon to even think about making a deal. They are not ready, and neither are we!”

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

    And soon after, the president halted at the last minute, in a distinctly humiliating retreat, U.S. air strikes on Iranian missile sites that would undoubtedly have created yet more insoluble problems for Washington across the Greater Middle East.

    Keep in mind that, globally, before the ayatollah’s put-down, the Trump administration had already had two abject foreign policy failures: the collapse of the president’s Hanoi summit with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un (followed by that regime’s provocative firing of several missiles over the Sea of Japan) and a bungled attempt to overthrow the regime of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.

    America’s Global Standing at a Record Low

    What’s great or small can be defined in absolute or relative terms. America’s “greatness” (or“exceptional” or “indispensable” nature) — much lauded in Washington before the Trump era — should certainly be judged against the economic progress made by China in those same years and against Russia’s advances in the latest high-tech weaponry. Another way of assessing the nature of that “greatness” and what to make of it would be through polls of how foreigners view the United States.

    Take, for instance, a survey released by the Pew Research Group in February 2019. Forty-five percent of respondents in 26 nations with large populations felt that American power and influence posed “a major threat to our country,” while 36 percent offered the same response on Russia, and 35 percent on China. To put that in perspective, in 2013, during the presidency of Barack Obama, only 25 percent of global respondents held such a negative view of the U.S., while reactions to China remained essentially the same. Or just consider the most powerful country in Europe, Germany. Between 2013 and 2018, Germans who considered American power and influence a greater threat than that of China or Russia leapt from 19 percent to 49 percent. (Figures for France were similar.)

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    China’s Xi with Russia’s Putin after talks in June 2019. (The Kremlin)

    As for Trump, only 27 percent of global respondents had confidence in him to do the right thing in world affairs, while 70 feared he would not. In Mexico, you undoubtedly won’t be surprised to learn, confidence in his leadership was at a derisory 6 percent. In 17 of the surveyed countries, people who lacked confidence in him were also significantly more likely to consider the U.S. the world’s top threat, a phenomenon most pronounced among traditional Washington allies like Canada, Great Britain, and Australia.

    China’s Expanding Global Footprint

    While 39 percent of Pew respondents in that poll still rated the U.S. as the globe’s leading economic power, 34 percent opted for China. Meanwhile, China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) launched in 2013 to link the infrastructure and trade of much of Southeast Asia, Eurasia, and the Horn of Africa to China (at an estimated cost of $4 trillion) and to be funded by diverse sources, is going from strength to strength.

    One way to measure this: the number of dignitaries attending the biennial BRI Forum in Beijing. The first of those gatherings in May 2017 attracted 28 heads of state and representatives from 100 countries. The most recent, in late April, had 37 heads of state and representatives from nearly 150 countries and international organizations, including International Monetary Fund (IMF) chief Christine Lagarde and United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres.

    Leaders of nine out of 10 Association of Southeast Asian Nations attended, as did four of the five Central Asian republics. Strikingly, a third of the leaders participating came from Europe. According to Peter Frankopan, author of “The New Silk Roads,” more than 80 countries are now involved in some aspect of the BRI project. That translates into more than 63 percent of the world’s population and 29 percent of its global economic output.

    Still, Chinese President Xi Jinping is intent on expanding the BRI’s global footprint further, a signal of China’s dream of future greatness. During a February two-day state visit to Beijing by Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, Xi suggested that, when it came to Riyadh’s overly ambitious economic plan, “our two countries should speed up the signing of an implementation plan on connecting the Belt and Road Initiative with the Saudi Vision 2030.”

    Flattered by this proposal, the crown prince defended China’s use of “re-education” camps for Uighur Muslims in its western province of Xinjiang, claiming it was Beijing’s “right” to carry out antiterrorism work to safeguard national security. Under the guise of combating extremism, the Chinese authorities have placed an estimated one million Uighur Muslims in such camps to undergo re-education designed to supplant their Islamic legacy with a Chinese version of socialism. Uighur groups had appealed to Prince bin Salman to take up their cause. No such luck: one more sign of the rise of China in the 21st century.

    China Enters High-Tech Race with America

    In 2013, Germany launched an Industry 4.0 Plan meant to fuse cyber-physical systems, the Internet of things, cloud computing, and cognitive computing with the aim of increasing manufacturing productivity by up to 50 percent, while curtailing resources required by half. Two years later, emulating this project, Beijing published its own 10-year Made in China 2025 plan to update the country’s manufacturing base by rapidly developing 10 high-tech industries, including electric cars and other new-energy vehicles, next-generation information technology and telecommunications, as well as advanced robotics and artificial intelligence, aerospace engineering, high-end rail infrastructure, and high-tech maritime engineering.

    As with BRI, the government and media then publicized and promoted Made in China 2025 vigorously. This alarmed Washington and America’s high-tech corporations. Over the years, American companies had complained about China’s theft of U.S. intellectual property, the counterfeiting of famous brands, and the stealing of trade secrets, not to speak of the pressuring of American firms in joint ventures with local companies to share technology as a price for gaining access to China’s vast market. Their grievances became more vocal when Donald Trump entered the White House determined to cut Washington’s annual trade deficit of $380 billion with Beijing.

    As president, Trump ordered his new trade representative, the Sinophobe Robert Lighthizer, to look into the matter. The resulting seven-month investigation pegged the loss U.S. companies experienced because of China’s unfair trade practices at $50 billion a year. That was why, in March 2018, Trump instructed Lighthizer to levy tariffs on at least $50 billion worth of Chinese imports.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Lighthizer, second from left with earpiece, and U.S. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and Trump at session on the global economy at G-20 Summit, June 28, 2019, in Osaka, Japan. (White House/ Shealah Craighead)

    That signaled the start of a Sino-American trade war which has only gained steam since. In this context, Chinese officials started downplaying the significance of Made in China 2025, describing it as nothing more than an inspirational plan. This March, China’s National People’s Congress even passed a foreign direct-investment law meant to address some of the grievances of U.S. companies. Its implementation mechanism was, however, weak. Trump promptly claimed that China had backtracked on its commitments to incorporate into Chinese law significant changes the two countries had negotiated and put into a draft agreement to end the trade war. He then slapped further tariffs on $200 billion in Chinese imports.

    The major bone of contention for the Trump administration is a Chinese law specifying that, in a joint venture between a foreign corporation and a Chinese company, the former must pass on technological know-how to its Chinese partner. That’s seen as theft by Washington. According to Senior Fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace Yukon Huang, author of “Cracking the China Conundrum: Why Conventional Economic Wisdom Is Wrong,” however, it’s fully in accord with globally accepted guidelines. Such diffusion of technological know-how has played a significant role in driving growth globally, as the IMF’s 2018 World Economic Outlook report made clear. It’s worth noting as well that China now accounts for almost one-third of global annual economic growth.

    The size of China’s market is so vast and the rise in its per capita gross domestic product — from $312 in 1980 to $9,769 in 2018 — is so steep that major U.S. corporations generally accepted its long-established joint-venture law and that should surprise no one. Last year, for instance, General Motors sold 3,645,044 vehicles in China and fewer than 3 million in the U.S. Little wonder then that, late last year, following GM plant closures across North America, part of a wide-ranging restructuring plan, the company’s management paid no heed to a threat from Trump to strip GM of any government subsidies. What angered the president, as he tweeted, caught the reality of the moment: nothing was “being closed in Mexico and China.”

    What Trump simply can’t accept is this: after nearly two decades of supply-chain restructuring and global economic integration, China has become thekey industrial supplier for the United States and Europe. His attempt to make America great again by restoring the economic status quo of before 2001 — the year China was admitted to the World Trade Organization — is doomed to fail.

    In reality, trade war or peace, China is now beginning to overtake the U.S. in science and technology.study by Qingnan Xie of Nanjing University of Science and Technology and Richard Freeman of Harvard University noted that, between 2000 and 2016, China’s global share of publications in the physical sciences, engineering, and mathematics quadrupled and, in the process, exceeded that of the U.S. for the first time.

    In the field of high technology, for example, China is now well ahead of the United States in mobile payment transactions. In the first 10 months of 2017, those totaled $12.8 trillion, the result of vast numbers of consumers discarding credit cards in favor of cashless systems. In stark contrast, according to eMarketer, America’s mobile payment transactions in 2017 amounted to $49.3 billion. Last year, 583 million Chinese used mobile payment systems, with nearly 68 percent of China’s Internet users turning to a mobile wallet for their offline payments.

    Russia’s Advanced Weaponry

    In a similar fashion, in his untiring pitch for America’s “beautiful” weaponry, Trump has failed to grasp the impressive progress Russia has made in that field.

    While presenting videos and animated glimpses of new intercontinental ballistic missiles, nuclear-powered cruise missiles, and underwater drones in a March 2018 television address, Russian President Vladimir Putin traced the development of his own country’s new weapons to Washington’s decision to pull out of the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) treaty with the Soviet Union. In December 2001, encouraged by John Bolton, then under secretary of state for arms control and international security, President George W. Bush had indeed withdrawn from the 1972 ABM treaty on the spurious grounds that the 9/11 attacks had changed the nature of defense for America. His Russian counterpart of the time, the very same Vladimir Putin, described the withdrawal from that cornerstone of world security as a grievous mistake. The head of Russia’s armed forces, General Anatoly Kvashnin, warned then that the pullout would alter the nature of the international strategic balance, freeing up countries to restart arms buildups, both conventional and nuclear.

    As it happened, he couldn’t have been more on the mark. The U.S. is now engaged in a 30-year, trillion-dollar-plus remake and update of its nuclear arsenal, while the Russians (whose present inventory of 6,500 nuclear weapons slightly exceeds America’s) have gone down a similar route. In that televised address of his on the eve of the 2018 Russian presidential election, Putin’s list of new nuclear weapons was headed by the Sarmat, a 30-ton intercontinental ballistic missile, reputedly far harder for an enemy to intercept in its most vulnerable phase just after launching. It also carries a larger number of nuclear warheads than its predecessor.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Putin meets in 2014 with young researchers at Russian Federal Nuclear Centre – All-Russian Research Institute of Experimental Physics, a key facility in Russia’s nuclear military complex. (President of Russia)

    Another new weapon on his list was a nuclear-powered intercontinental underwater drone, Status-6, a submarine-launched autonomous vehicle with a range of 6,800 miles, capable of carrying a 100-megaton nuclear warhead. And then there was his country’s new nuclear-powered cruise missile with a “practically unlimited” range. In addition, because of its stealth capabilities, it will be hard to detect in flight and its high maneuverability will, theoretically at least, enable it to bypass an enemy’s defenses. Successfully tested in 2018, it does not yet have a name. Unsurprisingly, Putin won the presidency with 77 percent of the vote, a 13 percent rise from the previous poll, on record voter turnout of 67.7 percent.

    In conventional weaponry, Russia’s S-400 missile system remains unrivalled. According to the Washington-based Arms Control Association, “The S-400 system is an advanced, mobile, surface-to-air defense system of radars and missiles of different ranges, capable of destroying a variety of targets such as attack aircraft, bombs, and tactical ballistic missiles. Each battery normally consists of eight launchers, 112 missiles, and command and support vehicles.” The S-400 missile has a range of 400 kilometers (250 miles), and its integrated system is believed to be capable of shooting down up to 80 targets simultaneously.

    Consider it a sign of the times, but in defiance of pressure from the Trump administration not to buy Russian weaponry, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey, the only Muslim member of NATO, ordered the purchase of batteries of those very S-400 missiles. Turkish soldiers are currently being trained on that weapons systems in Russia. The first battery is expected to arrive in Turkey next month.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Trump talks with Turkey’s Erdogan at G-20 Summit, June 28, 2019, in Osaka, Japan. (White House/ Shealah Craighead)

    Similarly, in April 2015, Russia signed a contract to supply S-400 missiles to China. The first delivery of the system took place in January 2018 and China test fired it in August.

    Expanding Beijing-Moscow Alliance

    Consider that as another step in Russian-Chinese military coordination meant to challenge Washington’s claim to be the planet’s sole superpower. Similarly, last September, 3,500 Chinese troops participated in Russia’s largest-ever military exercises involving 300,000 soldiers, 36,000 military vehicles, 80 ships, and 1,000 aircraft, helicopters, and drones. Codenamed Vostok-2018, it took place across a vast region that included the Bering Sea, the Sea of Okhotsk, and the Sea of Japan. Little wonder that NATO officials described Vostok-2018 as a demonstration of a growing Russian focus on future large-scale conflict: “It fits into a pattern we have seen over some time — a more assertive Russia, significantly increasing its defense budget and its military presence.” Putin attended the exercises after hosting an economic forum in Vladivostok where Chinese President Xi was his guest. “We have trustworthy ties in political, security and defense spheres,” he declared, while Xi praised the two countries’ friendship, which, he claimed, was “getting stronger all the time.”

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Map of Northern Sea Route along the coast of Russia. (Mohonu at English Wikipedia, via Wikimedia Commons)

    Thanks to climate change, Russia and China are now also working in tandem in the fast-melting Arctic. Last year Russia, which controls more than half the Arctic coastline, sent its first ship through the Northern Sea Route without an icebreaker in winter. Putin hailed that moment as a “big event in the opening up of the Arctic.”

    Beijing’s Arctic policy, first laid out in January 2018, described China as a “near-Arctic” state and visualized the future shipping routes there as part of a potential new “Polar Silk Road” that would both be useful for resource exploitation and for enhancing Chinese security. Shipping goods to and from Europe by such a passage would shorten the distance to China by 30 percent compared to present sea routes through the Malacca Straits and the Suez Canal, saving hundreds of thousands of dollars per voyage.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Icebreaker Yamal, August 2013. (International Maritime Organization via Flickr)

    According to the U.S. Geological Survey, the Arctic holds petroleum reserves equal to 412 billion barrels of oil, or about 22 percent  of the world’s undiscovered hydrocarbons. It also has deposits of rare earth metals. China’s second Arctic vessel, Xuelong 2 (Snow Dragon 2), is scheduled to make its maiden voyage later this year. Russia needs Chinese investment to extract the natural resources under its permafrost. In fact, China is already the biggest foreign investor in Russia’s liquefied natural gas (LNG) projects in the region — and the first LNG shipment was dispatched to China’s eastern province last summer via the Northern Sea Route. Its giant oil corporation is now beginning to drill for gas in Russian waters alongside the Russian company Gazprom.

    Washington is rattled. In April, in its latest annual report to Congress on China’s military power, the Pentagon for the first time included a section on the Arctic, warning of the risks of a growing Chinese presence in the region, including that country’s possible deployment of nuclear submarines there in the future. In May, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo used a meeting of foreign ministers in Rovaniemi, Finland, to assail China for its “aggressive behavior” in the Arctic.

    In an earlier speech, Pompeo noted that, from 2012 to 2017, China invested nearly $90 billion in the Arctic region. “We’re concerned about Russia’s claim over the international waters of the Northern Sea Route, including its newly announced plans to connect it with China’s Maritime Silk Road,” he said. He then pointed out that, along that route, “Moscow already illegally demands other nations request permission to pass, requires Russian maritime pilots to be aboard foreign ships, and threatens to use military force to sink any that fail to comply with their demands.”

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Leaders of the Arctic Council meet in Rovaniemi, Finland, May 6, 2019. (State Department/Ron Przysucha)

    American Downturn Continues

    Altogether, the tightening military and economic ties between Russia and China have put America on the defensive, contrary to Trump’s MAGA promise to American voters in the 2016 campaign. It’s true that, despite fraying diplomatic and economic ties between Washington and Moscow, Trump’s personal relations with Putin remain cordial. (The two periodically exchange friendly phone calls.) But among Russians more generally, a favorable view of the U.S. fell from 41 percent in 2017 to 26 percent in 2018, according to a Pew Research survey.

    There’s nothing new about great powers, even the one that proclaimed itself the greatest in history, declining after having risen high. In our acrimonious times, that’s a reality well worth noting. While launching his bid for reelection recently, Trump proposed a bombastic new slogan: “Keep America Great” (or KAG), as if he had indeed raised America’s stature while in office. He would have been far more on target, however, had he suggested the slogan “Depress America More” (or DAM) to reflect the reality of an unpopular president who faces rising great power rivals abroad.

  • Chinese Security Cameras Banned For Spying Are Nearly Impossible To Identify And Remove

    Federal agencies are rushing to meet a deadline to rip out Chinese made surveillance cameras in order to comply with a congressional ban, but as Bloomberg  reports, the task isn’t quite as easy as it seems: thousands of the devices are still in place and it’s looking as though most won’t be removed before the August 13 deadline. A complicated supply chain is making it difficult for authorities to understand whether security cameras are actually made in China or contain components that would violate US rules.

    The National Defense Authorization Act included an amendment for fiscal 2019 that would ensure federal agencies don’t purchase Chinese made surveillance cameras. Zhejiang Dahua Technology and Hikvision are two companies named specifically because they have both raised security concerns in the US. Hikvision is 42% controlled by the Chinese government and Dahua was found in 2017 to have cameras with software backdoors that allowed unauthorized people to view them and send information back to China.

    Despite Dahua saying they fixed the issue, the US government is still considering imposing further restrictions by banning both companies from purchasing American technology.

    Representative Vicky Hartzler, a Republican from Missouri said: “Video surveillance and security equipment sold by Chinese companies exposes the U.S. government to significant vulnerabilities. Removing the cameras will ensure that China cannot create a video surveillance network within federal agencies.”

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Dahua didn’t comment on the ban and Hikvision said it complies with all applicable laws and regulations. A company spokesperson also said the Chinese government isn’t involved in day-to-day operations of the company. “The company is independent in business, management, assets, organization and finance from it’s controlling shareholders,” the spokesman said.

    Of course it is.

    And despite the coming deadline, there’s at least 1,700 of these cameras still operating in places where they have been banned. According to Katherine Gronberg, vice president of government affairs at Forescout, the actual number could be higher because only a small percentage of government offices know what cameras they’re operating.

    “The real issue is for organizations that don’t have the tools in place to detect the banned devices,” she said. 

    A couple of years ago, the Department of Homeland Security tried to force federal agencies to secure their networks but, as of December, only 35% of required agencies had fully complied with the mandate. As a result, US federal agencies still don’t know how many, or what type of devices, are connected to their networks. This means they’re left to try and identify the cameras manually – one by one.

    Those charged with complying with the ban have discovered that it is more complicated than just switching off the cameras. Not only can Chinese cameras come with US labels, but many of them might also contain parts from Huawei. 

    Peter Kusnic, a technology writer at business research firm The Freedonia Group said: “There are all kinds of shadowy licensing agreements that prevent us from knowing the true scope of China’s foothold in this market. I’m not sure it will even be possible to ever fully identify all of these cameras, let alone remove them. The sheer number is insurmountable.” 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Sales of security video cameras are expected to climb to $705 million in 2021 from $570 million in 2016. Hikvision is the world’s largest video surveillance provider and has cameras installed in places like US businesses, banks, airports, schools, army bases and government offices. The cameras produce sharp images and use artificial intelligence and 3-D imaging to power facial recognition systems.

    These cameras can also be sold under brands like Panasonic and Honeywell. They are bought by intermediaries, like security firms, who then go on to sell them to government agencies and private businesses. The NDAA covers the companies’ extensive agreements with original equipment manufacturers, which sweeps up any vendor who resells the devices.

    Theoretically, two cameras running identical Hikvision firmware could carry two completely different labels and packaging. This means it is nearly impossible to figure out which cameras installed across the country are relabeled Chinese devices. Honeywell said they couldn’t track these re-labeled products and Panasonic didn’t respond to questions.

    This convoluted supply chain web is making it difficult for government agencies to actually obey the law. Hikvision has about 50,000 installation companies and integrated partners.

    A worker at the Department of Energy said: “We’ve been trying to get our arms around how big the problem is. I don’t think we have the full picture on how many of these cameras are really out there.”

    The article closes by noting that if somebody is routinely tapping into cameras to spy on federal agencies, they could likely easily determine identities of those who work in government departments… such as CIA.

  • Joe Biden: Protector Of The Deep State

    Authored by Jeremy Kuzmarov via Counterpunch.org,

    Kamala Harris surged in the polls after attacking frontrunner Joe Biden during the first Democratic Party debate for opposing federal busing programs in the 1970s that were designed to desegregate public schools. Bernie Sanders in the debate also criticized Biden’s support for the Iraq War. Left overlooked, however, were some other skeleton’s in “lunch bucket” Joe’s closet, including his history of advancing the interests of the “deep state.”

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    During the late 1970s and early 1980s, Biden sat on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, which was established upon recommendation of the 1975/1976 Pike committee to provide “vigilant legislative oversight over the intelligence activities of the United States to assure that such activities are in conformity with the Constitution and laws of the United States.” Biden himself admitted that the Senate Intelligence Committee failed at this latter task, telling The New York Times in 1982 that its performance was “barely adequate. There is a lack of prudent and consistent oversight…. and a willingness to accept blanket findings and to give indefinite approval for conducting operations.”

    With the Vietnam anti-war movement going strong, the slick young Biden had supported a 1974 bill that called for banning all covert operations. Sensing which way the political winds were blowing, Biden, however, told the Senate Committee in 1976 that he had “no illusions about Soviet intentions and capabilities in the world” and expressed agreement with neoconservative Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D-NY) that “isolationism was a dangerous and naïve foundation upon which to rest our foreign policy or the intelligence community which must serve that policy.”

    By the 1980s, Biden was supporting increases in intelligence and counterintelligence funding after Jimmy Carter had tried to cut the CIA’s staff by a third. In 1980, he voted to approve as Director of Central Intelligence (DCI) William Casey, a staunch anticommunist who ramped up covert arms supplies to the Afghan mujahidin, Nicaraguan Contras and Jonas Savimbi’s UNITA forces in Angola. While opposing the Contras use of terrorism and the FBIs illegal surveillance of the Committee in Solidarity with the People of El Salvador (CISPES), Biden supported Reagan’s War on Terrorism, whose double-standards were significant, and was a staunch proponent of the War on Drugs, even though he reviewed DEA reports on the illicit drug trade which would have pointed to the corruption of CIA allies.

    In 1978, Biden helped to write the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which permitted electronic surveillance by the President to acquire foreign intelligence information for a period of up to one year without a court order and sanctioned secret court proceedings.

    A year earlier, Biden had been part of a joint investigation by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and the Senate Subcommittee on Health and Scientific Research, chaired by Senator Edward Kennedy (D-MA), on unethical government drug testing programs during the early Cold War.

    One of the witnesses was Dr. Sidney Gottlieb, the CIAs “Dr. Death” who had spearheaded the Operation MK-ULTRA in which Lysergic Acid Diamelythide (LSD) was given to unwitting human guinea pigs as part of an effort to develop novel interrogation methods.

    Gottlieb was asked about Dr. Frank Olson, a CIA biochemist at the army biological warfare center at Ft. Detrick Maryland and member of the CIAs Special Operations Division (SOD), who was thought to be a victim of MK-ULTRA. In November 1953, Olson was allegedly given LSD at a CIA retreat, and after a bad reaction, jumped to his death from the 13th floor of the Statler Hotel in New York City.

    Forensics investigation, however, later determined that the cause of Olson’s death was blunt force trauma to the head. According to researcher Hank Albarelli Jr., two CIA hatchet men snuck into his hotel room through a side door and threw Olson out of the window while framing his death as a drug-induced suicide.

    At the 1977 hearing, Dr. Robert Lashbrook, Olson’s hotel roommate and SOD colleague, committed perjury. Neither Biden nor his colleagues, however, challenged him in any way. The same was true of Dr. Gottlieb who perjured himself after being granted legal immunity in exchange for his testimony. Senator Edward Kennedy, the “liberal lion” concluded that his hearings “closed the book on this sorry chapter [the Olson affair]” which was framed as a “tragic accident.” The book was anything but closed though, and it was not an accident, but likely state sponsored murder of a man who threatened to blow the whistle on state secrets.

    Biden should be judged as part of a generation of lawmakers who failed to reign in the “deep state.” Joe’s conversion from an opponent to a protector of the CIA in the 1970s set the groundwork for his Vice Presidency – and would do so for his presidency.

    In the 2009 debate over the “surge” in Afghanistan, Biden characteristically wanted a small troop increase and more air strikes and drone attacks – the approach favored by the CIA. Biden also supported the CIA’s operations in Libya, Ukraine, Honduras, Venezuela and Syria, and backed the expansion of the private military industry under Obama, which is heavily dominated by the CIA.

    In the next debate, Joe’s sparring partners should call him out for his dubious record on foreign policy and vow to work to curtail the power of the Executive Branch and “deep state.”

    This would mark them as the real people’s choice.

  • 'They Waited For Failure': Report Exposes PG&E's Inability To Replace Equipment That Sparked Deadly Wildfire

    The now-bankrupt PG&E has put together a contingency plan that would plunge millions of unsuspecting Californians into rolling blackouts reminiscent of the early 2000s (when the utility was last pushed into bankruptcy protection thanks to the market-manipulation hijinx of Enron and other electricity brokers), but as WSJ revealed in an explosive report published Wednesday – a report that was probably the result of months of battles between the paper’s lawyers and California’s Freedom of Information Commission – PG&E’s long history of deterring maintenance on its lines and towers, a practice that directly contributed to causing the deadliest forest fire in California history.

    The utility knew for years that hundreds of miles of high-voltage lines running in high-risk fire areas were at risk of failing and sparking a fire. And instead of acting swiftly to make the necessary upgrades, it appears the company routinely failed to identify the infrastructure most in need of maintenance.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>Utilities

    Last year, a 100-year old line failed and sparked the Camp Fire, which eventually caused the deaths of 85 people. Documents obtained by WSJ – mostly internal emails and reports – revealed that the utility knew that 49 of the steel towers that carry the electrical line that failed needed to be replaced entirely.

    For years, PG&E, which operates one of the oldest long-distance electricity transmission systems in the world, much of it having been built in the early 1900s, was able to get away with neglecting its lines and towers. But that changed in 2013, when California entered a punishing and prolonged drought.

    It dried out much of the state, exponentially amplifying the risk of wildfires. In a 2017 internal presentation, PG&E said it needed a plan to replace towers and better manage lines to prevent “structure failure resulting [in] conductor on ground causing fire.” But inscrutably, the company opted instead to focus its efforts (and billions in capital) on upgrading substations, and instead labeled many of its transmission lines as low-risk projects.

    Now, let’s look at the Caribou-Palermo line, the line that failed and caused the Camp Fire. PG&E delayed work on that line for more than five years, despite acknowledging that it, and dozens of aluminum lines and towers, needed urgent work “due to age.”

    Similarly, PG&E’s regulators did nothing to change the company’s plans because no regulator keeps a close eye on these projects. PG&E told federal regulators it planned to overhaul the Caribou-Palermo line in 2013, yet no improvements had been made when a piece of hardware holding a high-voltage line failed last November, sending sparks into nearby dry grass and sparking the fire.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>Map

    What’s worse, the company appears poised to make these same mistakes again as wildfire season progresses. PG&E has delayed maintenance work on several lines in Northern California’s highest-threat fire areas, including at least one near the Plumas National Forest, according to documents obtained by WSJ.

    The company hasn’t detailed the scope of the work needed for each line, but it has disclosed that some require upgrades similar to those needed on the Caribou-Palermo line. Across northern California, WSJ able to identify dozens of lines in high-risk fire areas that were as old or older than Caribou-Palermo, and need similar types of maintenance.

    One researcher at the University of Pittsburgh offered a damning assessment of their business model: “We have known for a long time that we are dealing with aging and antiquated infrastructure,” he said. “In a lot of cases, the business model was to wait for a failure and then respond.”

    Unfortunately, forcing the company to make these repairs can be difficult without intense public scrutiny, given that none of the agency’s regulators has authority over the utility’s projects and maintenance work.

    Whether this WSJ report spurs the state to act remains to be seen.

  • Big Pharma Hikes Drug Price 879% And That's Just One Of 3,400 So Far This Year

    Authored by Mac Slavo via SHTFplan.com,

    Big Pharma continues to jack up the prices on the drugs they peddle. The price of one drug was hiked 879%, and that’s only ONE of the 3,400 price increases that have occurred so far this year.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Pharmaceutical companies raised the prices of more than 3,400 drugs in the first half of 2019, surpassing the number of drug hikes they imposed during the same period last year, according to an analysis first reported by NBC NewsWhile the average price increase per drug was 10.5%, a rate around five times that of inflation, about 40 of the drugs saw triple-digit increases. That includes a generic version of the antidepressant Prozac, which saw a price increase of 879%.

    ARS Technica reported that the surge in price hikes comes amid ongoing public and political pressure to drag down the sky-rocketing price of drugs and healthcare costs overall. In May of 2018, President Donald Trump boldly announced that drug companies would unveil “voluntary massive drops in prices” within weeks, however, Big Pharma didn’t announce any big drops or actually reduce their prices. Trump then went on to publicly shame Pfizer for continuing to raise drug prices. The company responded with a short-lived pause on drug price increases mid-way through last year, but it resumed increasing prices in January along with dozens of other pharmaceutical companies.

    “Requests and public shaming haven’t worked,” Michael Rea, chief executive of RX Savings Solutions, told Reuters last December. His company helps health plans and employers seek lower-cost prescription medicines. It also conducted a new analysis of some drug prices.

    It really isn’t a surprise that people are losing faith in western medicine in record numbers in favor of a more natural and holistic approach. Cost is certainly one problem, but many experience debilitating side effects from Big Pharma’s drugs – and they then seek relief from those side effects by using other drugs laced with different synthetic chemicals.  It’s a vicious cycle, and no one should be surprised by the rise in things like herbal tinctures, medicinal teas, and CBD oil.

    The more than 3,400 drug price increases in the first half of 2019 is a 17% increase over the number of drug price hikes in the first half of 2018. So price increases are skyrocketing instead of going down. In addition to the Prozac generic, the drugs that saw triple-digit increases included the topical steroid Mometasone, which had a price increase of 381%. A pain reliever and cough medication (Promethazine/Codeine) saw a 326% hike while the ADHD treatment Guanfacine 2mg saw its price rise 118%.

    The Trump administration has finalized a new rule that goes into effect this summer, and it states that drug companies must include the prices of their product in advertisements on TV.  At that point, when the general public understands just how much these companies are ripping them off, they may make a more permanent turn away from Western medicine’s chemical treatments.

    It’s difficult to say if the Trump administration’s rule will have any effect on drug prices or not.

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Today’s News 10th July 2019

  • EU Mulls Sanctions On Turkey After 2nd Drilling Ship Deployed In Cypriot Waters

    Turkey and Europe are headed for a showdown in the eastern Mediterranean over Turkish plans for oil and gas exploration and drilling in Cypriot-recognized waters, with the European Union reportedly now mulling cutting financial assistance to Turkey over the illegal drilling. EU envoys are reportedly meeting Wednesday to discuss various punitive measures against Turkey, including suspending aviation talks and even sanctions.  

    The latest crisis was triggered after Turkish drilling vessel Yavuz sailed to an area off Cyprus’ east coast at the start of this week — the second to follow a first drilling vessel, Fatih, which had already been exploring in Cypriot waters. Notably, the vessels have been accompanied by the Turkish military, including drones, F-16 fighters, and warships

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Turkish drillship Yavuz, via Hurriyet Daily News

    Turkish authorities have been brazen in publicizing their territorial claims and actions backing them, even as EU leaders have slammed the now months-long exploration and drilling expansion in solidarity with Cypriot condemnations (since last May). 

    Turkish Vice President Fuat Oktay had warned over the weekend while speaking from the Turkish-occupied north of Cyprus: “Those who move against the legitimate rights of Turkey or the Turkish Cyprus and discount Turkey in the region will not be able to reach their aims,” according to Hurriyet Daily.   

    However, EU foreign minister Federica Mogherini warned Turkey this week that the EU would respond “appropriately and in full solidarity with Cyprus” after Ankara announced the deployment of the Yavuz drilling vessel. Previously, the Fatih had been deployed a mere 42 miles off the west coast of Cyprus.

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

    The EU’s Mogherini said following news of the second drill ship deployment that it’s an “unacceptable escalation” which violates EU-member Cyprus’ sovereignty

    Turkey’s declared intention to illegally conduct a new drilling operation northeast of Cyprus is of grave concern. This second planned drilling operation, two months after the start of the ongoing drilling operations west of Cyprus, is a further unacceptable escalation, which violates the sovereignty of Cyprus.

    “We call on the Turkish authorities, once again, to refrain from such actions, act in a spirit of good neighborliness and respect the sovereignty and sovereign rights of the Republic of Cyprus in accordance with international law,” she added. 

    The Cypriot government has repeatedly condemned Turkey’s “blatant violation of international law” and urged the EU to take firmer action. 

    “The Republic of Cyprus is determined to continue to defend its legal rights to the benefit of all its legal citizens, intensifying its efforts at a legal, political and diplomatic level, using all means at its disposal, especially in the framework of the European Union,” a new Cypriot government statement reads. 

    The president of Cyprus Nicos Anastasiades previously slammed Turkey for its “unprecedented escalation of illegal action” which constitutes a “second invasion” in the eastern Mediterranean, blaming Ankara for illegally drilling inside its exclusive economic zone. 

    Both the internationally recognized Greek Cypriot government and Turkey – which occupies northern Cyprus – have overlapping claims of jurisdiction for offshore oil and gas research in the natural gas-rich eastern Mediterranean.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has recently been provocatively sending warships near Cypriot waters in order to ward off foreign competition to oil and gas research, according to Cypriot officials, also seeking to bar Cypriot ships and planes from freely traversing its own European recognized waters. 

    But Erdogan is also bumping up against other Mediterranean countries’ plans in the region notably Israel and Egypt as well, at a moment he’s engaged in multiple crises both domestic and related to the West  even as Turkey has long sought EU membership.

    Turkey has in the past demanded that Cyprus formally recognize the breakaway Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (since 1974) and allow it to share revenues from Cypriot gas exploration. 

    Furthermore Turkey has laid claim to a waters extending a whopping 200 miles from its coast, brazenly asserting ownership over a swathe of the Mediterranean that even cuts into Greece’s exclusive economic zone.

    Such claims have been condemned by the US, European Union, and Egypt, with NATO officials recently signalling to Turkey that it was out of line. Should the Turkish military attempt to enforce its drilling claims and run up against Cypriot and Greek vessels, it could spark a deadly encounter which would force the EU and NATO to finally weigh in more forcefully. 

  • Kim Darroch: The Simple Explanation

    Authored by Craig Murray,

    The media is full of over-complicated theories as to who might have leaked Kim Darroch’s diplomatic telegrams giving his candid view on the Trump administration.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    I should start by explaining the FCO telegram system.

    The communications are nowadays effectively encrypted emails, though still known as “telegrams”: to the Americans “cables”. They are widely distributed. These Darroch telegrams would be addressed formally to the Foreign Secretary but have hundreds of other recipients, in the FCO, No.10, Cabinet Office, MOD, DFID, other government departments, MI6, GCHQ, and in scores of other British Embassies abroad. The field of suspects is therefore immense.

    It is very important to note that this is an old fashioned kind of leak which was given to the mainstream media without the documents being published online. It is therefore pretty useless in terms of public information. We haven’t seen the documents, we only know as much as Isabel Oakeshott and the Daily Mail chose to tell us. It is not possible to envision any more untrustworthy or agenda driven filter than that. We can therefore be certain this was not a wikileaks style disclosure in the interests of freedom of information about public servants and their doings, but the agenda was much more specific.

    Darroch’s scathing assessment of Trump is no way out of line with the mainstream media narrative and it is interesting – but exactly what I would expect of him – that Darroch shares the neo-con assumption that Trump’s failure to start a war with Iran over the drone take-down was a weird aberration. The leaks neither tell us anything startling nor obviously benefit any political faction in the UK. So what was the motive?

    I believe the most probable answer is much simpler than anything you will find in the vast amount of media guff printed on the subject these last two days by people with no knowledge.

    Kim Darroch is a rude and aggressive person, who is not pleasant at all to his subordinates. He rose to prominence within the FCO under New Labour at a time when right wing, pro-Israel foreign policy views and support for the Iraq War were important assets to career progress, as was the adoption of a strange “laddish” culture led from No. 10 by Alastair Campbell, involving swearing, football shirts and pretending to be working class (Darroch was privately educated). Macho management was suddenly the thing.

    At a time when news management was the be all and end all for the Blair administration, Darroch was in charge of the FCO’s Media Department. I remember being astonished when, down the telephone, he called me “fucking stupid” for disagreeing with him on some minor policy matter. I had simply never come across that kind of aggression in the FCO before. People who worked directly for him had to put up with this kind of thing all the time.

    Most senior ambassadors used to have interests like Chinese literature and Shostakovitch. Darroch’s are squash and sailing. He is a bull of a man.

    In my view, the most likely source of the leaks is a former subordinate taking revenge for years of bullying, or a present one trying to get rid of an unpleasant boss.

  • UK & France Accept Trump's Call For More Troops In Syria As Germany Rebuffs

    Amid an awkward diplomatic row between the UK and US following leaked cables sent from Britain’s ambassador to the United States back to London which described President Trump as “inept,” “insecure” and “incompetent,” the United Kingdom joined France Tuesday in being among the only US allies to heed the administration’s call to bolster forces in Syria

    Notably Germany has rebuffed the US request to deploy additional troops as part of the “anti-ISIS coalition” primarily in Syria’s north and east after US special envoy James Jeffrey told Die Welt’s Sunday edition that,“We want ground forces from Germany to partially replace our soldiers.” This as the Pentagon plans a draw down in line with Trump’s longtime promise to the American public of a “full” and “complete” withdrawal which has been long delayed since last year over concerns that either pro-Assad and Iranian forces or Turkey could fill the vacuum.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Image source: Reuters

    The Guardian confirmed the following on Tuesday:

    US officials briefed on Tuesday that Britain and France would contribute 10% to 15% more elite soldiers, although the exact numbers involved remain secret.

    The decision was first reported in the journal Foreign Policy, which described the development as “a major victory … for Donald Trump’s national security team” because few other countries had been willing to help out.

    The US call for increased German presence had reportedly caused deep division in Chancellor Angela Merkel’s ruling coalition, per the AFP:

    Discord broke out in German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s ruling coalition Sunday, after the United States urged the country to send ground troops to Syria as Washington looks to withdraw from the region.

    The Pentagon is believed to have slowly begun drawing down its presence in Syria, from a force which is believed to have been anywhere from 2,000 to multiple thousands, down to a possible current level of 400

    The UK has not commented on its own troop numbers in Syria, nor how many more it plans to send, but the bulk are believed to be special forces SAS soldiers

    The White House has of late been putting pressure on European allies to step up presence in Syria so it can essentially finally “declare victory” against ISIS and get out. 

    Meanwhile, Damascus sees any foreign, US or European presence as “foreign invaders” illegally encroaching on Syrian sovereignty at a moment Washington still prioritizes “countering Iran” in the region. 

  • Weaponizing The Dollar Has Accelerated The Demise Of The US Empire

    Authored by Patrick Lawrence via ConsortiumNews.com,

    The Trump administration’s incessant sanctions wars are curbing the dollar’s global hegemony and speeding the demise of U.S. empire…

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The signs are mounting steadily now. As the Trump administration weaponizes the dollarin defense of American hegemony, it is prompting many other nations to find alternatives to the U.S. currency as the default medium of exchange. The long-term implications of this swiftly advancing trend, evident among allies as well as those Washington considers adversaries, cannot be overstated: At stake is the longevity of America’s global preeminence.

    The just-concluded Group of 20 session in Osaka, Japan, was a dramatic demonstration of how quickly “de-dollarization” efforts are coalescing. And the pattern could not be clearer: The Trump administration’s incessant use of unilateral economic and financial sanctions against perceived enemies, which is almost certainly without precedent, is high among the reasons these efforts now gather momentum at a pace few in the financial markets or in official circles anticipated.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Trump and U.S. team meet with Xi Jinping and Chinese delegation, June 29, 2019, at G-20 in Osaka. (White House/Shealah Craighead)

    The impulse to international trade and financial transactions has been evident for some time. Russia has actively encouraged its trading partners to avoid the dollar in favor of local currencies since Washington imposed sanctions against Russia following the U.S.–cultivated coup in Ukraine five years ago. Russia is now recruiting other nations to participate in its alternative to the U.S.–controlled SWIFT bank-messaging system. China has set up a parallel mechanism, the Cross­–Border Interbank Payments System.    

    China launched an oil-futures market denominated in yuan little more than a year ago. Its annual turnover is already the equivalent of $2.5 trillion. The Shanghai Futures Exchange, where oil futures are traded, recently announced plans to offer forward contracts in rubber, nonferrous metals, and other commodities — all to be transacted in yuan.

    The G–20 gathering marked an important step for these de-dollarization efforts. France, Germany, and Britain announced on the opening day that a trading system developed over the past year to circumvent U.S. sanctions against Iran — and any entity transacting with it — is now operational. The Instrument in Support of Trade Exchanges, or Instex, replaces the Special Purpose Vehicle Europeans devised a year ago. All three sponsors, along with Russia, China, and the U.S., are signatories of the 2015 accord governing Iran’s nuclear programs, which the U.S. repudiated last year.

    Salvaging the Nuclear Deal

    Instex is intended to salvage the multi-sided agreement without U.S. participation.  And Iranian media reported that the Islamic Republic put in place a corresponding system, the Special Trade and Finance Instrument, last spring. It is not clear how effective Instex will prove in practice or whether it will be enough to persuade Tehran to remain within the bounds of the nuclear accord. The initial signs are mixed: Iran said Sunday that it will begin enriching uranium beyond the pact’s limits; in making the announcement, a foreign ministry official also indicated that Tehran wants to save the agreement.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Eccles Federal Reserve Board Building, Washington, D.C. (Ron Dicker, CC BY-SA 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons)

    However well Instex performs, its geopolitical significance is evident. It effectively institutionalizes a rift in the trans–Atlantic alliance that has widened steadily since the Obama administration force-marched the Europeans into the sanctions against Russia after the Ukraine crisis broke open. Instex is also the most important attempt to date to challenge the dollar’s hegemony as the world’s trading and reserve currency.

    The Osaka G–20 meeting had other surprises. In a major speech before the opening session began, Vladimir Putin urged other members of the BRICS nations —Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa — to increase the proportion of its trade conducted in currencies other than the dollar. Given the Russian president spoke at a leading international forum, this was his most pointed challenge to dollar hegemony to date.

    And it starts to look like a concerted effort. Izvestia, the Russian daily, reported simultaneously that the Russian Finance Ministry and the People’s Bank of China, China’s central bank, had just signed an agreement to increase ruble-denominated and yuan-denominated trade to as much as half of bilateral transactions. No timetable for this shift was reported.

    BRICS nations together account for not quite a quarter of global economic output. Last spring theytested a payment system intended to allow users to meet financial obligations in local currencies — an undertaking Putin plainly had in mind when he spoke in Osaka.

    Profligate Use of Sanctions

    The Trump administration’s profligate use of sanctionsthey are currently in place against roughly 20 nations, most prominently Iran, Russia, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and North Koreadid not inspire the current de-dollarization phenomenon. Trump’s Washington merely forced it forward. It also weakens trust in the dollar every time it freezes the assets of designated adversaries such as Venezuela, or companies and individuals residing in “enemy” nations such as Russia and Iran.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Russian President Vladimir Putin, left, and Trump during G-20 in Osaka, June 28, 2019. (White House/ Shealah Craighead)

    It is remarkable that this administration so far fails to recognize that it is doing at least as much damage to the dollar’s credibility as any nation planning to circumvent its use. Washington never learns, it seems. Even before the Europeans unveiled Instex in Osaka, the Treasury Department had alreadythreatened to sanction the system’s sponsors and anyone who uses it. 

    The speed with which other nations now seek alternatives to the dollar is also a remarkable feature of the de-dollarization phenomenon. Competition among reserve currencies has long been a recurring topic in financial markets. But until now the end of dollar hegemony has commonly been considered a far-off development unlikely to occur in the lifetime of anyone now living. This is no longer likely to be so.

    It is important, however, not to read too much into Instex and other recent developments. The dollar is not balanced on any precipice of imminent decline. It still accounts for roughly two-thirds of global foreign exchange reserves, according to the International Monetary Fund. A far higher proportion of international transactions are still conducted in the U.S. currency. It remains likely that a serious challenge to dollar hegemony is still a matter of a decade or more in the future.

    But this challenge is now coming. This is how the news from Osaka, Instex, the recent Sino­–Russian agreement, and the efforts of the BRICS are best understood; as the first steps in the mounting of this challenge. Washington’s defense against it will be fierce, harming the lives of many.

    The dollar is the cornerstone of American power. The use of this power, at its most brazen and crude — the sword out of the sheath — is evident now in the sanctions wars. The U.S. can bring any nation it wants to its knees. It can freeze the assets of any entity that is invested in the U.S., has deposits in the U.S., or buys U.S. Treasury paper. Being the world’s sine qua non reserve currency puts the U.S. at the center of global commerce and induces dependence in reverse; everyone needs access to the dollar.

    The currency’s decline, when it begins in earnest, will be a good measure of the American empire’s passing into the past.

  • Mysterious Flying Wing Stealth Drone Makes Appearance In Chinese Promo Video (Photo) 

    According to a new Global Times report, a video has surfaced on Chinese social media that depicts a mysterious flying wing stealth drone for future aircraft carriers.

    Friday marked the 50th anniversary of Shenyang Aircraft Corporation’s J-8 fighter jet, which the company, a subsidiary of state-owned Aviation Industry of China (AVIC), published a promotional video highlighting past success and provided a glimpse of China aerospace in the 21st century.

    “In the latter part of the video, which turned from real life documentary to computer-generated images, a stealth drone featuring a flying wing design was shown operating on an aircraft carrier. The drone seems large, as its landing gear is as tall as a person, the video showed,” the Times reported Sunday.

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

    A Chinese military expert who asked not to be named informed the Times that Shenyang has the expertise in designing a ship-based flying wing drone, so officials are expecting to see the drone undergo test flights in the near future.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Shenyang also designed China’s first carrier-borne aircraft, the J-15, and is working on the J-31, a fifth-generation stealth fighter that will be launched from carriers.

    “China’s no stranger to either flying wing designs on its drones or to stealth drones. The People’s Liberation Army has also begun to test the Sky Hawk drone as well as the CH-7, the latter of which is also purported to operate from carriers. Shenyang is also rumored to have developed the Sharp Sword flying wing stealth drone,” the Times noted, as per a report from Sputnik.

    The anonymous expert said the new drones would be a multi-mission aircraft: able to conduct land or sea attacks, aerial refueling, and intelligence missions.

    The race for flying wing drones has taken off in the last five years, with the US testing the X-47B and MQ-25 Stingray, both will be operated from aircraft carriers.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The benefits of these wing-shaped drones are no fuselage and tails, allow for subsonic cruising as well as a low radar profile.

    Chinese military officials are interested in the next-generation human-crewed and unmanned aircraft on or off carriers to deter Western powers and push them out of the Eastern Hemisphere. More importantly, China is the rising power, challenging the US, the status quo power, through technological advances in defense, is currently arming islands across the South China Sea for the inevitable conflict with the US or one of its allies.

  • 'Mad' Magazine Told The Truth About War, Advertising, And The Media

    Authored by Jeet Heer via TheNation.com,

    “After Mad, drugs were nothing…” – Patti Smith

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    In the summer of 1954, almost any American kid who had the wherewithal to scrounge up a dime could walk into a drugstore and buy the sharp satire on Senator Joseph McCarthy found in the pages of Mad comics #17. The Army-McCarthy hearings had dominated television, and the Wisconsin demagogue had finally alienated so many establishment forces that the Senate was at last moving to censure him. Harvey Kurtzman, the editorial impresario who created Mad, was impressed neither by McCarthy’s buffoonery nor the more deliberative political theater of the Senate. Kurtzman seized on the television drama to recast the whole McCarthy fiasco as a game show called “What’s My Shine?(a travesty of a then-popular program called What’s My Line?).

    In real life, such as it was, McCarthy brandished a photo purporting to show Army secretary Robert T. Stevens meeting alone with David Schine, a McCarthy crony and reputed lover of McCarthy’s aide, Roy Cohn. That photo turned out to be cropped so that others at the meeting were out of sight. In the Mad version, drawn by cartoonist Jack Davis, Senator Joseph McCartaway, complete with Roy Cohn hanging over his shoulder like a sinister ventriloquist, flaunts a fake photo to prove that “Even Steven is in reality a Red Skin!” As both press and onlookers go bug-eyed, McCartaway fills the TV screen with a picture of the cabinet secretary with a tomahawk and a war bonnet. Mad’s satire was directed not just at McCarthy’s dishonesty but also, more pointedly, at the medium that allowed the rabble-rouser to rule the national stage.

    In Mad, McCarthy and other senators are performing for the TV camera and work their parliamentary antics to fit the time allotted to them by a commercial sponsor. Politics, the story suggests, is just another TV show. The sting of this message has only gotten sharper under the presidency of Donald Trump, Fox News addict and Roy Cohn’s proud political acolyte.

    Last week the magazine’s current owners, DC comics, announced that Mad, which started as a comic book in 1952 and became a magazine in 1955, is on the verge of suspending publication. According to news reports, the magazine will continue publishing issues filled with reprint material to fill out existing subscriptions, but it’ll cease buying new material.

    Born in the troubled era of McCarthyism, Mad is dying in another squalid political epoch. Mad was arguably America’s greatest and most influential satirical magazine, a strange claim to make of a publication that was mostly read throughout its existence by children and teenagers, but still justifiable.

    Mad was often rude, tasteless, and childish – which made it all the more potent as a tributary of youth culture. The kids who read Mad learned from it to distrust authority, whether in the form of politicians, advertisers or media figures. That was a lesson that successive generations took to heart. Without Mad, it’s impossible to imagine underground comics, National LampoonSaturday Night LiveThe SimpsonsThe Daily Show, or Stephen Colbert. In the historical sweep of American culture, Mad is the crucial link between the anarchic humor of the Marx Brothers and the counterculture that emerged in the 1960s.

    Writing in The New York Times Magazine on the occasion of Mad’s 25th anniversary in 1977, Tony Hiss and Jeff Lewis argued,

    “Month after month and issue after issue, in a relentlessly good‐natured way, Mad told us that everything was askew—that there were lies in advertising, that other comic hooks lied, that television and movies lied, and that adults, in general, when faced with the unknown, lied.”

    Hiss and Lewis cited an impressive array of cultural figures who attested to Mad’s shaping force. Gloria Steinem said, “There was a spirit of satire and irreverence in Mad that was very important, and it was the only place you could find it in the 50’s.” Singer Patti Smith made a similar point more succinctly: “After Mad, drugs were nothing.”

    Kurtzman, the genius who was the wellspring for Mad, sometimes denied any political intent.

    “I never regarded myself as political,” he once said.

    “I don’t think the fact that you have a platform necessarily gives you to qualification to make a speech.”

    He admitted he made an exception for McCarthy because he was “so evil. It was like doing a satire on Hitler.” But the truth was more complicated. Kurtzman, born in 1924, was something of a red diaper baby. His parents subscribed to The Daily Worker and sent him to the famously progressive Camp Kinderland.

    Kurtzman didn’t inherit his parents’ politics, but his background left him hostile to conventional American culture, which he regarded as filled with lies. Prior to Mad, Kurtzman’s major achievement as a cartoonist was writing and editing two war comics—Two-Fisted Tales and Frontline Combat—which were nearly unique in their unvarnished portrayal of the brutality of the Korean War. “It struck me that war is not a very nice business, and the comic book companies dealing in the subject matter of war tended to make war glamourous,” Kurtzman recalled. “That offended me—so I turned my stories to antiwar.”

    Unlike the war comics, Mad was meant to be funny—but the same underlying ethic, a detestation of lies, guided Kurtzman whether he was doing realistic stories or parodies. Kurtzman’s satire aimed at uncovering the deceptions of the media and popular culture. Mickey Mouse in Kurtzman’s unvarnished version became Mickey Rodent while Superduperman was a “creep” who had an unhealthy fixation on “Lois Pain, Girl Reporter.”

    Kurtzman produced those war books and Mad for EC Comics, run by Bill Gaines, a young publisher who enjoyed risks and didn’t mind legal trouble. The bread and butter of EC Comics were horror comics like Tales from the Crypt which were so lurid they helped incite a best-selling tirade, a Senate investigation, and the eventual creation of an industry-wide censorship code.

    Gaines’s Senate testimony was almost as much of farce as Mad’s rendition of the McCarthy hearings. Pepped up on weight-loss pills, Gaines made a sweaty and unconvincing witness to hostile senators who were not about to buy his advanced theories that teenagers can be trusted with challenging art. These were ideas that might win more favor in other decades, but went completely against the grain of conventional wisdom in the 1950s.

    The early years of Mad were genuinely dangerous times for Gaines. Lyle Stuart, Gaines’s business manager, was arrested for sale of “disgusting literature” in the form of an EC comic book story that parodied Mickey Spillane’s violent detective novels. (The story was called “My Gun Is The Jury”—a riff on Spillane’s I, The Jury). Stuart faced a jail term of a year before the judge threw out the case.

    Besieged by the Senate, the legal system, parent groups, other publishers, and distributors, Gaines had to give up comic books. Turning Mad into a magazine was his lifeboat. Initially, Gaines and Kurtzman were simpatico, although they eventually split in 1956 when Kurtzman asked for half ownership of the magazine.

    When they were on good terms, Gaines didn’t even mind when Kurtzman’s parodies of ads miffed advertisers. In fact, after the break with Kurtzman, Gaines decided to make Mad ad-free in 1957, a policy that continued until 2001 (nearly a decade after Gaines’s death in 1992).

    Gaines would cite the progressive tabloid PM, which briefly flourished in the 1940s, as a precedent for Mad’s no-advertising policy. “In those days there was no such thing as running an anti-cigarette story because they were terrified of losing their cigarette advertising,” Gaines noted. “So PM comes along and tears into everything and doesn’t give a shit.”

    Gaines had the same jaunty nonchalance he admired in PM. One Mad mock-ad in the 1960s had Adolf Hitler endorsing smoking. The parody ran:

    “Hi. I’m Adolph [sic] Hitler. In the 30’s and 40’s we knocked off millions of people and filled countless cemeteries. That’s nothing! I want to talk about a really fantastic cemetery-filler.”

    Mad’s willingness to tweak the noses of the powers that be earned it many enemies. In 1961, retired brigadier general Clyde J. Watts claimed Mad was “the most insidious Communist propaganda in the United States today.” In 1979, Bill Wilkinson, Grand Dragon of the Ku Klux Klan, wrote to the magazine saying,

    “You and the jew-communist run MAD magazine are obviously trying to do away with the great Red, White and Blue and promote radicalism in this country’s youth.”

    Tragically, the subversive publication that so angered Watts and Wilkinson won’t be around to poison future American generations.

  • First Amendment Stands Strong In Trump vs. Twitter Showdown

    Submitted by Michael Scott of OilPrice.com

    Trump has helped make Twitter one of the most amusingly exciting social media platforms on the planet–but a court now says he’ll have to swallow the bitter pill of criticism because this is, after all, a Democratic country.   Judgment has been handed down: @realDonaldTrump violated the Constitution when he blocked critics on Twitter. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The ruling of the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan saw a three-judge panel agree with a lower court judge ruling last year who said Trump was violating the First Amendment when he blocked critics on his Twitter account. According to the court, the First Amendment does not permit a public official using a social media account for “all manner of official purposes” to exclude people from an otherwise-open online dialogue because they disagree with the official.

    Trump’s use of the blocking function was challenged by the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, as well as seven Twitter users he had blocked, who included a journalist, a surgeon, and police officer and others.  Judge Barrington Parker said that the president’s account on Twitter is indeed a public forum and that “once the President has chosen a platform and opened up its interactive space to millions of users and participants, he may not selectively exclude those whose views he disagrees with.”

    The court’s decision upheld a May 2018 ruling by U.S. District Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald in Manhattan, which prompted Trump to unblock some accounts–but the president failed to oblige.

    The heart of the matter is that this is a world that still doesn’t know what to make of Twitter. 

    Trump has rendered his social media accounts central to his presidency. The account is used to randomly to promote his agenda, fire people, announce resignations, and even as a foreign policy tool. It’s also used, vociferously, to attack his critics, which–as the court has ruled–is a two-way street. 

    The entire fiasco is a microcosm of Trump’s larger love-hate relationship with the tech world, in general. 

    Indeed, Trump appears to believe that the likes of Twitter, Google and Facebook are all ganging up on him. 

    Letting loose on Fox News last week, Trump claimed that Twitter was preventing him from getting followers–a conspiracy he alleged was “possibly illegal”. 

    “You know, I have millions and millions of followers but I will tell you, they make it very hard for people to join me in Twitter, and they make it very much harder for me to get out the message,” he said.

    Trump warned both Twitter and Facebook that they need to “be careful”, after he launched an attack on Twitter, warning it the company that it might be prosecuted for making him look bad (along with Facebook and Google). 

    Days prior to this, Twitter announced it would begin labeling and demoting tweets from world leaders who violate its rules.  Egged on by Fox News’ Tucker Carlson, who noted that Google is against Trump and doesn’t want him re-elected, Trump claimed to have won that elusive battle. 

    “I won. They were totally against me,” Trump said. “I won.”

    Even last year, the White House said it was looking into whether tech companies were suppressing positive articles about the president after Trump accused Google of manipulating search results to make him look bad. The search engine was rigged “so that almost all stories & news is BAD”, he tweeted.

    He may have a point, at least on one aspect: In July last year, it surfaced that unidentified activists had influenced Google’s algorithm so that when the word “idiot” was typed into Google’s image search, Trump’s was the first returned result. Those results are still active.

    The court ruling comes as Trump is set to hold a Presidential Social Media Summit later this week.

    Facebook and Twitter won’t be attending. 

    Instead, the White House has invited tech’s top conservative critics in politics and media.

  • Escobar: Debunking The Indo-Pacific Myth

    Authored by Pepe Escobar via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

    The Trump administration is obsessively spinning the concept of a “free and open Indo-Pacific”. Apart from a small coterie of scholars, very few people around the world, especially across the Global South, know what that means since the then incipient strategy was first unveiled at the 2017 APEC forum in Vietnam.

    Now everything one needs to know – and especially not know – about the Indo-Pacific is contained in a detailed Pentagon report.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Still: is this an act, or the real deal? After all, the strategy was unveiled by “acting” Pentagon head Patrick Shanahan (the Boeing guy), who latter committed hara-kiri, just to be replaced by another, revolving door, “acting” secretary, Mark Espel (the Raytheon guy).

    Shanahan made a big deal of Indo-Pacific when he hit the 18th Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore last month, picking up on his introduction to the Pentagon report to stress the “geopolitical rivalry between free and repressive world order visions” and demonizing China for seeking to “reorder the region to its advantage”.

    In contrast, all the benign Pentagon yearns for is just “freedom” and “openness” for a “networked region”; calling it the New Pentagon Silk Road wouldn’t be far fetched.

    Anyone remotely familiar with “Indo-Pacific” knows that’s code for demonization of China; actually, the Trump administration’s version of Obama’s “pivot to Asia”, which was in itself a State Dept. concoction, via Kurt Campbell, fully appropriated by then Secretary Hillary Clinton.

    “Indo-Pacific” congregates the Quad – US, Japan, India and Australia – in a “free” and “open” God-given mission. Yet this conception of freedom and openness blocks the possibility of China turning the mechanism into a Quintet.

    Add to it what hawkish actor Esper told the Senate Armed Services Committee way back in 2017:

    “My first priority will be readiness – ensuring the total Army is prepared to fight across the full spectrum of conflict. With the Army engaged in over 140 countries around the world, to include combat operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, training rotations to Europe to deter Russia, and forward deployed units in the Pacific defending against a bellicose North Korea, readiness must be our top priority.”

    That was 2017. Esper didn’t even talk about China – which at the time was not the demonized “existential threat” of today. The Pentagon continues to be all about Full Spectrum Dominance.

    Beijing harbors no illusions about the new Indo-Pacific chief they will be dealing with.

    Surfing FONOP

    “Indo-Pacific” is a hard nut to sell to ASEAN. As much as selected members may allow themselves to profit from some “protection” by the US military, Southeast Asia as a whole maintains top trade relations with China; most nations are participants of the New Silk Roads, or Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and members of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB); and they will not shrink from enjoying the benefits of Huawei’s 5G future.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    ASEAN Defense Senior Officials’ Meeting-Plus Sustainable Security, Thailand, April 4, 2019.

    Actually even the other three in the Quad, as much as they are not linked to BRI, are having second thoughts on playing supportive roles in an all-American super production. They are very careful about their geoeconomic relations with China. “Indo-Pacific”, a club of four, is a de facto late response to BRI – which is indeed open, to over 65 nations so far.

    The Pentagon’s favorite mantra concerns the enforcement of “freedom of navigation operations” (FONOP) – as if China, juggling the countless tentacles of global supply chains, would have any interest in provoking naval insecurity anywhere.

    So far, “Indo-Pacific” has made sure that the US Pacific Command was renamed US Indo-Pacific Command. And that’s about it. Everything remains the same in terms of those FONOPs – in fact a carefully deceptive euphemism for the US Navy to be on 24/7 patrol anywhere across Asian seas, from the Indian to the Pacific, and especially the South China Sea. No ASEAN nation though will be caught dead performing FONOPS in South China Sea waters within 12 nautical miles of rocks and reefs claimed by Beijing.

    The rampant demonization of China, now a bipartisan sport across the Beltway, on occasion even more hysterical than the demonization of Russia, also features proverbial reports by the Council on Foreign Relations – the establishment’s think tank by definition – on China as a serial aggressor, politically, economically and militarily, and BRI as a geoeconomic tool to coerce China’s neighbors.

    So it’s no wonder this state of affairs has led Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on a recent, frenetic Indo-Pacific related tour, including Quad members India and Japan and possible associates Saudi Arabia, UAE and South Korea.

    Geopoliticians of the realist school do fear that Pompeo, a fanatic Christian Zionist, may be enjoying under Trump a virtual monopoly on US foreign policy; a former CIA director playing warmongering top “diplomat” while also “acting” as Pentagon head trampling other second string actors who are not under full employment.

    His Indo-Pacific roving was a de facto tour de force emphasizing the containment/demonization not only of China but also Iran, which should be seen as the major US target in the Indo/Southwest Asia part of the club. Iran is not only about strategic positioning and being a major BRI hub; it’s about immense reserves of natural gas to be traded bypassing the US dollar.

    The fact that the non-stop demonization of Iran and/or China “aggression” comes from a hyperpower with over 800 military bases or lily pads spread out across every latitude plus a FONOP armada patrolling the seven seas is enough to send the hardest cynic into a paroxysm of laughter.

    The high-speed train has left the station

    In the end, everything under “Indo-Pacific” goes back to what game India is playing.

    New Delhi meekly opted for not buying oil from Iran after the Trump administration lifted its sanctions waiver. New Delhi had promised earlier, on the record, to only respect UN Security Council sanctions, not unilateral – and illegal – US sanctions.

    This decision is set to jeopardize India’s dream of extending its new mini-Silk Road to Afghanistan and Central Asia based on the Iranian port of Chabahar. That was certainly part of the discussions during the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit in Bishkek, when full members Putin, Xi and Modi, plus Rouhani – as the head of an observer nation – were sitting at the same table.

    New Delhi’s priority – embedded deep in the Indian establishment – may be containment of China. Yet Putin and Xi – fellow BRICS and SCO members – are very much aware that Modi cannot at the same time antagonize China and lose Iran as partner, and are deftly working on it.

    On the Eurasian chessboard, the Pentagon and the Trump administration, together, only think Divide and Rule. India must become a naval power capable of containing China in the Indian Ocean while Japan must contain China economically and militarily all across East Asia.

    Japan and India do meet – again – when it comes to another more geoeconomically specific anti-BRI scheme; the Asia-Africa Growth Corridor (AAGC), which so far has had a minimal impact and stands no chance of luring dozens of nations across the Global South away from BRI-related projects.

    The chessboard now clearly shows Indo-Pacific pitted against the three key hubs of Eurasia integration – Russia-China-Iran. The definitive unraveling of Indo-Pacific – even before it starts gaining ground – would be a clear commitment by New Delhi to break apart the US sanctions regime by restarting purchases of much-needed Iran oil and gas.

    It won’t take much for Modi to figure out that taking a second role in a Made in USA production will leave him stranded at the station eating dust just as the high-speed Eurasia integration train passes him by.

    *  *  *

    Full Report below:

  • Powell Testimony Preview: What The Fed Chair May Say Tomorrow

    Chair Powell is slated to give his semi-annual testimony before the House Financial Services and Senate Banking Committees on Wednesday and Thursday, respectively. His prepared remarks will be released at 8:30 am Eastern on Wednesday morning. As per the usual with these hearings, Powell will be testifying on behalf of the FOMC. Consequently, as Deutsche Bank’s Matthew Luzzetti notes, his prepared remarks and the overall tone from his testimony, should largely adhere to the message from – and the intricacies of – the discussion at the June FOMC meeting, the full details of which will be revealed with the release of the minutes to this meeting later on Wednesday.

    That said, there have been a few developments since the June FOMC meeting that could give Powell an opportunity to update the Committee’s views in important ways. Two events stand out in particular.

    • One, the G-20 meeting resulted in at least a near-term truce and a possible pathway towards the resumption of trade negotiations between the US and China. While this outcome avoided the worst-case scenario of a breakdown in talks and escalation that includes additional tariffs, it did little to alleviate the uncertainty that Fed officials believe is contributing to cooling momentum in global trade and domestic capex plans, as last week’s Monetary Policy Report made clear. As a result, Powell will likely stick with a cautious line on the impact of these developments on the US outlook, likely noting, as San Francisco Fed President Daly did recently, that failure to remove trade uncertainty will continue to act as a headwind to US growth.
    • The second important development since the last FOMC meeting was the June jobs report, which we have argued featured details that were considerably weaker than the robust headline payroll figures indicate, particularly related to growth in hours worked and aggregate incomes. The June 19 FOMC statement noted that “job gains have been solid, on average, in recent months, and the unemployment rate has remained low.” Powell is likely to reiterate this relatively upbeat assessment of the labor market following the latest jobs data. However, if questioned more closely about the underlying details, we would not be surprised if he were to sound a mild note of caution about the recent downshift in hours worked, particularly in the context of softer wage inflation. Powell also may provide an update on the progress of the Fed’s policy review, a common theme of which has been the benefits of running a tight labor market.

    With respect to inflation, it is important to recall what Chair Powell stated in his post-meeting press conference last month: “Wages are rising…but not at a pace that would provide much upward impetus for inflation. Moreover, weaker global growth may continue to hold inflation down around the world…and we are well aware that inflation weakness that persists even in a healthy economy could precipitate a difficult to arrest downward drift in longer-run inflation expectations.” This statement details the case for undertaking preemptive rate cuts. On this point, market-based measures of inflation expectations have remained soft and the latest University of Michigan survey showed long-term inflation expectations at all-time lows. With global growth indicators remaining weak, this assessment should remain unchanged, even with some modest upward revisions to core PCE inflation since the June FOMC meeting.

    In short, many analysts, and Deutsche Bank in particular, don’t expect Chair Powell to tip his hand with respect to the July meeting but rather reiterating the same concerns the Committee highlighted on June 19. If this expectation proves correct, market pricing for a 25bp rate cut at the July FOMC meeting should remain entrenched.

    If, however, in a surprising turn Fed leadership has conviction that they will not cut at the July meeting, Powell will need to begin laying the groundwork for this hawkish message. With the  blackout period commencing the following week, and given the FOMC’s penchant for not surprising in a hawkish direction, they should want to soon plant the hawkish seed if that is in fact the direction they are leaning.

    MARKET PRICING:

    A solid Employment resulted in a significant paring back in the implied probabilities of a 50bps rate cut at the Fed’s July meeting – to just 3.5% from around 27% before the data, though the market is still completely priced for a 25bps cut; money markets now price 61bps of easing through the end of the year, compared to 75bps at the close of business last Thursday (the day before the payrolls report). Some analysts say the real question is not whether the FOMC cuts rates by 25bps or 50bps at the July meeting, but what happens afterwards. Societe Generale notes that before the (weak) jobs data at the start of June, the market was pricing a 40% probability that rates would still be above 2% at the end of 2019, now however, the market is assigning a mere 11% chance, though that has been edging up slightly post-payrolls.

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Today’s News 9th July 2019

  • 90% Of Palestinians Distrust Jared Kushner's Peace Plan

    After White House Senior Advisor Jared Kushner unveiled his highly anticipated plan for peace in the Middle East during a two-day economic workshop in Bahrain, it was greeted with derision and exasperation by Arab leaders. The Palestinian leadership boycotted the event while a long list of commentators from Arab countries described the plan as “a colossal waste of time” and “dead on arrival”.

    In fact, as Statista’s Niall McCarthy notes, new polling from the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research has found that nine in ten Palestinians do not trust the goals of the plan.

    Infographic: 90% Of Palestinians Distrust Jared Kushner's Peace Plan  | Statista

    You will find more infographics at Statista

    Instead of focusing on the deadlocked political situation, Kushner instead focused on economics, intending to invest $50 billion to fund 179 regional infrastructure projects over the coming decade. $27.6 billion would go to the West Bank and Gaza with the remainder going to Jordan, Egypt and Lebanon.

    The primary goal of the plan is to allow the Palestinian territories to better access international markets while simultaneously improving key infrastructure such as electricity, water and telecommunications. That would see Palestinian GDP double over the next ten years, generate an estimated one million jobs and halve the poverty rate. The U.S. and Israel would not be responsible for the funding – the Bahrain workshop aimed to raise capital from across the Arab world. As the polling shows, however, an economic plan totally lacking a political dimension is certainly not being viewed as realistic by Palestinians.

  • European Union: Toward A European Superstate

    Authored by Soeren Kern via The Gatestone Institute,

    • German Defense Minister Ursula von der Leyen, nominated to be the next President of the European Commission, has called for the creation of a European superstate. “My aim is the United States of Europe…” she said in an interview with Der Spiegel. She has also called for the creation of a European Army.

    • Belgian Prime Minister Charles Michel, nominated to be the next President of the European Council, has said that Eastern European countries opposed to burden-sharing on migration should lose some of their EU rights. He is also a strong proponent of the Iran nuclear deal.

    • Spanish Foreign Minister Josep Borrell, nominated to replace Federica Mogherini as High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, is a well-known supporter of the mullahs in Iran. Borrell has also said that he hopes Britain will leave the EU because it is an impediment to the creation of a European superstate.

    • International Monetary Fund Managing Director Christine Lagarde, nominated to be the next President of the European Central Bank, has supported U.S. President Donald J. Trump’s trade war with China. “President Trump has a point on intellectual property. It is correct that nobody should be stealing intellectual property to move ahead…. On these points clearly the game has to change, the rules have to be respected.”

    • “The best cure for Europhilia is always to observe the EU’s big beasts at their unguarded worst… unencumbered by any attachment to democracy, accountability or even basic morality… [W]e witnessed rare footage of the secretive process that propels so many retreads and second-rate apparatchiks into positions of immense power in Brussels and Frankfurt, utterly disregarding public opinion…. Everything that is wrong with the EU was shamelessly on display.” — Allister Heath, The Telegraph.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    German Defense Minister Ursula von der Leyen, nominated to be the next President of the European Commission, has called for the creation of a European superstate. “My aim is the United States of Europe…” she said in an interview with Der Spiegel. She has also called for the creation of a European Army. Pictured: Von der Leyen (left) is welcomed by outgoing European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker at the Commission’s headquarters on July 4, 2019 in Brussels, Belgium. (Photo by Thierry Monasse/Getty Images)

    After weeks of frenzied backroom wrangling, European leaders on July 2 nominated four federalists to fill the top jobs of the European Union. The nominations — which must be approved by the European Parliament — send a clear signal that the pro-EU establishment has no intention of slowing its relentless march toward a European superstate, a “United States of Europe,” despite a surge of anti-EU sentiment across the continent.

    Following are brief profiles of the nominees for the top four positions in the next European Commission, which begins on November 1, 2019 for a period of five years.

    Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission

    German Defense Minister Ursula von der Leyen, the daughter of a prominent EU official, has been nominated to replace Jean-Claude Juncker as the next president of the European Commission, the powerful bureaucratic arm of the European Union. Von der Leyen, of the center-right Christian Democratic Union (CDU), was a compromise choice after the candidacy of Manfred Weber, a favorite of German Chancellor Angela Merkel, was rejected by critics, led by French President Emmanuel Macron.

    Macron had favored the candidacy of European Commission Vice President Frans Timmermans, a Dutch Social Democrat. Timmermans, however, was rejected by the Visegrád Group — the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia — due to his frequent criticism of their stance against mass migration and judicial reforms.

    Von der Leyen has called for the creation of a European superstate. “My aim is the United States of Europe — on the model of federal states such as Switzerland, Germany or the U.S.,” she said in an interview with Der Spiegel. She has also called for the creation of a European Army.

    At the same time, however, von der Leyen has been roundly criticized at home and abroad for her performance as German defense minister. During her tenure, Germany’s military has deteriorated due to budget cuts and poor management, according to Parliamentary Armed Forces Commissioner Hans-Peter Bartels.

    “The Bundeswehr’s condition is catastrophic,” wrote Rupert Scholz, who served as defense minister under Chancellor Helmut Kohl, days before von der Leyen was nominated to the EU’s top post. “The entire defense capability of the Federal Republic is suffering, which is totally irresponsible.”

    Writing for the Munich-based newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung, commentator Stefan Ulrich opined that von der Leyen is an “unsuitable” choice:

    “Von der Leyen is unsuitable because after six years as defense minister the Bundeswehr is still in such a deplorable state. She should have resigned a long time ago. As President of the European Commission, she will be overwhelmed.”

    In March 2016, von der Leyen was cleared of allegations of plagiarism in her doctoral thesis. In September 2015, the newsmagazine Der Spiegel reported that plagiarized material had been found on 27 pages of her 62-page dissertation. The president of the Hanover Medical School, Christopher Baum, said that although von der Leyen’s thesis did contain plagiarized material, the school decided against revoking her title because there had been no intent to deceive. “It’s about mistake, not misconduct,” he said.

    Von der Leyen is currently being investigated by the Berlin Public Prosecutor’s Office for nepotism in connection with the allocation of contracts worth hundreds of millions of euros to outside consultants. One such firm is McKinsey & Company, where her son David works as an associate.

    Former European Parliament President Martin Schulz tweeted: “Von der Leyen is our weakest minister. That’s apparently enough to become Commission president.”

    A Deutschlandtrend survey published on July 4 found that 56% of Germans believe that von der Leyen is not a good choice to lead the European Commission; 33% said that she is a good choice.

    The European Parliament will vote on her nomination in Strasbourg on July 16. If approved, she will take over from Jean-Claude Juncker on November 1.

    Charles Michel, President of the European Council

    Belgian Prime Minister Charles Michel, the son of a prominent EU official, has been nominated to succeed Poland’s Donald Tusk as President of the European Council. The European Council defines the EU’s overall political direction and priorities. The members of the European Council are the heads of state or government of the 28 EU member states, the European Council President and the President of the European Commission.

    Michel became Belgium’s youngest prime minister in 2014 at the age of 38. In December 2018, he resigned after losing a no-confidence motion over his support for the UN Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration. It proclaimed basic rights for migrants, but critics said it would blur the line between legal and illegal immigration. He now heads a caretaker government after an inconclusive general election in May 2019.

    Michel has said that Eastern European countries opposed to burden-sharing on migration should lose some of their EU rights. “The European Union is not only an ATM when you need support,” he said. “Cooperation means solidarity and responsibility.”

    Michel is a strong proponent of the Iran nuclear deal, formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). He has criticized the Trump administration for withdrawing from the agreement: “No #IranDeal means more instability or war in the Middle East. I deeply regret the withdrawal by @realDonaldTrump from #JCPOA. EU & its international partners must remain committed and Iran must continue to fulfil its obligations.”

    Michel has also condemned the Trump administration’s recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. “We know that tensions in Israel and Palestine are feeding a form of hatred and violence that is felt everywhere in the world. That’s why we have unequivocally condemned Donald Trump’s statement. It was oil on fire, we do not need it.”

    Josep Borrell, EU Foreign Policy Chief

    Spanish Foreign Minister Josep Borrell has been nominated to replace Federica Mogherini as High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. Like Mogherini, Borrell is a well-known supporter of the mullahs in Iran and is likely to clash with the United States and Israel over the nuclear deal with Tehran.

    In a February 19 interview with Politico, Borrell, a Socialist, declared that Israel would have to live with the existential threat of an Iranian nuclear bomb:

    “The Americans decided to kill [the Iran nuclear deal], unilaterally as they do things without any kind of previous consultation, without taking care of what interests the Europeans have. We are not children following what they say. We have our own prospects, interests and strategy and we will continue working with Iran. It would be very bad for us if it goes on to develop a nuclear weapon…. Iran wants to wipe out Israel; nothing new about that. You have to live with it.”

    On February 11, Borrell marked the 40th anniversary of the Iranian revolution by praising the achievements made by women in the country since Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini swept to power in 1979. The rights and status of Iranian women have, in fact, been severely restricted since the Islamic Revolution. In a Twitter thread, Borrell also encouraged the Iranian regime to wait out American sanctions in case U.S. President Donald J. Trump is not reelected in 2020.

    In May 2019, Spain withdrew a warship, the frigate Méndez Núñez, from the USS Abraham Lincoln Carrier Strike Group, because of rising tensions between Washington and Tehran.

    Also in May 2019, Borrell accused the United States of acting “like a western cowboy” after the Trump administration recognized the president of Venezuela’s National Assembly, Juan Guaidó, as interim president of the country. Borrell said that Spain “will continue to reject pressures that border on military interventions” to remove from power Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro. The Spanish Socialist Party has a long history of promoting the Marxist revolutionaries led by Maduro and his predecessor, Hugo Chávez.

    In November 2018, Borrell explained why the United States is more politically integrated than the European Union: “The United States has very little previous history. They were born to independence with practically no history; the only thing they had done was to kill four Indians.” He later apologized for the “excessively colloquial manner” in which he downplayed the “quasi annihilation” of Native Americans. Borrell made no mention of the destruction of the native populations of Central and South America at the hands of Spanish conquerors.

    Borrell has said that “Europe needs a new leitmotiv” and that the fight against climate change “should be one of the great engines of Europe’s rebirth.”

    Borrell has also stated that he hopes Britain will leave the EU because it is an impediment to the creation of a European superstate:

    “I belong to the school which believes that with the UK in the EU we will never have a political union. Personally, because I do want a political union, I don’t care whether the United Kingdom leaves because I know that to date, it has been an obstacle to further integration.”

    In April 2012, Borrell was forced to resign as president of the European University Institute (EUI) due to a conflict of interest after it emerged that he was simultaneously being paid €300,000 a year as a board member of the Spanish sustainable-energy company Abengoa.

    In October 2016, Borrell was fined €30,000 ($34,000) by the National Securities Market Commission (CNMV) for insider trading after selling 10,000 shares in Abengoa in November 2015.

    Christine Lagarde, President of the European Central Bank

    Christine Lagarde, a former French finance minister the current managing director of the International Monetary Fund, has been nominated to succeed Mario Draghi as president of the European Central Bank (ECB). Lagarde’s nomination has received mixed reviews. As the head of the IMF, she brings strong credentials in leadership, management and communications. She is, however, a lawyer, not an economist, and she has no experience in monetary policy.

    During an interview with the Daily Show, Lagarde said that President Donald Trump “has a point” in his trade war with China:

    “President Trump has a point on intellectual property. It is correct that nobody should be stealing intellectual property to move ahead. He has a point on subsidies, you cannot just go about competing with others out there that are heavily subsidized. On these points clearly, the game has to change, the rules have to be respected.”

    Financial reporter Bjarke Smith-Meyer noted that Lagarde’s nomination came as something of a surprise and “pushes the European Central Bank toward an area it’s tried to avoid in its 21-year history: politics.”

    Paul Taylor, a columnist for Politicoadded:

    “Central banking is rocket science. If you don’t get it right, the consequences can be tragic.

    “That’s why EU leaders are taking a huge gamble in their decision to entrust the leadership of the European Central Bank to Christine Lagarde, a political rock star with no economic training and no practical experience of monetary policy.

    “At a time when the ECB is running low on options for jolting the economy, Lagarde may have the acumen and authority needed to persuade reluctant, conservative Germany and the Netherlands of the urgent need to provide more fiscal stimulus….

    “But by nominating the former French minister to succeed Italy’s Mario Draghi — the bold president of the bank who rescued the European economy in 2012 with a promise to do ‘whatever it takes to preserve the euro’ — the EU’s leaders have effectively decided that they don’t need a central banker to run their central bank….

    “The surprise choice of Lagarde, 64, was part of a Franco-German trade-off under which conservative German Defense Minister Ursula von der Leyen, 60, was nominated to head the European Commission, breaking a political deadlock in which all the original candidates fell by the wayside….

    “The main reason why Lagarde got the nod, instead of the experienced French central bank chief François Villeroy de Galhau, appeared to be gender.

    “For the first time, the sensitive choice of ECB chief was the adjustment variable in political horse-trading over other top EU jobs — even though the bank is meant to be strictly independent of politics.”

    In December 2016, France’s Court of Justice of the Republic found Lagarde guilty of negligence for not seeking to block a fraudulent 2008 arbitration award to a politically connected tycoon when she was finance minister. The court ruled that Lagarde’s negligence in her management of a long-running arbitration case involving tycoon Bernard Tapie helped open the door for the fraudulent misappropriation of €403 million ($450 million) of public funds in a settlement given to Tapie in 2008 over the botched sale of sportswear giant Adidas in the 1990s.

    Reflections on European “Democracy”

    Writing for The Telegraph, columnist Allister Heath, in an essay titled, “The EU is a Sham Democracy,” noted:

    “Thank you, Eurocrats, for being yourselves. The best cure for Europhilia is always to observe the EU’s big beasts at their unguarded worst, wheeling and dealing in their natural habitat, unencumbered by any attachment to democracy, accountability or even basic morality.

    “The spectacle of the past few days made for compulsive watching: we witnessed rare footage of the secretive process that propels so many retreads and second-rate apparatchiks into positions of immense power in Brussels and Frankfurt, utterly disregarding public opinion.

    “Peeking into Europe’s dystopia was certainly the right medicine for pre-Brexit Britain, guaranteed to convert erstwhile moderates into raging Brexiteers as they looked on, aghast, at the shocking disconnect between elites and people.

    “Everything that is wrong with the EU was shamelessly on display: a Franco-German stitch-up; smaller countries being bulldozed, especially Eastern Europeans; a constitutional coup which sidelined the (useless) European Parliament; the fact that so many of the new generation of EU leaders have had brushes with the law that would have terminated their careers in the US or UK; their explicit commitment to a ‘United States of Europe’ and a ‘European army’ (about which we keep being lied to); and the singing of a national anthem we were promised wouldn’t exist when the European constitution was voted down….

    “While the EU apes some of the rituals of democracy, they are a sinister sham, and will always be. The EU is a technocratic empire, and can be nothing else.”

    Writing for the European media platform, Euractiv, Jorge Valero lamented:

    “After five summit days and hundreds of hours of phone calls, meetings and backroom chats, the EU conclave agreed on its new leadership. But the ‘white smoke’ that emerged from the Council building preludes storm clouds for the nominees and the European demos.

    “Few winners came out of the distribution of the top posts sealed on July 2, and the European democracy was hardly one of them.

    “Ursula von der Leyen, Charles Michel, Josep Borrell, and Christine Lagarde have good reasons to pop the champagne and toast their unexpected elevation to Commission president, European Council chair, High Representative and ECB chief, respectively.

    “But it was a high price to pay for the badly needed gender balance….

    “The fresh leadership will stand in the shadow of old scandals, legal cases and malpractice. Lagarde was found guilty of negligence in the Bernard Tapie scandal. Borrell was sanctioned by the Spanish market authority for using insider information in the sale of some shares.

    “The German parliament launched an investigation into von der Leyen for nepotism and irregularities in allocating expensive contracts. And Michel’s career would hardly be the same if his father hadn’t been a Belgian minister and EU Commissioner.”

    The British Conservative MEP Daniel Hannon, in a tweet, summarized: “Can anyone look at the people who will be running the EU for the next five years and then try to claim that the high tide of federalism has passed?”

  • The Strange Case Of Chrystia Freeland And The Failure Of The "Super Elite"

    Authored by Matthew Ehret via OrientalReview.org,

    Canadian Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland has become a bit of a living parody of everything wrong with the detached technocratic neo-liberal order which has driven the world through 50 years of post-industrial decay. Now, two years into the Trump presidency, and five years into the growth of a new system shaped by the Russia-China alliance, the world has become a very different place from the one which Freeland and her controllers wish it to be.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Chrystia Freeland

    Having been set up as a counterpart to the steely Hillary Clinton who was supposed to win the 2016 election, Freeland and her ilk have demonstrated their outdated thinking in everything they have set out to achieve since the 2014 coup in Ukraine. Certainly before that, everything seemed to be going smoothly enough for End of History disciples promoting a script that was supposed to culminate in a long-sought for “New World Order”.

    The Script up until Now

    Things were going especially well since the collapse of the Soviet system in the early 1990s. The collapse ushered in a unipolar world order with the European Union and NAFTA, followed soon thereafter by the World Trade Organization and the 1999 destruction of Glass-Steagall. The trans-Atlantic at last was converted into a cage of “post-sovereign nations” that no longer had actual control of their own powers of credit generation. Under NATO, even national militaries were subject to technocratic control. This cage was perfect for the governing elite “scientifically managing” from above while the little people bickered over their diminishing employment and standards of living from below.

    Even though the former Soviet bloc nations were in tatters by 1992, their sovereign powers could only be undone by applying the liberalization process which took 30 years in the west in a short space of only a decade. This was done under the direction of such monetarist “reformers” such as Anatoly Chubais and Yegor Gaidar under Yeltsin. Similar privatization and liberalization reforms were applied viciously to Ukraine and other Warsaw pact countries during the same period. Those pirates that became the “nouveau riche” of the west were joined by such contemporary modern oligarchs such as Oleg Deripaska, Boris Berezovksy, Mikhail Fridman, Roman Abramovich in Russia, alongside Petro Poroshenko, Rinat Akhmetov, Mikhail Khodorkovsky and Viktor Pinchuk of Ukraine (to name a few). Not to forget their spiritual roots, many of these oligarchs soon purchased houses in the swank upmarket sections of London which has come to be known as “Moscow on Thames.”

    By the end of the 1990s a new phase of this de-nationalization was unleashed with the unveiling of the Blair doctrine explicitly calling for a “post-Westphalia” world order which unleashed a wave of hellish regime change wars in the Arab World beginning with 9-11, and with a long term intention to target Libya, Syria, Iran, and Lebanon while expanding NATO’s hegemony against the potential re-emergence of Russia and China.

    The Economic Meltdown Was Always the Intention

    Let’s be clear: the whole point of the post-1971 world was directed with the intention of destroying the moral-political and economic foundations for western society. The belief in scientific progress and industrial growth was the cause of all true progress from the 15th century Golden Renaissance to the assassinations of the 1960s. The intended consequences of this post-1971 (zero growth) policy were:

    1) The destruction of the productive forces of labor vis a vis outsourcing to “cheap labour markets” driven by shareholder profit.

    2) The consolidation of wealth into an ever smaller array of private multi-billionaire owners under a logic of Darwinian survival of the fittest.

    3) The creation of a vast speculative bubble supported by ever greater rates of unpayable debt and totally detached from the physically productive forces of reality.

    Just like 1929, after years of speculation known as the roaring twenties, the “plug could be pulled” on the bubble in order to impose a bit of shock therapy onto a sleeping population who would beg for fascism as a solution if only it would put bread on their tables. Though this plan failed 80 years ago due to the American rejection of fascism under President Roosevelt, the belief that the formula could succeed in the 21st century was adhered to most closely as long as America was brought firmly under control of the City of London and their Wall Street lackies.

    Although the fascist “solution” to their manufactured crisis was put down during WWII, this new attempt was premised upon the policy that a new system of Global Government managed by draconian regulation would be imposed under a “Green New Deal” framework whereby the instruments of banking regulation, state directed capital and centralized government (not evils unto themselves), would be directed only to green, low energy flux density forms of energy which inherently lower the population of the earth. This is very different from the protectionism, bank regulation, state credit and central authority exerted by America during the 1930s New Deal (or Eurasian New Silk Road policy today). The difference is that one system empowers sovereign nations, and increases the productive powers of labor and energy flux density of humanity while increasing quality of life, the other “Green” agenda has the opposite effect whereby monetary incentives are tied to decreasing the “carbon footprint” of the earth. The image of a drug addict getting paid heroine as an incentive to bleed himself to death is useful here.

    With the slow collapse of first world economies after the assassination of nationalist leaders in the 1960s, the plan for depopulation and global government seemed to be unfolding without serious opposition.

    The Role of Chrystia Freeland

    Freeland’s bizarre role in this whole affair was to do what every good Rhodes Scholar is conditioned to do upon their completion of their indoctrination at Oxford: facilitate the tough transition of the “pre-collapse” world economy into a new operating system that was meant to be the “green post-collapse” world economy. It wasn’t going to be easy to tell a new “pirate class” of billionaires that they would have to accept losing much of their wealth (less population equals less money), and operate under a strict new global operating system of regulation necessary to contract the society. The Rhodes Scholarship program begun in 1902 to advance a re-organized British Empire and had worked alongside the Fabian Society for over a century producing more than 7000 scholars who have permeated across all fields of society (media, education, government, military and corporate).

    In his 1877 will, Cecil Rhodes said this group should be “a society which should have its members in every part of the British Empire working with one object and one idea we should have its members placed at our universities and our schools and should watch the English youth passing through their hands just one perhaps in every thousand would have the mind and feelings for such an object, he should be tried in every way, he should be tested whether he is endurant, possessed of eloquence, disregardful of the petty details of life, and if found to be such, then elected and bound by oath to serve for the rest of his life in his Country. He should then be supported if without means by the Society and sent to that part of the Empire where it was felt he was needed.”

    After leaving Oxford in 1993, Chrystia Freeland learned the ropes of “perception management” by working for the London Economist, Washington Post, Financial times and Globe and Mail and Reuters. After serving a stint as editor-at-large of Reuters, the time had come for her to play the role of Valery Jarrett to the “Barack Obama” of Canada then being prepped for Prime Ministership of Justin Trudeau.

    She was perfect.

    As an asset of the global propaganda system, Freeland had made high level contacts with those Ukrainian, Russian, and Western oligarchs mentioned above including Viktor Pinchuk and Mikhail Khodorkovsky. Larry Summers, George Soros and Al Gore, were just a few players in the west whom she considered her “close friends” and whom she was happy to bring into Canada during the period of re-organization of the Liberal Party (2011-2014) as it prepared to take power under the banner of the Canada 2020 think tank. What made Freeland even more special was that she was bred from a zealous family of Ukrainian nationalists under the patriarchy of her Nazi grandfather Michael Chomiak. This network was brought to Canada after WWII by Anglo-American intelligence and cultivated as a force with ties to pro-Nazi Ukrainian counterparts ever since.

    Freeland’s admission into politics was managed by another Rhodes Scholar named Bob Rae who served as interim controller of the Liberal Party during several of the Harper years and was a major player in Canada 2020. Rae, who had been the NDP Premier of Ontario from 1990-1995 was happy to abdicate his seat to Freeland ensuring her entry into Trudeau’s inner circle and thus becoming his official handler.

    Freeland Promotes the New Global Elite

    Freeland has made it clear that she understands well that there is a fundamental difference in cultural identities of the “new rich” relative to the older oligarchic families which she serves. In the 2011 Rise of the New Global Elite, she describes it as follows:

    “To grasp the difference between today’s plutocrats and the hereditary elite, who “grow rich in their sleep” one need merely glance at the events that now fill high-end social calendars.”

    Freeland then breaks down the categories of “new plutocrats” into two subcategories: the good, technocratic friendly plutocrats who are ideologically compatible with the New World Order of depopulation, such as Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, George Soros, et al and the “bad” plutocrats who tend not to conform to the British Empire’s program of global governance and depopulation under the green agenda. In Freeland’s world “good oligarchs” are those who adhere to this agenda, while “bad oligarchs” are those who do not. Trump is a terrible Plutocrat, and – Viktor Yanukovych was a good plutocrat until he decided to not sacrifice Ukraine on the altar of the collapsing European Union and chose to throw Ukraine’s destiny into the Eurasian Economic Union in October 2013.

    In the same paper, Freeland wrote:

    “if the plutocrats’ opposition to increases in their taxes and tighter regulation of their economic activities is understandable, it is also a mistake. The real threat facing the super-elite, at home and abroad, isn’t modestly higher taxes, but rather the possibility that inchoate public rage could cohere into a more concrete populist agenda– that, for instance, middle-class Americans could conclude that the world economy isn’t working for them and decide that protectionism… is preferable to incremental measures.” Quoting billionaire Mohamed El-Erian, the CEO of Pimco she wrote: “one of the big surprises of 2010 is that the protectionist dog didn’t bark.”

    Freeland ended her article with this message:

    “The lesson of history is that, in the long run, super-elites have two ways to survive: by suppressing dissent or by sharing their wealth… Let us hope the plutocrats aren’t already too isolated to recognize this”.

    But what does Freeland really think of the technocratic management under a plutocratic governance of society? In Plutocrats vs. Populists (Nov. 2013), Freeland lets her pro-plutocratic worldview out of the bag when she gushes:

    “At its best, this form of plutocratic political power offers the tantalizing possibility of policy practiced at the highest professional level with none of the messiness and deal making and venality of traditional politics… a technocratic, data-based, objective search for solutions to our problems”

    Since a technocratic managerial class committed to a common ideology must be solidified for this system to work, Freeland goes on to make the case to recruit young people to the imperial civil service:

    “Smart, publicly minded technocrats go to work for plutocrats whose values they share. The technocrats get to focus full time on the policy issues they love, without the tedium of building, rallying– and serving– a permanent mass membership. They can be pretty well paid to boot.”

    The End of a Delusion?

    Now that Russia and China’s new operating system shaped by the Belt and Road Initiative has created a force of opposition to this British-run Deep State design, nothing which those would-be gods of Olympus have attempted to achieve has succeeded. Syria stands strong and the Arab nations are increasingly joining China’s Belt and Road Initiative. Venezuela has failed to fall the way so many regimes have done before 2014 and NAFTA has been seriously challenged by a nationalistic president in the USA who has also totally rejected the Malthusian agenda with the killing of COP21 and the Green New Deal. Trudeau’s usefulness has withered away quicker than you can say “SNC Lavalin” and now the decision appears to be seriously humored whether Freeland will take the reins of Canada after Trudeau is eliminated in order to “preserve the dying British Empire” and the dream of Cecil Rhodes. While the universe may be organized by a principle of reason, no one can say the same applies to the mind of an oligarchic.

  • Hong Kong Leader Carrie Lam Says Extradition Bill Is "Dead" After Protests

    In an unexpected, if not outright bizarre concession by Beijing to protesters, on Tuesday morning Hong Kong leader Carrie Lam gave her strongest pledge yet when she declared the highly unpopular extradition bill that sparked several mass protests was “dead”, changing from an earlier script that it “will die” in 2020, according to the SCMP.

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

    “I have almost immediately put a stop to the (bill) amendment exercise, but there are still lingering doubts about the government’s sincerity, or worries whether the government will restart the process in the legislative council, so I reiterate here: There is no such plan, the bill is dead.”

    Addressing the month-long drama during a news conference, she reiterated that there is no plan to restart the legislation, describing the work to amend the bill as a “total failure.” Meanwhile, she said she would take full responsibility for what has happened in the city, according to a translation of her address.

    However, just like Erdogan’s surprisingly muted reaction to the loss of Istanbul in the local election re-run two weeks ago was a Trojan horse to the leader’s true intentions, unveiled this past weekend with his sacking of the central bank chief, confirming that nothing has changed and the Turkish “executive president” is digging himself even deeper as the country’s unchecked, executive power, we would urge readers not to read too much into this soundbite: as the SCMP notes, whether the bill was effectively withdrawn – as demanded by protesters – remained unclear, as Lam did not say that she is officially withdrawing the bill, raising questions about to what extent the measure could be revived in the future. Additionally, Lam stood firm on not setting up a top-level probe into clashes between police and protesters. Meanwhile, an independent study will be looking into police behavior during the protests, she said, asking for some time to “improve the current situation.”

    Lam noted those concerns in Cantonese remarks, via CNBC.

    “What I’m saying today is nothing really different from what I said before. But maybe the citizens need to hear a definitive saying (from me),” Lam said, according to a translation of those comments. “So saying that the extradition bill is now in the coffin is the more definitive way of saying it, which means, the bill is dead. Hence, everyone doesn’t need to worry whether there will be any tactics that the discussion of the bill will resume in this Legislative Council term.”

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Yet in a hint that a wave of “behind the scenes” retaliation was coming, Lam said the Independent Police Complaints Council would be launching an investigation, and that all parties involved in the demonstrations, including protesters, police, media and onlookers, could provide information.

    Ever the Beijing-trained bureaucrat, the chief executive, speaking before meeting her advisers in the Executive Council, reiterated that the government did not call a protest on June 12, during which there were violent clashes between police and mostly young protesters, a “riot”. And even as she suggested that all those who had “rioted” may be facing penalties, Lam also said she was “willing to engage in an open dialogue with students without any preconditions”, sending a barrage of mixed messages.

    Whether this is just a gambit to ease tension in the town where just yesterday a fresh round of protests shut down the main shopping area, or a genuine gesture, student leaders from eight universities balked, and turned down her request for a small-scale and closed-door meeting on Friday, and said they would only talk to Lam if she agreed to their two preconditions: meet them in a town hall-style open meeting and promise to exonerate protesters.

    At the same time, protesters have been urging the government to respond to other demands: withdraw the bill completely, retract all references to the protest on June 12 as a riot; set up a commission of inquiry to examine police use of force; and launch democratic reforms. A demand for Lam to resign appears to have gradually faded away.

    Lam admitted the public’s trust in the government was fragile, yet said she is “proud of the quality of the Hong Kong people” as demonstrated by the peaceful behavior of the vast majority of protesters. She, however, said “a very small minority of protesters have used the occasion to resort to violent acts and vandalism.”

    “We are sad to see these violent acts because they undermine the rule of law in Hong Kong,” she said. “So I make a very sincere plea here, that in the future, if anyone in Hong Kong have any different views — especially those about the Hong Kong government’s policies — please continue to uphold the value of expressing it in a peaceful and orderly manner.”

    As the SCMP adds, the weekly Exco meeting is the first at the Chief Executive’s Office since June 11. Last week’s meeting was held at Government House as the administrative headquarters were closed because of the protests. The previous two Exco meetings were cancelled.

    Had the bill passed, it would have allowed Hong Kong to transfer suspects to jurisdictions it lacks extradition agreements with, including mainland China. Critics feared it would remove the legal firewall between the city and the mainland, exposing suspects to opaque trials across the border.

    Tuesday marks exactly a month since the first mass protest against the bill brought an estimated 1 million people onto the streets on June 9, followed by about 2 million the following weekend.

  • The Lowest Paying Jobs Are In These States 

    A new report by Yahoo Finance, using Occupational Employment Statistics from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), shows the lowest-paying jobs in all 50 states pay an annual wage between $18,000 and $26,000 per year.

    Most of these low-paying jobs were in the restaurant industry. The report discovered the most common low-paying jobs were cooking, prepping, and serving food. On a geographical basis, the lowest paying jobs were situated in the Rust Belt, Deep South, and Midwest.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Ticket takers, ushers, and lobby attendants were the second-most common low-paying jobs across the country.

    “Jobs are low-paying for one of two reasons,” David Neumark, professor of economics at the University of California, Irvine told Yahoo Finance. “There’s a lot of supply and not much demand. And they’re very low-skilled. I mean, how much skill does it take to collect movies at the movie theater, right?”

    Yahoo Finance points out that workers in the restaurant industry from Alabama to Washington were paid poorly, but there were exceptional variations in wages for the same jobs. Food preparation and servers made an annual wage of $18,680 in Alabama, the same position in Washington paid $25,550.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The reason for the pay gap in both states is due to the cost of living. Alabama was ranked as the 11th cheapest state to live while Washington was 38th, according to the Cost of Living Index by the Missouri Department of Economic Development.

    The lowest-paid job was in Louisiana, where gaming and sports book writers and runners made $17,820.

    A little more than 60% of the workforce is paid at hourly rates, according to the BLS, and out of that, 1.3 million earned less than the federal minimum wage.

    And with inflation moving higher, the average American worker can barely survive, nevertheless purchase a home. Meanwhile, most have insurmountable students loans and aboustely no savings to whether the upcoming recession.

     

  • Poundstone: There's A 50% Chance Humans Die-Off Within 760 Years

    Authored by Mac Slavo via SHTFplan.com,

    The author of “The Doomsday Calculation” estimates that there is a 50 percent chance the human race will die off within the next 760 years. In the book, author William Poundstone applies the mathematical approach of Princeton University astrophysicist J. Richard Gott III to estimate when humans will officially die off.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    According to The Daily Mail, this mathematical method is said to work to predict the likely length of existence of anything of an uncertain duration so long as it’s being encountered at a random point in time.

    “Obviously, if you have any specific information affecting the life span of, say, the human race, or a class of stars, you can estimate its life span more realistically,” Gott told the New York Times in 1993.

    “But this statistical method allows you to make at least a rough estimate of a life span without knowing anything more than how long something has existed,” he added.

    It’s a little surprising humanity isn’t predicted to end sooner with the rate the elite globalists are manipulating everything.

     In an article published byVox, Poundstone explained the Copernican method he used to arrive at his prediction. The Copernican principle came from Copernicus, the great Renaissance astronomer, who declared Earth was not the center of the universe.

    “Demographers have estimated the total number of people who ever lived at about 100 billion. That means that about 100 billion people were born before me,” Poundstone said.

    “Currently, about 130 million people are born each year. At that rate, it would take only about 760 years for another 100 billion more people to be born.  That’s the basis of the claim that there’s a 50 percent chance that humans will become extinct within about 760 years. The flip side of the claim is there’s also a 50 percent chance we’ll survive past 760 years, possibly long past that.”

    After graduating from Harvard with a physics degree, Gott used this method to predict the demolition of the Berlin Wall. He estimated that there was a 50 percent chance the wall would come down no later than 24 years from that day, but that it would stand for at least two and two-thirds years more. The demolition of the wall officially began on June 13, 1990, roughly 21 years later, reported The Daily Mail. 

    Poundstone wrote: [Gott] reasoned that this prediction had a 50 percent chance of being right. You may feel that 50 percent is too wishy-washy and Gott just got lucky. No problem: The method can supply predictions with any degree of confidence you choose. To achieve 95 percent confidence, you’d make a diagram with the shaded region covering the middle 95 percent of the bar. The prediction range would be wider (from 1/39 to 39 times the past duration). Had Gott used this formulation, his prediction for the wall’s ceasing to exist would have been 0.21 to 312 years after his visit. This is less impressive, given the extremely wide range — but it would have been correct, too.”

    Using his own method in 1993, Gott estimated the end of humanity with a 95% probability of accuracy. He wrote about it in a scientific journal called Nature. “Making only the assumption that you are a random intelligent observer, limits for the total longevity of our species of 0.2 million to 8 million years can be derived at the 95 [percent] confidence level,” Gott said, in the abstract for the article.

    But here’s where things get really interesting: Bayes’ theorem can also be used to lay odds on the existence of extraterrestrial intelligence; on whether we live in a Matrix-like counterfeit of reality; on the “many worlds” interpretation of quantum theory being correct; and on the biggest question of all: how long will humanity survive? –The Doomsday Calculation, book description

  • FBI, ICE Using Facial Recognition To Bulk-Scan DMV Photos In "Unprecedented Surveillance Infrastructure"

    The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) along with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has been using state driver’s license databases to run photos of millions of Americans through facial-recognition systems without their knowledge or consent, according to the Washington Post

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Thousands of facial-recognition requests, internal documents and emails over the past five years, obtained through public-records requests by Georgetown Law researchers and provided to The Washington Post, reveal that federal investigators have turned state departments of motor vehicles databases into the bedrock of an unprecedented surveillance infrastructure.

    Police have long had access to fingerprints, DNA and other “biometric data” taken from criminal suspects. But the DMV records contain the photos of a vast majority of a state’s residents, most of whom have never been charged with a crime. –Washington Post

    Disturbingly, neither Congress nor state legislatures have authorized this type of systemand none of us agreed to it when we obtained licenses

    “They’ve just given access to that to the FBI,” said Rep. Jim Jordan, ranking GOP member of the House Oversight Committee. “No individual signed off on that when they renewed their driver’s license, got their driver’s licenses. They didn’t sign any waiver saying, ‘Oh, it’s okay to turn my information, my photo, over to the FBI.’ No elected officials voted for that to happen.” 

    “Law enforcement’s access of state databases,” and in particular those of the DMV, is “often done in the shadows with no consent,” added House Oversight Committee Chairman Elijah E. Cummings (D-MD). 

    And as has been reported for some time, law enforcement has been relying on facial recognition technology as a routine investigative tool for years – and it’s going to get worse

    Since 2011, the FBI has logged more than 390,000 facial-recognition searches of federal and local databases, including state DMV databases, the Government Accountability Office said last month, and the records show that federal investigators have forged daily working relationships with DMV officials. In Utah, FBI and ICE agents logged more than 1,000 facial-recognition searches between 2015 and 2017, the records show. Names and other details are hidden, though dozens of the searches are marked as having returned a “possible match.” –Washington Post

    Also disturbing is the fact that law enforcement often uses facial recognition to investigate low-level crime, with searches often executed with nothing more formal than an email from a federal agent to a local contact,” according to the Post

    “It’s really a surveillance-first, ask-permission-later system,” says Project on Government Oversight watchdog lawyer Jake Laperruque. “People think this is something coming way off in the future, but these [facial-recognition] searches are happening very frequently today. The FBI alone does 4,000 searches every month, and a lot of them go through state DMVs.”

    Targeting illegals with licenses? 

    The Post also brings up the fact that undocumented residents who obtain driver’s licenses in states which allow this may be subject to immigration enforcement due to the facial recognition technology. 

    Though Utah, Vermont and Washington allow undocumented immigrants to obtain full driver’s licenses or more-limited permits known as driving privilege cards, ICE agents have run facial-recognition searches on those DMV databases.

    More than a dozen states, including New York, as well as the District of Columbia, allow undocumented immigrants to drive legally with full licenses or driving privilege cards, as long as they submit proof of in-state residency and pass the states’ driving-proficiency tests.

    Lawmakers in Florida, Texas and other states have introduced bills this year that would extend driving privileges to undocumented immigrants. Some of those states already allow the FBI to scan driver’s license photos, while others, such as Florida and New York, are negotiating with the FBI over access, according to the GAO. –Washington Post

    “The state has told [undocumented immigrants], has encouraged them, to submit that information. To me, it’s an insane breach of trust to then turn around and allow ICE access to that,” according to Georgetown Law Center on Privacy and Technology senior associate Clare Garvie, who led the research. 

    The FBI’s facial-recognition search has access to local, state and federal databases containing more than 641 million face photos, a GAO director said last month. But the agency provides little information about when the searches are used, who is targeted and how often searches return false matches. –Washington Post

    When asked about the surveillance, the FBI told the Post to refer to last month’s congressional testimony from Deputy Assistant Director Kimberly Del Grecco, who said that facial recognition was necessary “to preserve our nation’s freedoms, ensure our liberties are protected, and preserve our security.” 

    Racist technology?

    Civil rights advocates have decried the use of facial recognition technology due to the fact that it is far less accurate when trying to identify people of color. According to the report, “The software’s precision is highly dependent on a number of factors, including the lighting of a subject’s face and the quality of the image, and research has shown that the technology performs less accurately on people with darker skin.” 

    Whatever the objection, we’re now at the point where our ability to drive a car or enjoy the out-of-doors is subject to constant electronic surveillance of varying accuracy. 

  • Matrix-Like Reality Goes Mainstream: NBC Asks "Are We Living In A Simulated Universe"

    Authored by Dan Folk via NBCNews.com,

    What if everything around us – the people, the stars overhead, the ground beneath our feet, even our bodies and minds – were an elaborate illusion?

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    What if our world were simply a hyper-realistic simulation, with all of us merely characters in some kind of sophisticated video game?

    This, of course, is a familiar concept from science fiction books and films, including the 1999 blockbuster movie “The Matrix.” But some physicists and philosophers say it’s possible that we really do live in a simulation — even if that means casting aside what we know (or think we know) about the universe and our place in it.

    “If we are living in a simulation, then the cosmos that we are observing is just a tiny piece of the totality of physical existence,” Oxford philosopher Nick Bostrom said in a 2003 paper that jump-started the conversation about what has come to be known as the simulation hypothesis.

    “While the world we see is in some sense ‘real,’ it is not located at the fundamental level of reality.”

    Simulating worlds and beings

    Rizwan Virk, founder of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s PlayLabs program and author of “The Simulation Hypothesis,” is among those who take the simulation hypothesis seriously. He recalls playing a virtual reality game so realistic that he forgot that he was in an empty room with a headset on. That led him to wonder: Are we sure we aren’t embedded within a world created by beings more technologically savvy than ourselves?

    That question makes sense to Rich Terrile, a computer scientist at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California. Detailed as they are, today’s best simulations don’t involve artificial minds, but Terrile thinks the ability to model sentient beings could soon be within our grasp. “We are within a generation of being those gods who create those universes,” he says.

    Not everyone is convinced. During a 2016 debate at the American Museum of Natural History in New York City, Harvard University physicist Lisa Randall said the odds that the simulation hypothesis is correct are “effectively zero.” For starters, there’s no evidence that our world isn’t the array of stars and galaxies that it appears to be. And she wonders why advanced beings would bother to simulate Homo sapiens. “Why simulate us? I mean, there are so many things to be simulating,” she said. “I don’t know why this higher species would want to bother with us.”

    Echoes of Genesis

    Yet, there’s a familiar ring to the idea that there’s a simulator, or creator, who does care about us. Similarly, the idea of a superior being forging a simulated universe parallels the notion of a deity creating the world — for example, as described in the Book of Genesis.

    Some thinkers, including Terrile, welcome the analogy to religion. If the simulation hypothesis is correct, he says, then “there’s a creator, an architect — someone who designed the world.” It’s an ancient idea recast in terms of “mathematics and science rather than just faith.”

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    (click image for link to poll and updated distribution)

    But for other scholars, including University of Maryland physicist Sylvester James Gates, the similarity between the simulation hypothesis and religious belief should be taken as a warning that we’re off track. Science, as he said in a recent radio interview, has taken us “away from this idea that we are puppets” controlled by an unseen entity. The simulation hypothesis, he said, “starts to look like a religion,” with a programmer substituting for god.

    Who, or what, is the godlike entity that may have created a simulated universe? One possibility, supporters of the simulation hypothesis say, is that it’s a race of advanced beings — space aliens. Even more mind-bending is the possibility is that it’s our own descendants — “our future selves,” as Terrile puts it. That is, humans living hundreds or thousands of years in the future might develop the ability to simulate not only a world like ours but the bodies and minds of the beings within it.

    “Just as you can simulate anything else, you can simulate brains,” Bostrom says. True, we don’t yet have the technology to pull it off, but he says there’s no conceptual barrier to it.

    And once we create brain simulations “sufficiently detailed and accurate,” he says, “it is possible that those simulations would generate conscious experiences.”

    The search for evidence

    Will we ever learn whether the simulation hypothesis is correct? Bostrum says there’s a remote chance that one day we might encounter a telltale glitch in the simulation. “You could certainly imagine a scenario where a window pops up in front of you, saying, ‘You are in a simulation; click here for more information,’” he says. “That would be a knock-down proof.”

    More realistically, physicists have proposed experiments that could yield evidence that our world is simulated. For example, some have wondered if the world is inherently “smooth,” or if, at the smallest scales, it might be made up of discrete “chunks” a bit like the pixels in a digital image. If we determine that the world is “pixelated” in this way, it could be evidence that it was created artificially. A team of American and German physicists have argued that careful measurements of cosmic rays could provide an answer.

    What if we did confirm that we were living in a simulation? How would people react upon learning that our world and thoughts and emotions are nothing more than a programmer’s zeroes and ones? Some imagine such knowledge would disrupt our lives by upending our sense of purpose and squashing our initiative. Harvard astronomer Abraham Loeb says the knowledge could even trigger social unrest.

    Knowing that our thoughts and deeds aren’t our own could “relieve us from being accountable for our actions,” he says. “There is nothing more damaging to our social order than this notion.”

    Others imagine evidence in support of the simulation hypothesis could engender a new fear — that the creators might grow tired of the simulation and switch it off. But not Bostrum. “You could similarly ask, ‘shouldn’t we be in perpetual fear of dying?’ You could have a heart attack or a stroke at any given point in time, or the roof might fall down,” he says.

    Whatever we might think of the simulation hypothesis, Bostrom thinks the mere act of pondering it provides a welcome dose of humility. He cites Hamlet’s cautionary remark to a friend in Shakespeare’s “Hamlet”: “There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.”

    And Botrum insists that he takes the simulation hypothesis seriously.

    “For me, it’s not just an intellectual game,” he says. “It’s an attempt to orient myself in the world, as best I can understand it.”

  • China (Officially) Buys Gold For 7th Straight Month As Treasury Holdings Tumble

    China continued its renewed (public) gold-buying spree in May adding another 10 tons of the precious metal to its reserve – the seventh month of buying in a row.

    “It’s a diversification away from the U.S. dollar, particularly given the trade tensions and the potential technology cold war that’s evolving,” said Bart Melek, global head of commodity strategy at TD Securities.

    “We have to remember that gold is nobody’s liability.”

    While this figure is hotly contested as being an underestimate of Chinese State’s actual gold holdings, its the only figure available, and whatever the real number, its notable that the Chinese government has revived the trend of announcing physical gold purchases each and every month.

    “Given the U.S.-China tensions, it is little surprise that China is attempting to diversify away its holdings of the dollar and Treasuries,” Howie Lee, an economist at Oversea-Chinese Banking Corp. in Singapore, said in an email, adding that it’s likely to continue adding in the coming months as its reserve holdings still lag countries such as the U.S. and Germany.

    “Aside from its attempt to diversify its holdings of dollars, owning more gold reserves is also an important strategy in China’s rise as a superpower,” Lee said.

    The People’s Bank of China raised reserves to 61.94 million ounces in June from 61.61 million a month earlier, according to data on its website on Monday. In tonnage terms, last month’s inflow was 10.3 tons, following the addition of almost 74 tons in the six months through May.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    In fact, thanks in larger part to the surge in gold prices in the last month, the value of China’s gold reserves rose by the most in at least 4 years…

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Pointedly this occurred as the trade war erupted and China ‘allowed’ the yuan to devalue against the dollar…

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    As Bloomberg previously reported, the rise in reserves reflects the government’s “determined diversification” away from dollar assets, Argonaut Securities (Asia) Ltd. analyst Helen Lau said, adding that retail demand has also picked up. At this rate of accumulation, China could buy 150 tons in 2019, according to Lau.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    One wonders if Alasdair Macleod is on to something when he notes that if the yuan is to replace the dollar for China’s trade, officials will have to back it with gold

    It is hard to see how the US can match a sound-money plan from China. Furthermore, the US Government’s finances are already in very poor shape and a return to sound money would require a reduction in government spending that all observers can agree is politically impossible. This is not a problem the Chinese government faces, and the purpose of a gold-linked jumbo bond is not so much to raise funds; rather it is to seal a price relationship between the yuan and gold.

    Whether China implements the plan suggested herein or not, one thing is for sure: the next credit crisis will happen, and it will have a major impact on all nations operating with fiat money systems. The interest rate question, because of the mountains of debt owed by governments and consumers, will have to be addressed, with nearly all Western economies irretrievably ensnared in a debt trap. The hurdles faced in moving to a sound monetary policy appear to be simply too daunting to be addressed.

    Ultimately, a return to sound money is a solution that will do less damage than fiat currencies losing their purchasing power at an accelerating pace. Think Venezuela, and how sound money would solve her problems. But that path is blocked by a sink-hole that threatens to swallow up whole governments. Trying to buy time by throwing yet more money at an economy suffering a credit crisis will only destroy the currency. The tactic worked during the Lehman crisis, but it was a close-run thing. It is unlikely to work again.

    Because China’s economy has had its debt expansion of the last ten years mostly aimed at production, if she fails to act soon she faces an old-fashioned slump with industries going bust and unemployment rocketing. China offers very limited welfare, and without Maoist-style suppression, faces the prospect of not only the state’s plans going awry, but discontent and rebellion developing among the masses.

    For China, a gold-exchange yuan standard is now the only way out. She will also need to firmly deny what Western universities have been teaching her brightest students. But if she acts early and decisively, China will be the one left standing when the dust settles, and the rest of us in our fiat-financed welfare states will left chewing the dirt of our unsound currencies.

    Is China’s “signal” an explicit warning of the end to the dollar era that has existed since August 1971, when gold as the ultimate money was driven out of the monetary system.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Now that’s a trend that is nobody’s friend.

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Today’s News 8th July 2019

  • The Decline & Fall Of Britain's Labour Party

    Brexit has turned British politics upside down, with the consistent failure of the Conservative and Labour parties to deliver or effectively oppose the country’s exit from the EU fuelling a voter exodus, exemplified today with the latest voting intention poll putting Corbyn’s party in fourth place for the first time in its history.

    Statista’s Martin Armstrong details that, as surveys by YouGov show, since the last election, Labour have managed to squander a relative wealth of positive public opinion, utterly failing to capitalise on the Tories being weak and wounded.

    In the first ‘Favourability Tracker’ after the 2017 vote, a net 7 percent of Brits had a positive opinion of the party, compared to -21 percent for the Conservatives. In July 2019, this figure now sits at -35 percent for the Conservatives, but it is Labour that have fallen most spectacularly, now at -36 percent – a brutal drop of 42 percentage points.

    Infographic: The fall of the Labour Party | Statista

    You will find more infographics at Statista

    In place of the two almost-slain giants have emerged a resurgent Liberal Democrats and the new Nigel Farage platform – the Brexit Party. The former enjoying the best net rating of -12 percent, and the latter at the same level the Conservatives were at just after their last (narrow) election win.

  • NATO Narrative Nonsense: How Stupid Do They Think We Are?

    Authored by Patrick Armstrong via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

    “I daresay you haven’t had much practice,” said the Queen.

    “When I was your age, I always did it for half-an-hour a day. Why, sometimes I’ve believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast.”

    Consumers of the print or electronic output of the League of Copy Typists and their Instructors are expected to believe many impossible things and believe them, not just before breakfast, but all day too.

    Come to think it, believing any part of the official Skripal story, from the incredibly lethal nerve agent that didn’t kill them, to the spectacular coincidence of the British Army’s chief nurse being on the scene, to the re-wrapped perfume bottle would tax the White Queen’s ability. Here’s a list. But that’s not to say that we’re finished yet: there always seems to be another absurdity like the dead ducks.

    Pseudo psychology explains geopolitics. And pretty idiotically too: a whole country on the couch.Russia is more insecure and paranoid“, “a kind of neurotic disorder that renders Russia’s sense of insecurity” “The deep sense of humiliation, the dread of arrogant Westerners, the fear of NATO encirclement.” or maybe it’s not the whole country, just Putin: Putin’s insecure because of Russia’s “diminished role in the world“. “Well, Russian President Vladimir Putin is a textbook case of someone with a serious inferiority complex.” Anyway, some gasbag pseudo-psychology explains it: there’s no reality, Russia/Putin is just naturally paranoid. Probably nothing you can do about it.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    NATO is just going along, minding its own business when, entirely without provocation, hostile nations try to destabilise the world, interfere with freedom of navigation, assault the Rules-Based International Order, and otherwise force NATO to react. From a current Pentagon study:

    “Russia is adopting coercive strategies that involve the orchestrated employment of military and nonmilitary means to deter and compel the US, its allies and partners prior to and after the outbreak of hostilities.”

    Deter and compel” – poor little NATO, so weak, so bullied! Russia does this because of its “deep-seated sense of geopolitical insecurity” which it has just because it has. (More geopolitical pseudo-psychology.)

    And, finally, Putin is interfering in the West’s interference in another country.

  • Bolton Losing Ground On Venezuela, Iran… But Far From Down-And-Out

    Authored by Martin Sieff via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

    The wave of wishful thinking articles, including some by friends of mine whose judgment I usually respect was entirely wrong. President Donald Trump has not fired John Bolton for the failed fiasco of his latest inept attempt to topple the legitimate democratically-elected government of Venezuela: At least not yet.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Bolton remains National Security Advisor of the United States with his fingerprints all over the latest “incident” of limpet mine attacks on the two oil tankers in the Persian Gulf.

    That is not to see that daylight has perceptibly opened up between Trump and Bolton, first on Venezuela and now on Iran. It most clearly has.

    Had Trump still been fully in Bolton’s pocket, he would by now have ordered the ferocious air strikes against Iran that Bolton desperately craved. It is greatly to the president’s credit that he did not.

    The failure of Bolton – eagerly supported by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Special Envoy Elliott Abrams and Vice President Mike Pence – to secure the toppling of President Nicolas Maduro of Venezuela a month ago clearly cost him badly. Trump is a lifelong businessman. He would have gone for what he regarded as a good deal – the toppling of Maduro in a US–orchestrated coup but Bolton and his gang made an utter hash of it.

    Bolton was therefore eager to turn the president’s attention – and that of political Washington – to Iran as soon as possible. The compliant, spineless jellyfish of the US Mainstream Media (MSM) accommodated him as always. Not a whisper of doubt about Bolton’s evident incompetence in the Venezuela Escapade has been allowed to appear in the New York Times and the Washington Post.

    Instead, the MSM has settled for fluff gossip stories about how much Trump still loves or does not love his national security adviser.

    Bolton retains the strategic support of his wealthy, enormously influential political sponsors: The neocon clans that ran US foreign and national security policy so catastrophically under President George W. Bush and whom President Barack Obama shamefully and complacently allowed to stay in power and perpetrate the destabilizations of Ukraine and Syria and the toppling of the government of Libya.

    Bolton also continues to enjoy the total support of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. If Netanyahu fails to secure a governing coalition in the September elections in Israel, it is extremely possible that Bolton will lose the crucial Israeli allies he has taken for granted for so long.

    Since the days of Yitzhak Rabin, the Israeli military has profoundly distrusted the war hungry wild delusional schemes of the neocon chicken-hawks in Washington as much as their opposite numbers in the Pentagon. Netanyahu’s most likely successor, Bluer and White coalition leader General Benny Gantz, a former Israel Defense Forces chief of staff can be a counted in their number.

    Indeed, the key takeaway from the events that did – and more importantly did NOT – happen between the United States, Iran and Venezuela over the past three months is that the senior generals in the Pentagon, especially in the US Army – resisted the neocon super-hawks led by Bolton and his allies.

    Senior US generals in my observations are not caricature, irresponsible militarists at all but sober professionals who recognize clearly the real rising challenges they face and the need to try and prevent having to fight several full scale wars on multiple fronts at the same time.

    That is why the departure of General James Mattis as Secretary of Defense and of General John Kelly left such a worrisome gap at the apex of US strategic policymaking.

    Yet the past three months have shown that the departures of Kelly and Mattis did not give Bolton and his fellow warmongers a free hand: The warmongers thought it did, but they blew it. Bolton is not gone yet by a long shot. But the myth of his supposed “genius” (which I have addressed elsewhere in these columns) has been badly damaged. Trump himself is beginning to see through it.

    A man as fanatical and relentlessly energetic as Bolton – the mark of the dangerous fool in the estimation of Field Marshal Bernard Montgomery – should never be dismissed from consideration until he is finally gone. As long as he still has the chance to whisper in the ear of the President of the United States – and the president lets him – he remains a danger to world peace and the survival of humanity.

    The good news is that Venezuela has been granted a brief stay of execution. Iran, which Bolton has obsessed with destroying for 40 years, still remains his primary target. Yet Trump, Bolton’s own president, refused to play by Bolton’s appointed Gulf of Tonkin script on the latest manufactured Gulf crisis.

    Bolton and his allies are obvious, brutal, predictable and straightforward: But they are also energetic, never-resting and relentless. They clearly have not given up in their efforts to manipulate Trump into launching a full-scale war with Iran and more provocations can be expected to follow relentlessly each piled upon another.

    Bolton is down. But not out. After a strong start, he has suffered several stinging reversals. But his will power is not dented. Nor is his determination to drag his country headlong into multiple needless and avoidable conflicts whose only end can be utter destruction.

  • Apple's India iPhone Sales Crash 42%

    According to The Economic Times, Apple’s continuing slowdown in India has translated into a 42% decline in iPhone shipments in 1Q19 from a year before. During the first quarter, Apple shipped 220,000 iPhones in India, followed by an improvement in April thanks to carrier discounts. In May and June, however, iPhone sales plunged again.

    Neil Shah, research director at Hong Kong-based Counterpoint Technology Market Research, said the full-year estimate for iPhone shipments in India is 1.5 million to 1.6 million, a 10-17% drop from 2018 and as much as 53% collapse from the peak shipment of 3.2 million in 2017.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Apple could start manufacturing its iPhones in India through Foxconn, with an initial monthly capacity of 250,000. About 75% of the iPhones may be exported as Apple figures out how to rework its supply chains outside of China.

    “Apple had a disappointing run in 2018 and the outlook for 2019 looks weaker, with shipments having fallen further compared to last year, with the exception of April, thanks to price correction that month,” said Shah.

    The Times said Apple is preparing to transform India into a major production hub than a top producing market, and intends to scale up local manufacturing amid US-China trade tensions.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Apple has instructed its key suppliers — Foxconn, Pegatron, and Wistron to move 15-30% of their production facilities outside of China to avoid US tariffs.

    “Companies like Apple already have some of their global partner manufacturers in India and with the right environment and possibly incentives, can create a large-scale global hub for making in India and a deep ecosystem for component manufacturers,” said Pankaj Mohindroo, chairman of the Indian Cellular and Electronics Association.

    “We are sitting on an opportunity which needs to be lapped up without losing a minute, else we run the risk of these investments going to other countries like Vietnam.”

    Foxconn and Wistron have already constructed factories in India and industry experts told The Times that manufacturing volumes are increasing.

    “Commercial production of iPhone XR and the models above that should begin by the year-end at Foxconn and exports will be part of the plan from day one,” said an anonymous industry insider.

    India is also planning on relaxing its requirements on companies sourcing at least 30% of goods locally, but those requirements have been major hurdles for technology companies to meet. As a result, foreign direct investment dropped 13% in India in 2018. However, the relaxation of local sourcing regulations will allow more companies who are reworking supply chains out of China to find a possible home in India.

  • Trump's Citizenship Question Isn't Controversial. Obama Deleting It Should've Been

    Authored by Ian Miles Cheong via HumanEvents.com,

    President Trump’s citizenship question on the upcoming U.S. census is, contrary to popular opinion, the norm for the decennial survey.

    Barack Obama was the first President to exclude a question on citizenship in the U.S. Census.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    But today, the Trump administration is being assailed from the Left for its efforts to include the question.

    The Left has responded typically, with accusations of racism. The question of nationality, they claim, is a danger to immigrants.

    There has also been no shortage of confusion as to whether President Donald Trump would go forward with its addition. Trump’s statements appear to contradict news reports that his administration dropped its plan to ask the question after a Supreme Court ruling.

    The planned citizenship question asks: “Is this person a citizen of the United States?”

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    U.S. Census Letter

    The political left’s dominant view is that the question could serve to marginalize immigrants or non-white Americans.

    NPR, quoting the Urban Institute, says the census threatens to put “more than 4 million people at risk of being undocumented.” The headline warns the addition of the question could lead to “worst undercount of black, Latinx people in 30 years.”

    But the framing implies Trump is the first U.S. President to include a question on citizenship, when in fact Trump is simply following the established and understandable tradition of asking those who fill out the form if they’re actually Americans.

    The charge against Trump is one that demands reframing – Obama was the first to not include a question on citizenship, naturalization, or nativity in almost 200 years. The Trump administration is simply undoing Obama’s 8-year effort to distort the status quo.

    Obama’s own efforts to not ask the question was limited to the 2010 Census. From 2009 to 2016, the former president’s Census Bureau had no problem asking anyone if they were Americans on all eight of his annual ACSs (American Community Survey), which targeted smaller demographics key to the success of the Democrats in the eight years of his administration.

    The ACS even asked the question in both English as well as Spanish.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    American Community Survey (Census Bureau)

    In the decades prior, administrations from Bush, to Clinton, going all the way back to 1820, had questions on citizenship, nationality, or nativity. The process originated with Thomas Jefferson.

    1870 Census

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    1880 Census

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    1900 Census

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    1910 Census

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    1920 Census

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    1930 Census

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    1940 Census

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    1950 Census

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    1960 Census

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    1970 Census

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    1980 Census

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    1990 Census

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

  • Starbucks Forced To Apologize After Post-Cop-Ban #DumpStarbucks Campaign Goes Viral

    Starbucks was forced to apologize on its website after an incident in a Tempe, Arizona, where a barista asked six police officers to leave the location, went viral. Additionally, the company has deployed its EVP/President of U.S. Retail to Tempe Sunday night after speaking to the city’s police chief. 

    In a statement addressed to “Chief Moir and the entire Tempe Police Department,” Starbucks apologizes for the July 4th incident, calling it “completely unacceptable”:

    Thank you, Chief Moir, for the conversation today.  On behalf of Starbucks, I want to sincerely apologize to you all for the experience that six of your officers had in our store on July 4.

    When those officers entered the store and a customer raised a concern over their presence, they should have been welcomed and treated with dignity and the utmost respect by our partners (employees). Instead, they were made to feel unwelcome and disrespected, which is completely unacceptable.

    At Starbucks, we have deep appreciation for your department and the officers who serve the Tempe community. Our partners rely on your service and welcome your presence, which keeps our stores and the community a safe and welcoming place.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The apology continues, with Starbucks EVP Rossann William stating: 

    Our strong relationship with the Tempe Police Department has provided us the opportunity to host several “Coffee with a Cop” events in area stores, which bring residents and police together to discuss relevant issues and find common ground. We look forward to continuing to strengthen our relationship with you, and we agree that the experience of your officers requires an important dialogue – one that we are committed to being part of.

    What occurred in our store on July 4 is never the experience your officers or any customer should have, and at Starbucks, we are already taking the necessary steps to ensure this doesn’t happen again in the future.

    I will be in Tempe this evening and welcome the opportunity to meet with any of you in person to address concerns or questions.

    As we reported yesterday, a barista asked six police officers to leave the store – or move out of a customer’s line of sight – because they were making a customer feel “unsafe”, according to Business Insider which first reported the snafu.

    As a result, the hashtag #DumpStarbucks started trending on Twitter after the Tempe Officers Association tweeted out a “Dump Starbucks” logo that was first used in 2012 to protest the company’s support of same sex marriage.

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

    Six officers, including military veterans, were in the Starbucks – on the 4th of July of all days– to get drinks. A barista then asked them to leave because a customer “did not feel safe” with them present. The officers reportedly left without any confrontations, but the Tempe Officer’s Association said at the time that “such treatment has become all too common in 2019” and said it will “look forward to working collaboratively” with Starbucks to address the incident.

    The issue was a topic of discussion on Fox News Sunday, where the President of the Tempe Officers Association said he hopes the issue “encourages a national dialogue”. 

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

  • US Foreign Policy Is A War On Disobedience

    Authored by Caitlin Johnstone via Medium.com,

    In an excellent new essay titled “We’re Not the Good Guys  – Why Is American Aggression Missing in Action?”, Tom Engelhardt criticizes the way western media outlets consistently describe the behavior of disobedient nations like Iran as “aggressions”, but never use that label for the (generally antecedent and far more egregious) aggressions of the United States.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    “When it comes to Washington’s never-ending war on terror, I think I can say with reasonable confidence that, in the past, the present, and the future, the one phrase you’re not likely to find in such media coverage will be ‘American aggression,’” Engelhardt writes. He then asks a very fair question:

    “So here’s the strange thing, on a planet on which, in 2017, U.S. Special Operations forces deployed to 149 countries, or approximately 75% of all nations; on which the U.S. has perhaps 800 military garrisons outside its own territory; on which the U.S. Navy patrols most of its oceans and seas; on which U.S. unmanned aerial drones conduct assassination strikes across a surprising range of countries; and on which the U.S. has been fighting wars, as well as more minor conflicts, for years on end from Afghanistan to Libya, Syria to Yemen, Iraq to Niger in a century in which it chose to launch full-scale invasions of two countries (Afghanistan and Iraq), is it truly reasonable never to identify the U.S. as an ‘aggressor’ anywhere?”

    In other words, does it really make sense for any nation to be able to take over the world and then look up with Bambi-eyed innocence saying “I was attacked! Completely out of the blue!” whenever any government pushes back on this? If you ask the empire’s narrative makers, the answer is a resounding yes.

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

    This important discrepancy is as close as we’ll ever get to an honest admission from the political/media class that they consider empire-building and endless war to be normal, and any opposition to it freakish. All nations are meant to submit to America’s use of military and economic force upon them, and if they don’t, that’s “aggression”. The official position of the political/media class is that the US is a normal nation with the same rights and status as any other, but the unofficial position is that this is an empire, and nations will either obey or be destroyed.

    It’s a machine with the same values as Napoleon or Hitler or Genghis Khan or any other imperialist conqueror from ages past; the only difference is that it pretends not to be the thing that it is. The US markets itself as an upholder of rules-based liberal democratic values, even though it consistently flouts international law, wages imperialist wars of aggression, imprisons journalists, crushes dissent and uses propaganda just as much as any totalitarian regime. The only difference is that it does so in a way that enables its supporters to pretend that that’s not what’s actually happening.

    Forget the “war on terror”. If US foreign policy were honest it would unite all its war propaganda sloganeering under a single banner: the War on Disobedience.

    After the end of the first cold war there was much celebration. At long last! The USSR was no longer a threat, so America could finally stop pouring its resources into the nuclear arms race and finally just relax and start acting like a normal country in the world. But it didn’t take long after the Berlin Wall fell for the neoconservatives to find their way into key points of influence and steer US foreign policy into the agenda of ensuring that America never again risks losing its status as the world’s only superpower. Which necessarily meant expanding the use of military and economic force to a level never previously seen.

    So now you’ve got this weird dynamic where the US is constantly working to make sure that no other countries surpass it and gain the ability to treat America the way America treats other countries. That’s all US military and economic agendas in a nutshell right now.

    The nation that poses the greatest threat to US hegemony is of course China. Most of the US war machine’s aggressions right now are ultimately built around securing resource control and geostrategic dominance to prevent China from surpassing it without attacking China itself. Any time you see the US ramping up hostilities toward a given nation, just do a search for that nation’s name plus China (or plus “Belt and Road Initiative”), and you’ll usually find a strong connection.

    So the USSR was simply replaced with China, and the nuclear arms race was simply replaced with greatly increased global military expansionism. The plutocrat-owned media and the plutocrat-owned political class have fallen right in line with this and normalized the idea of US imperialism around the world. The cold war never ended, it just shifted its narrative and focus. Neoconservatism never went away, it just went mainstream.

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

    But the thing about neocons and the rest of the increasingly indistinguishable proponents of American imperialism is that their underlying thesis is actually fundamentally correct: the US empire does depend on endless war in order to maintain its dominance over other nations. America doesn’t have the leverage to stay on top using economic prowess alone; it requires both the carrot of US military backing and the stick of US military aggressions. War is the only adhesive holding the US-centralized empire together, and the more its economic dominance slips away in the face of China’s economic rise, the more ham-fisted and desperate its warmongering is necessarily going to get.

    This is completely unsustainable, especially in a world where the other major nuclear weapons force, Russia, is on China’s side of the new cold war dynamic. We’ve all now found ourselves trapped on a planet made of limited resources with two major alliances trying to out-consume and out-resource control each other, while hurtling toward a major military confrontation between nuclear superpowers. This puts us on a direct trajectory toward either nuclear annihilation or ecosystemic collapse in the near term. This means the argument that America needs to maintain its dominance at all cost is no longer a viable one, since that cost will almost certainly be everything in the world.

    So we’ve all got some important questions to ask ourselves, haven’t we? Do we desire to stay in the familiar US-controlled world order at the price of omnicide and ecocide, or do we wish to roll the dice and bet on humanity instead? Do we wish to stay the course because it preserves a status quo that is all we’ve ever known, or do we take a leap of faith on the possibility that we can de-escalate all geopolitical enmity and move into collaboration with each other and with our ecosystem?

    This choice right here is why I write so much about mankind’s need to transcend its old conditioning patterns and move into something wildly unprecedented. Our current fear-based mentality makes a populism-driven leap of faith into transcendence impossible and ensures that we remain on an oligarch-driven trajectory toward extinction. I firmly believe that we have the freedom to either pass or fail this test, but we don’t have the freedom not to take it. We’ll transcend our old conditioning patterns which we inherited from our evolutionary ancestors who lived in a wildly different world from the one we’ve created, or we will perish. It’s an A or B choice, but the choice is ours.

    *  *  *

    The best way to get around the internet censors and make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for my website, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. My work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook, following my antics on Twitter, throwing some money into my hat on Patreon or Paypalpurchasing some of my sweet merchandise, buying my new book Rogue Nation: Psychonautical Adventures With Caitlin Johnstone, or my previous book Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers. For more info on who I am, where I stand, and what I’m trying to do with this platform, click here. Everyone, racist platforms excluded, has my permission to republish or use any part of this work (or anything else I’ve written) in any way they like free of charge.

    Bitcoin donations:1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2

  • China And Taiwan Are "One Family," Says Chinese Official, Further Complicating Things For The US 

    Taipei Mayor Ko Wen-je, touted as a candidate in Taiwan’s 2020 presidential election, on Friday met with Liu Jieyi, director of China’s Taiwan Affairs Office, who both agreed on enhancing cross-strait relations, something that could irritate the Trump administration.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Jieyi said both sides of the Taiwan Strait are “one family” but avoided saying phrases like “one country, two systems” and “peaceful reunification” during the closed-door meeting, reported Focus Taiwan.

    Wen-je, who was in Shanghai for the Taipei-Shanghai Twin-City forum, met with Jieyi at a guest house Friday night.

    “The trend is unstoppable,” Jieyi said, adding that China is committed to improving cross-strait relations following the guidance of Chinse President Xi Jinping.

    Even if the meeting was closed-door, the conference is considered a significant gravitational shift, one where Taiwan could lean more towards China than the US.

    During a press conference, Jieyi shared the achievements between Shanghai and Taipei in the past decade and his vision of a friendly environment in Taiwan Strait.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Jieyi said he had read Wen-je’s book titled “Taipei — A Proud City with Progressive Values” and said the mayor’s pursuit of serving his constituents and bringing innovation in the city was similar with China’s mission to lift millions out of poverty through technological advances.

    He also said, “people from both sides of the Taiwan Strait are one family and should help each other,” referring to travel and trade statistics.

    While China suspended official contacts with Taiwan, Wen-je said that the Taipei-Shanghai forum is the “only official platform of communications between the two sides.”

    Taiwan and China have been ruled separately since the 1949 split. Beijing still regards Taiwan as a province to be reunited with the mainland, by military force if necessary.

    The Trump administration has made strong gestures in support of Taiwan, including the “Taiwan Assurance Act of 2019,” which supports Taiwan with “regular sales and defense articles.” There have also been more frequent reconnoissances missions with US warships in the Taiwan Strait. This comes at a time when the trade war has escalated into an almost full economic war, that has severely strained US-China relations.

    Readers have to understand the danger is growing of an actual shooting war that could involve China and the US sparring over Taiwan.

  • Then They Came For… Betsy Ross? Jefferson? July 4th? America?

    Authored by John Derbyshire via The Unz Review,

    I hope you enjoyed your July 4th as much as the Derbs enjoyed ours. You should in fact enjoy the Fourth each year now with special zest in the knowledge that it may not be a public holiday much longer.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Our Cultural Revolution advances ever faster.

    Nowadays the word “pride” dwells under a cloud of suspicion. Steve Sailer has mused that when the younger generation today learns about the 1942 Gary Cooper movie Pride of the Yankees, their first reaction is probably: “Hey, I didn’t know Lou Gehrig was gay!”

    For example, we recently had Pride Week in New York City, with the word “pride” used in just that sense. It climaxed on Sunday, June 30th, in a huge parade of proud Ls, Gs, Bs, Ts, and Qs down Fifth Avenue.

    Thus primed, I think I may be forgiven for having misapprehended a headline I saw on the Drudge Report. American Pride Hits New Low. “Uh-oh,” I thought, “what have the homo lobbies been up to now?”

    On investigation it turned out that the news report had nothing to do with eccentric sexual inclinations. That headline was actually taken from a new press release out of Gallup, the very respectable polling organization:

    As Americans prepare to celebrate the Fourth of July holiday, their pride in the U.S. has hit its lowest point since Gallup’s first measurement in 2001. While 70 percent of U.S. adults overall say they are proud to be Americans, this includes fewer than half (45 percent) who are “extremely” proud, marking the second consecutive year that this reading is below the majority level. Democrats continue to lag far behind Republicans in expressing extreme pride in the U.S.

    American Pride Hits New Low; Few Proud of Political System, by Megan Brenan, July 2, 2019

    The eye-catching sentence is: “Democrats continue to lag far behind Republicans in expressing extreme pride in the U.S.”

    The actual percentages expressing themselves “extremely proud to be American” are: Republicans 76, Democrats 22. That’s a heck of a gap: 54 percentage points. In 2001 it was ten points, 64 to 54.

    Here’s my question for Democrats. The biggest issue in our politics right now arises from the fact that millions – tens of millions, likely hundred of millions – of foreigners want to come settle in America, with or without proper permission. Isn’t that an occasion for…”pride”?

    Apparently not. This last week, we have seen a couple of major strides toward the abolition of Independence Day: .

    The logic on this one was hard to follow. Is it the thirteen stars, representing the original thirteen colonies, in all of which (I think) slavery was legal at the time Ms. Ross offered her flag design? If it was, then the thirteen stripes must be equally offensive. That could be…what’s the cant word here?…oh yes: problematic, that could be problematic to a great many not-yet-fully-woke Americans, as our present national flag retains those same thirteen stripes.

    The issue got further confused when diehard counter-revolutionary subversives noted that the Betsy Ross flag was prominently displayed at Barack Obama’s second inaugural bash.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Since it is inconceivable that Saint Barack himself was not fully woke to the shameful associations of the flag, a new justification for the ban had to be thought up.

    It quickly was.

    The Betsy Ross flag, we are now told, has been appropriated by white supremacists as a symbol of their deplorable movement.

    I must say, I wasn’t aware of this. I have never seen the Betsy Ross flag on display at meetings of my own local white supremacy group SCARF (that’s the Suffolk County Assembly of Racists and Fascists) … but perhaps we’re just behind the curve out here in the sticks.

    This logical switch illustrates the nimbleness of the Cultural Revolutionaries. In the fullness of time they will no doubt declare that yes, the current national flag is indeed unacceptable. They know, however, that the time is not yet right for a full-scale assault against all our national symbols. They need to proceed methodically, step by step until the moment is ripe to storm the Winter Palace.

    The other revolutionary step forward this week:

    • the city of Charlottesville, Virginia will no longer celebrate Thomas Jefferson’s birthday as an official city holiday.

    Charlottesville is the home of the University of Virginia, which Jefferson founded, and of Jefferson’s Monticello estate.

    If we continue along this path it can only be a matter of time—and not much time, given the accelerating pace of the past few years—until George Washington himself is expunged from the nation’s memory… exactly as President Trump foresaw in his speech following the 2017 antifa riot in Charlottesville.

    Several people have pointed out that the name of our capital city is doubly outrageous to the legions of the Woke, commemorating as t does not only slave-owner George but also, in the “D.C.” part, Christopher Columbus, who caused West Indian aborigines to be enslaved.

    The name “Washington, D.C.” must soon therefore be dragged down into oblivion along with Old Glory.

    If, at that point, we are still celebrating July the Fourth, you can be sure it will be the next item on the revolutionaries’ list.

    “Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.”

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Today’s News 7th July 2019

  • The Only Strategic Rationale For America's Involvement In Syria Finally Revealed

    Authored by Elias Samo via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

    “Washington lacks a clear strategy in Syria “; those were the recent words of Robert Ford, the last American ambassador to Syria who served prior to and during the first few years of the Syrian uprising from 2010 to 2014. A man of Ford’s intricate knowledge of the Syrian/American political dynamic is surly knowledgeable enough to assess America’s policy towards Syria. He goes on to say, “It is hard to explain the fundamental American mission in Syria… Is it to fight Daesh? Or is it to help promote a Kurdish autonomous district in Northeastern Syria… Or is it to resist Iranian encouragement?” It is partially all three; however, oddly enough, Mr. Ford avoids the obvious top priority and strategic rationale for America’s involvement in Syria: The Protection of Israel.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    To alleviate this dereliction by the executive branch for not presenting a clear strategy in Syria, as the former ambassador asserts, the Congress took it upon itself to identify American strategic interests in Syria and make recommendations to Trump.

    However, it is legitimate to ask: what do American congressmen know about Syria to qualify them to determine American strategic interests in the country? It is very unlikely for American congressmen to know much about Syria; they are dictated the Israeli narrative and that is all they need to know.

    Irrespective of who or what motivated the congressmen to seek information to develop a framework for American strategic interests in Syria and eventually send a letter signed by nearly four hundred congressmen- roughly seventy five percent of the total number of congressmen from both chambers and both parties- to the president about their findings and their recommendations, the congressmen called upon United States Institute of Peace (USIP) to establish a Syria Study Group (SSG) to provide them information about Syria to comprehend the situation and formulate recommendations to Trump.

    The SSG was established in February 2019 and gave its interim report to Congress May 1, 2019; the report consists of detailed seven single-spaced typewritten pages.

    Subsequent to the SSG submitting of its interim report to Congress on May 1, the four hundred congressmen Letter was sent to the president on May 20.

    It would be natural to assume that the Letter is a condensed reflection of what the interim report contained and recommended; that was not the case.

    The elaborate and detailed interim report dealt with a multitude of issues centered around American national security. Ironically, the Letter to the President focused on the sources of threats to Israeli security: terrorism, Syria, Lebanon (Hezbollah), Iran, Turkey and Russia. Just a note regarding the difference in emphasis in the two documents. In the seven – page single spaced interim report Israel is mentioned nine times, it is mentioned twenty one times in the two page Letter.

     

    The first paragraph of the Letter states “[…] we recommend several specific steps to advance our regional security priorities, including assisting our ally, Israel, in defending itself in the face of growing threats, including on its northern border.” The reference to northern border is Syria and Lebanon. As for Syria, it is suffice to note that Israel occupied the Syrian Golan for fifty two years and annexed it recently with Trump’s blessings. Syria has not fired a shot at Israel in decades while Israel has fired hundreds of shots at Syria just recently; there are no Syrian boots on the ground in Israel, while there are Israeli boots on the ground in Syria. So much for the threat to Israel emanating from Syria. As for the Lebanese scenario, it is similar to that of Syria, albeit on a smaller scale, with one addition: Hezbollah which Israel views it a source of imminent threat. However, it is suffice to note that it is Israel which has been the source of violent onslaughts against Hezbollah. The Letter, in the succeeding paragraphs, elaborates further on the acquisition by Syria and Hezbollah of large and more threatening sophisticated weapons to threaten the security of the regional, nuclear super power: Israel.

    Need one point out the ridicule?

    In the third paragraph, the Letter asserts: “While our nation has encouraged more stable and inclusive political systems in the Middle East, the regime in Tehran has spread its influence and destabilized its neighbors for its own gain.” To say this is an outrageous distortion of the truth would be an understatement. There is not a sane Iraqi, Syrian, Lybian, Yemeni and most Muslim Arabs who would vouch to such a distortion. In fact, internationally, the US and Israel are viewed as sources of threat to international peace and security; both have boots on foreign grounds but no foreign boots on their grounds.

    Russia receives a jab at the fourth paragraph for its role “[…] to ensure the survival of the Assad regime.” It adds “Furthermore, in providing Damascus with advanced weapons like the S-300 anti-aircraft, Moscow is complicating Israel’s ability to defend itself from hostile action emanating from Syria.”

    The last part of the Letter contains three recommendations which are interrelated and converge on the core of the Letter; the security of Israel.

    Beyond any conceivable doubts, the Letter was dictated by Israelis or their advocates in Washington, signed and submitted by the 400 congressmen to Trump; the height of hypocrisy. What is dismaying is that hardly any voices of protests were raised in the American society at large or the political or intellectual segments about the fact that four hundred congressmen, who are elected by Americans to serve American interests, at a time when the US is bogged down in the Arab region, sign and submit a letter to the US President concerned almost exclusively with Israel Security.

    These congressmen had an opportunity to make a coherent recommendation on US policy in the Arab region in the interest of American National Interest, but instead chose to make recommendations to safeguard the wellbeing and security of a foreign state: Israel.

  • Visualizing The 20 Biggest Bankruptcies In US History

    Doing business means taking calculated risks.

    Regardless of whether you are opening a lemonade stand or you’re a leading executive at a Fortune 500 company, Visual Capitalist’s Jeff Desjardins points out that risk is an inevitable part of the game.

    Taking bigger risks can generate proportional rewards – and sometimes, such as for the companies you’ll read about below, the risk-taking backfired to queue up some of the biggest bankruptcies in U.S. history.

    Going For Broke

    Today’s infographic comes to us from TitleMax, and it highlights the 20 biggest bankruptcies in the country’s history.

    Companies below are sorted by total assets at the time of bankruptcy.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    There are times when companies are forced to push in all of their chips to make a game-changing bet. Sometimes this pans out, and sometimes the plan fails miserably.

    In other situations, companies were actually unaware they were “all-in”. Instead, the potentially destructive nature of the risk was not even on the radar, only to be later triggered through a global crisis or unanticipated “Black Swan” events.

    The Biggest Bankruptcies in the U.S.

    Here are the 20 biggest bankruptcies in U.S. history, and what triggered them:

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The data set on the biggest bankruptcies is organized by assets at time of bankruptcy. Therefore, they are not in inflation-adjusted terms, meaning the list skews towards more recent events.

    This makes the impact of the 2008 financial crisis particularly easy to spot.

    The events and consequences relating to the crisis (loan defaults, illiquidity, and declining asset values) were enough to take down banks like Lehman Brothers and WaMu. The after effects – including a slumping global economy – led to a second wave of bankruptcies for companies such as GM and Chrysler.

    In total, nine of the 20 biggest bankruptcies on the list occurred in the 2008-2009 span.

    A Dubious Distinction

    You may also notice that one company was on the list twice, and this was not an accident.

    Pacific Gas & Electric, a California company that is the nation’s largest utility provider, has the dubious distinction of going bankrupt twice in the last 20 years. The first time, in 2001, resulted from a drought that limited hydro electricity generation, forcing the company to import electricity from outside sources at exorbitant prices.

    The more recent instance happened earlier this year. Facing tens of billions of dollars in liabilities from raging wildfires in California, the utility filed for Chapter 11 protection yet another time.

  • Are We Really Free? Maybe It's Time For A Personal Declaration Of Independence

    Via The Organic Prepper blog,

    How independent are any of us, really?

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    We like to think we live in the “free-est” nation in the world, but do we really?  Think about it.

    • You never own your home outright, even when the mortgage is paid off. Every year, you must make your extortion payment to the city or trust me, you won’t be living in that house for long.

    • The same thing with your car. If you don’t pay your annual extortion payment on your vehicle and pay a hundred bucks for a tiny sticker that gives you permission to drive it, it will be promptly towed away by the city with the government’s blessing. Then, like a hostage negotiation gone wrong, you’ll have to pay even more money to cover their theft and storage of YOUR vehicle.

    • On a regular basis, you must pay a fee and ask the government for permission to do any number of things, such as driving a car, traveling outside the country, running a business, adding another bathroom to your home, or even catching a fish for dinner.

    • Permits and licenses are big revenue generators from start to finish – and if you proceed without asking permission, they will extort more money from you in the form of fines. If you refuse to pay the fines (or if you can’t) they’ll kidnap you and lock you in a cage, where you’ll be forced to perform manual labor for 10 cents an hour for whatever length of time the legal authorities feel is sufficient to teach you a lesson.

    • There are places in our nation where you can’t use your property the way you want. There are areas where you cannot collect the water that falls on your land. There are places where you aren’t allowed to detach your home from the grid. There are places that dictate where your vegetable garden can grow (or even if you’re allowed to have one), places that won’t allow you to hang your clothes out to dry, and places that make it illegal to sleep in your car.

    The bottom line is, some places in the United States are freer than others, but we’re all still serfs paying fealty to lords.

    I’m sick of it.

    Did you know that, as a business owner, when I write a paycheck of $1200 to an employee, it costs me $1399.91 and that she only ends up with $1042.12? Think about what we could all do with an extra $357.79 per pay period. I bet we wouldn’t go out fighting wars on other people’s soil with it. I bet we wouldn’t enrich politicians and weapons manufacturers with it and special interest groups with it.

    I don’t know about you, but I’m sick of it.

    I’m sick of being taxed locally on the business I created using absolutely no municipal resources, of being taxed on the wages I pay to my employees, of being taxed on the car that the bank and I own, of being asked for a list of personal property so the local government can tax me on that too.

    Sick.

    Of.

    It.

    And it goes far beyond taxation.

    Our government isn’t really made up of the elected officials that it purports. It’s made up, mostly, by people who sell their souls to huge corporations that have an interest in beneficial (to them) laws being passed and laws that would harm their businesses shut down before they ever reach the desk of the presidents.

    As well, the supposed watchdog entities, like the Food and Drug Administration, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the United States Department of Agriculture are populated and led by those who have been hand-picked to support corporations, no matter what the detriment to the American people whom they pretend to protect. If Congress was like Nascar, the members would have to wear uniforms emblazoned with their sponsors. However, Washington DC does not have the transparency of professional car racing, so we must guess at the sponsors of our “representatives.”

    We are buried under silly laws with the sole purpose of generating revenue or adding to the slave labor force in the for-profit prison system. We must work most of our waking hours to be able to pay for our basic necessities. We are convinced repeatedly through entertainment and social media that we must have things that our ancestors would never have considered owning, much less requiring.

    They have most people convinced that they must follow the food pyramid, the vaccine schedule, and the rules that force us to have licenses for every darned thing we do. We must pay for and be granted permission to feed ourselves, transport ourselves, build shelters for ourselves, unite in matrimony, and even to own pets.

    We’re ruled by fear and manipulation.

    Like some kind of frighteningly authoritarian parent, they assure us that it’s for our own safety, these breaches in our independence and that we must comply or face the consequences.  They ground us by taking away our licenses. They send us to our rooms that just happen to be located in for-profit prisons. They don’t “allow” us to pursue life, liberty, and happiness because once we taste that sweet freedom, we won’t want to be under their oppressive thumbs anymore.

    But some of us have seen the corporate government for what it is: a bully that reigns through fear of reprisal and grievous harm. They hold over us these fears:

    • We will die if we don’t eat things that were inspected and approved by them.

    • We will be jailed, fined, or have our children taken from us if we don’t toe the line, vaccinate them as ordered, medicate them as recommended.

    • We are unable to figure things out for ourselves because we are not “experts” and therefore we must suppress our own judgments and bow to their far greater knowledge.

    • We will die if we don’t follow their expert health and nutrition advice.

    • We’ll be murdered by scary foreign terrorists if we don’t allow the TSA to fondle our private parts and perform x-rays that show us naked before we fly.

    Some people fear these things and believe these tales so thoroughly, they allow the government to enforce ridiculous, unconstitutional laws “for our own safety.” They say, “Better that I give up my rights as a human being and save the world from a terrorist.”

    Whether you call it freedom, liberty, sovereignty, or self-governance, the point remains the same: if you’re reading this, you probably want to determine your own life, whether the result is success or failure. You want to have control over your ability to live, truly live, and not merely exist as a slave to the powers that be.

    You can withdraw your consent.

    When’s the last time you read – actually read – the Declaration of Independence?

    Please allow me to share an excerpt.

    We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

    Now, I’m not planning to arm up and head to Washington DC to take over Congress, but I am continuing to withdraw my consent in every way possible.

    You have a natural human right to be free.

    Human beings are born with natural rights, every single one of us. We have the rights to life, liberty, and property. We have the right to benefit from our own work.

    And if that’s not enough, there’s a back-up. You also have constitutionally-protected right to be free.

    The 13th Amendment to the Constitution abolished slavery.  This means that if you are a slave today, it’s either illegal, or you have voluntarily accepted your servitude.

    Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

    You have a Constitutionally protected right to be free. If you aren’t free, then revolution is your motherlovin’ duty.

    This isn’t about guns blazing, militias mobilizing, and guerrilla warfare. It’s about small personal acts of independence. The way you lead your life every single day can be a personal Declaration of Independence.  By refusing to concede your natural rights, quietly and resolutely, you are performing a much-needed act of revolution.

    Anyone can be part of this revolution.

    Many people believe that revolution requires that they lead a march, stand in front of a crowd with a bullhorn, or form a militia. They feel like it’s a job for the Julian Assanges and James Wesley Rawleses of the world.

    They’re wrong.  You don’t have to be a person with thousands of followers on Twitter and Facebook.  You don’t have to be a person with a military leadership position on your resume. You need not get yourself arrested on the steps of the White House, go to prison forever for telling an unpopular truth, or stare down a bunch of scary-looking thugs in jackboots.

    But you do have to do something.

    You can’t just sit there and complain unless you really are just another armchair Rambo.

    The way you lead your life every single day can be an act of revolution.  By refusing to concede your natural rights, quietly and resolutely, you are performing an act of revolution. Walking the walk doesn’t always require civil disobedience or militia membership.  It requires your consistent determination not to let others infringe on your own freedom.

    It doesn’t matter if you are a soccer mom from the suburbs, a college student in a dormitory, a church-going dad and husband, or a person who has found themselves homeless through the ongoing economic crisis – by living resolutely, you are performing an act of revolution.

    Don’t get me wrong – we need the Julians, the militias,  and the JWRs.  We need the people who stand in protest.  We need those who expose wrongdoing.  We need the organizers, the shouters, the big personalities, and the leaders. But these are not the only ways to revolt.  If every single person was off organizing their own rally, there’d be no one left to march in it.

    What it is imperative upon us to do is to find our compass and follow it.

    We must make ourselves immune to control by not needing what “they” hand out.  We have to be armored against the way everyone else lives and choose our own paths.  We must stubbornly refuse to participate in the hoop-jumping that is everyday life in America.  By all of us who believe in liberty doing this, we form an army of stubborn non-participants in the status quo.

    Random Acts of Revolution

    The most revolutionary act is to be self-sufficient and in need of nothing that the government can provide for you in exchange for some small liberty.  This list of insurrections is by no means comprehensive.

    • Question absolutely everything you hear on the news. Always be a skeptic. All major media goes back to just a few conglomerates. Call them out.  When you see coverage that is clearly biased, take a moment to call out the media about it.  Take the time to comment on mainstream media websites and point out the unbalanced coverage.  If you use social media, share this information and post on the media outlet’s social media pages as well.

    • Get out of the banking system. By opting to “unbank” or “underbank” there is a limit to what can be easily stolen from you.  When you have physical control of your financial assets, you are not at as high a risk of losing those assets, and therefore, less likely to be dependent on “the system.”

    • Educate others.  At the (very high) risk of people thinking you’re crazy, it’s important to let people know WHY you do what you do.  If you object to a municipal policy, speak at a town meeting or send a letter to the editor of your local paper.  If you’re an activist, make a point of explaining the reasons behind your activism. But be calm and rational. By ranting incoherently or by keeping your mouth shut, you influence no one. By providing provable facts, you can open minds and awaken others.

    • Grow your own food or buy local.  Every single seed that you plant is a revolutionary act.  Every bit of food that you don’t have to purchase from the grocery store is a battle cry for your personal independence.  When you educate yourself (and others) about  Big Food, Big Agri, and the food safety sell-outs at the FDA, you will clearly see that we are alone in our fight for healthy, nutritious foods.  Refuse to tolerate these attacks on our health and our lifestyles. If you can’t grow your own food, the support local farms. You have the right to food that won’t kill you. Forget CAFOs and industrial crops sprayed with glyphosate. Go local and you’ll be feeding your family foods that are wholesome, nutritious, and unlikely to be subject to recalls like Big Food keeps launching.

    • Refuse to comply.  If you know your natural rights, which are guaranteed under the Constitution and its Amendments, then it makes it much harder for “authorities” to bully you.  You don’t have to let them search your home without a warrant, you don’t have to answer questions, and you don’t have to comply with laws that are in conflict with the Constitution. You don’t have to be aggressive or get in a fight with them. You just have to be staunch in your refusal.

    • Embrace your right to bear arms.  Be responsible for your own safety and security. 911 should not be your personal security plan. Save yourself.

    • Don’t be in debt.  No one can be free if they are in debt. If you are in debt, you are forced to work in whatever conditions are present, for whatever amount is offered, complying with whatever criteria is necessary to keep your job. As well, the high interest rates that you pay only serve to make the bankers more wealthy.  Instead of borrowing, save until you can afford something or realize that if you could actually afford it, you wouldn’t need to borrow money to have it. If you’re already in debt, this articlecan help you get it paid down fast.

    • Be prepared for disaster.  Have enough food, water, and supplies to take care of your family in the event of a natural disaster. Don’t expect FEMA to take care of you. (Learn more here.)

    • Be involved in your children’s education.  For some, this means homeschooling or unschooling, and for others, this means being on top of what they are learning in a formal school setting. Join the PTA and actively volunteer if your child goes to school.  Be an advocate for your child and insist that the teachers teach. If your child goes to school, supplement this at home with discourse about current events and outings that help them learn about the world around them.

    • Know that any freedom you give up, you will never get back. Remember what we lost in the “Patriot” Act and the Indefinite Detention Act (NDAA)?  Those freedoms aren’t ever coming back unless something more drastic than anything I’ve seen in my lifetime occurs.

    • Maintain your privacy. For the love of crickets, don’t be that ignorant fool who says “If I haven’t done anything wrong, I don’t have anything to worry about. You have plenty to worry about. All information can be manipulated to track you, profile you, make you look guilty, and control you. Trust me, when the social credit program rolls out here, you’ll have more to worry about than you ever imagined.

    • Stop making excuses for collaborators. The tax collectors who enforce the extortion of your money? The TSA agents who pat you down and dehumanize you? Stop trying to justify their jobs. Stop trying to make it okay.  “These agents are only doing their jobs.” They should be ashamed of themselves for having these jobs. Heck, I’ve even heard people in line at the airport thank the TSA for patting them down. F*ck that. I will not be complicit in my own slavery.

    For even more ways to cease your support of a government run amok, check out 50 Ways to Starve the Beast.

    As Albert Camus, a French philosopher and author said, “The only way to deal with an unfree world is to become so absolutely free that your very existence is an act of rebellion.”

    Get out there and be the squeaky wheel.

    If you see something wrong, don’t just ignore it. Say something about it, and keep saying something until it changes.  Whether this is some process that infringes on your privacy, a job requirement that impedes your health, or another injustice, pursue it relentlessly. Ask questions publically, write letters, and use social media to bring pressure to encourage a change.

    If you’re currently taking the easy way through life, if you recognize yourself as a slave, STOP. You don’t have to continue like that.

    According to the Declaration of Independence,  “Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”

    That means that you don’t have to accept the unjust laws. That means you don’t have to quietly take it, muttering under your breath that it isn’t right, but not daring to raise your voice.  That means that “they” are only in control of you if you allow it.

    Independence isn’t something you celebrate one day a year. Independence is the way you live your life, every single day, refusing to submit to that which makes you beholden to or less than someone else.

    There are nearly 330 million people in the United States. (source)

    Only 3% of the population fought in the Revolutionary War, and 10% actively supported them.

    If 9,900,000 people quietly and peacefully revolted by withdrawing their consent to be governed by tyrants we could not be silenced.

    If 33,000,000 people supported those revolting, we could not be stopped.

    The government might be watching us, but we can watch them right back.

    Make the way you live your life a revolutionary act. Show people what freedom really means, and maybe it will catch on.

  • Study Confirms Cannabis Oil Can Reduce Or Eliminate Epileptic Seizures In Kids

    A small study conducted by researchers at the University of Saskatchewan adds to the growing body of evidence that cannabis can be used to successfully treat seizures in children, according to the CBC

    A study funded by Jim Pattison’s Children’s Hospital Foundation monitored seven children suffering from severe pediatric epilepsy, in which up to 1,200 seizures a month are common. 

    On average, the overall reduction in seizures was close to 75%, while three of the seven children stopped having seizures altogether. 

    “Some people might say that’s not perfect, that’s not 100 per cent, but you have to take into consideration these are kids that have failed multiple anti-seizure medications, multiple treatments. The likelihood of getting a good result with another medication is really, really low,” said pediatric neurologist Dr. Richard Huntsman, one of the study’s authors. 

    During the study, the children were administered their typical medication in addition to the cannabis. No participant was administered a placebo.

    After one month of observing their seizures, the children received increasing doses of a herbal cannabis extract. The dosage was then increased each month for six months.

    A major barrier to the study was the notion that the cannabis-based medicine would make the children intoxicated.

    But the actual medication consisted of 95 per cent cannabidiol (CBD) and five per cent THC. CBD is derived from cannabis plants but does not create a high, whereas THC can be intoxicating. –CBC

    “What we were able to show is that the THC levels, even at the highest doses in this study, remained low,” said Huntsman. “Based on this —and, again, this [is] preliminary data for seven patients of study so we have got to keep that in mind — but what we’re able to show so far is that the concerns about THC intoxication, maybe it’s not as much of a concern.” 

    And while this study may have been small, it confirmed a growing body of evidence supporting the known efficacy of cannabis for a variety of ailments. In fact, there are already FDA-approved treatments for seizures associated with certain conditions, such as Lennox-Gastaut syndrome, and Dravet syndrome, both of which are rare. 

    CBD for seizures is nothing new

    The non-psychoactive CBD cannabinoid found in Marijuana was famously used in 2013 to treat seizures in Charlotte Figi, a 3-year-old from Colorado who suffered from severe, 30 minute seizures.

    The twins were 3 months old when the Figis’ lives changed forever. Charlotte had just had a bath, and Matt was putting on her diaper.

    She was laying on her back on the floor,” he said, “and her eyes just started flickering.” –CNN

    Charlotte’s doctors weren’t able to pinpoint what was going on; her blood tests and scans were all normal, telling the Figis “It is unusual in that it’s so severe, but it’s probably something she’ll grow out of.”

    As the years went on, Charlotte got worse.

    With medical and recreational marijuana having been approved in Colorado, the Figis – who had previously been against marijuana use – considered using cannabis to treat Charlotte after Matt Figis discovered an online video of a California boy whose seizures were mitigated using the alternative treatment. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    By then, Charlotte had lost the ability to walk, talk, and eat, and was having 300 grand mal seizures a week. Her heart had stopped several times, only to be resuscitated over and over.

    At just five years old, the Figis turned to CBD cannabinoid treatment as a last resort.

    “They had exhausted all of her treatment options,” said Harvard-trained physician Alan Shackelford, who added: “There really weren’t any steps they could take beyond what they had done. Everything had been tried — except cannabis.”

    The results were stunning…

    Charlotte’s recovery was dramatic. 

    “When she didn’t have those three, four seizures that first hour, that was the first sign,” Paige recalled. “And I thought well, ‘Let’s go another hour, this has got to be a fluke.’”

    The seizures stopped for another hour. And then for seven days.

    Paige said she couldn’t believe it, nor could Matt. But their supply was running out.

    Enter the Stanley Brothers

    With the Figis expensive supply of CBD oil marijuana nearly gone, one of Colorado’s largest marijuana growers, the Stanley Brothers, stepped up to create a strain of marijuana containing high levels of CBD just for Charlotte – naming it Charlotte’s web.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    “The biggest misconception about treating a child like little Charlotte is most people think that we’re getting her high, most people think she’s getting stoned,” Josh Stanley said, stressing his plant’s low THC levels. “Charlotte is the most precious little girl in the world to me. I will do anything for her.”

    Years later, Charlotte was thriving – only having 2-3 seizures per month, mostly in her sleep. Not only can she walk, but she’s was riding a bicycle, feeding herself, and talking as of CNN‘s 2013 report. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    I literally see Charlotte’s brain making connections that haven’t been made in years,” Matt said. “My thought now is, why were we the ones that had to go out and find this cure? This natural cure? How come a doctor didn’t know about this? How come they didn’t make me aware of this?”

    ***

  • Trump's Relationship To Russia & China: A Revival Of The Henry Wallace Doctrine?

    Authored by Matthew Ehret via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

    During the course of the G20 important agreements and alliances were reached between Russia-China and the USA which indicate that President Trump is not “just another neo-con” as some of his cynical detractors have claimed, but is actually working to re-orient the United States into a strategic alliance with the Eurasian superpowers. This was seen with his announced lifting of the Huawei ban on American companies, his promise to cancel the additional $300 billion in tariffs with China, his cancelling the sanctions on Turkey for its purchase of Russia’s S400 defense system (which renders a big chunk of the NATO ABM shield against Russia impotent), not to mention the president’s historic visit to North Korea’s de-militarized zone to meet with Kim Jong-un.

    While not directly discussed at the event, the melt-down of the Trans-Atlantic banking system now bursting at the seams with over $700 trillion of derivatives, and corporate debt bubble which the Bank of International Settlements is warning will be the new sub-prime junk bond meltdown was on everyone’s mind. Whether the USA would be willing to re-organize itself in harmony with the new system driven by the Belt and Road Initiative was a question which only the braindead could avoid thinking about.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    While some commentators are trying to spin this emerging re-orientation in global affairs as a mere “trick to get re-elected”, the reality goes much deeper than many realize, as Trump is merely tapping into an American strategy which was firmly established during the 1941-1944 presidential term of America’s President Franklin Delano Roosevelt and his loyal collaborator Henry A. Wallace who had planned a grand design for a US-Russia-China New world order founded upon principles enshrined in the Atlantic Charter and enunciated in his 1942 “Century of the Common Man” speech.

    Wallace’s Fight for a Just World Order

    While serving as FDR’s Vice President, Wallace wrote in his 1944 book Our Job in the Pacific: 

    It is vital to the United States, it is vital to China and it is vital to Russia that there be peaceful and friendly relations between China and Russia, China and America and Russia and America. China and Russia Complement and supplement each other on the continent of Asia and the two together complement and supplement America’s position in the Pacific.”

    In another 1944 piece Two Peoples-One Friendship (Survey Graphic Magazine), Wallace described the destiny of the US-Russia for mutual arctic development with transportation connections across the Bering Strait:

     “Of all nations, Russia has the most powerful combination of a rapidly increasing population, great natural resources and immediate expansion in technological skills. Siberia and China will furnish the greatest frontier of tomorrow… When Molotov [Russia’s Foreign Minister] was in Washington in the spring of 1942 I spoke to him about the combined highway and airway which I hope someday will link Chicago and Moscow via Canada, Alaska and Siberia. Molotov, after observing that no one nation could do this job by itself, said that he and I would live to see the day of its accomplishment. It would mean much to the peace of the future if there could be some tangible link of this sort between the pioneer spirit of our own West and the frontier spirit of the Russian East.”

    Expressing a mode of long term thinking and sensitivity to the Asian psyche rarely seen by westerners, Wallace wrote that “Asia is on the move. Asia distrusts Europe because of its “superiority complex”. We must give Asia reason to trust us. We must demonstrate to Russia and China, in particular that we have faith in the future of the Common Man in those two countries. We can be helpful to both China and Russia and in being helpful can be helpful to ourselves and to our children. In planning our relationships today with Russia and China, we must think of the world situation as it will be forty years hence.

    So What Went Wrong?

    With the early death of Franklin Roosevelt in April 1945, the nest of Wall Street lackeys (many of them Fabians and Rhodes Scholars) embedded in the American bureaucracy quickly took over under the Presidency of Harry Truman. Wallace was quickly demoted to Commerce Secretary, and the Bretton Woods institutions such as the IMF and World Bank were cleansed of all New Deal economists loyal to the Wallace-FDR vision of the post war world. This was done through the creation of a fascist police state run under the control of Hoover’s FBI and McCarthy’s House Committee on Un-American Activities which ran the witch hunt that destroyed the lives of countless patriots, labelling them as “Soviet agents”. The 1947 Security Act evoked the Executive Order 9835 that made “reasonable grounds for belief that a person is disloyal” grounds for firing someone from any government position.

    One early victim of the witch hunt was the IMF’s first director Harry Dexter White who had been accused of being a soviet spy and died in 1948 after a McCarthy hearing. Wall Street agents such as John J. McCloy, Averell Harriman, and George Keenan quickly took control of these banks and re-organized them as instruments for a neo-colonial enslavement of the world rather than as the issuers of long term productive credit which they were meant to be.

    Truman’s immediate belligerence to Russia caused the Russia cancellation of its $1.2 billion subscription to join the World Bank agreed to in 1944, and Churchill’s Iron Curtain speech enshrined the bi-polar dynamic of Mutually Assured Destruction as the bedrock of the post war age of nuclear terror. As Truman unleashed the “Truman Doctrine” of US foreign entanglements in the new Cold War against Russian expansion starting with America’s enmeshment into the Greece-Turkey conflict orchestrated by London in the Spring of 1947, Churchill said in Fulton Missouri: “Neither the sure prevention of war, nor the continuous rise of world organization will be gained without what I have called the fraternal association of the English speaking peoples. This means a special relationship between the British Commonwealth and Empire and the United States.” The Truman doctrine and Special Relationship represented the total reversal of the “community of principle” policy to avoid “foreign entanglements” advocated by George Washington, John Quincy Adams and adopted by FDR and Wallace.

    Wallace Fights Back

    Before being fired from his post as Commerce Secretary in 1946 for giving a speech calling for US-Russia friendship, Wallace warned of the emergence of a new “American fascism” which has come to be known in recent years as the Deep State.

    “Fascism in the postwar inevitably will push steadily for Anglo-Saxon imperialism and eventually for war with Russia. Already American fascists are talking and writing about this conflict and using it as an excuse for their internal hatreds and intolerances toward certain races, creeds and classes.”

    In his 1946 Soviet Asia Mission, Wallace said “Before the blood of our boys is scarcely dry on the field of battle, these enemies of peace try to lay the foundation for World War III. These people must not succeed in their foul enterprise. We must offset their poison by following the policies of Roosevelt in cultivating the friendship of Russia in peace as well as in war.

    Henry Wallace did not disappear as his enemies would have liked, but became a third party candidate for the 1948 presidency acquiring the support of leading patriots and artists, not the least of whom being the great African American activist/singer Paul Robeson who set into a motion a process that blossomed under Martin Luther King’s Civil Rights movement. Wallace’s presidential speeches are a stirring call to action which can educate and inspire today’s generation. It is a tragic reminder that the American people, having just heroically given so much to stop a global fascist movement during WWII, failed to stop the emergence of a new fascism in America itself and did not vote for Wallace when they had the chance.

    A Last Chance?

    Although John F. Kennedy did attempt to revive the spirit of FDR during his three years in office, his early assassination, (followed by those of his brother, Martin Luther King and Malcolm X), sabotaged the re-awakening of the true constitutional America.

    Decades after the assassinations of the 1960s, many cannot be blamed for having believed that all hope for America was lost. Yet in spite of this disbelief, we have found a US President at war with the same Deep State structures that took control of America over FDR’s dead body, not only meeting with the leadership of Russia, China and India but calling for good relations and an end to the age of war.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Today, the great infrastructure programs driven by credit which epitomized the New Deal under Wallace and FDR is alive in the surprising Belt and Road Initiative. Russia and China have thus found themselves in the ironic role of having become more American than the America which has ran roughshod over the world for the past half century. Whether Wallace’s dream finally be revived by a US-Russia-China alliance for a new just economic order will occur or not has not yet been answered.

  • Bay Area Home Prices Plunge In May, Largest In 7 Years

    As the overall economy cycles down through summer, real estate markets on the West Coast have materially weakened.

    A new report from CoreLogic, and also reported by The Mercury News, shows Bay Area home prices for May have experienced their most significant drop in nearly seven years.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The median price of a home in the Bay Area is about $860,000, sustained a 1.7% decline in May on a YoY basis. Momentum in sales is also fading, down 2.7% YoY, another sign the top could be in.

    “So far this year, the annual change in the Bay Area’s median sale price has been close to flat, whereas early last year the median experienced double-digit annual growth,” CoreLogic analyst Andrew LePage said.

    “This change reflects the erosion of buyer affordability after years of rising home prices and last year’s run-up in mortgage rates. The combination caused would-be buyers’ mortgage payments to far outpace income growth, pricing out some and causing others to back out of the market.”

    The Bay Area has experienced seven years of increasing prices, but as of March, sale prices YoY started to flatline. The last time this happened was in January 2012, according to CoreLogic.

    In the Bay Area’s nine counties including Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano, and Sonoma, overall existing home sales dipped by 1%.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Sales in tech-heavy and ultra-expensive San Mateo and Santa Clara counties plunged by 10% and 6%, respectively.

    Bay Area, real estate agents, have become more cautious of a deteriorating housing market since last year’s top when the median sale price hit a record of $928,000 in May 2018 but has since reversed.

    Median sale prices for existing homes dropped 5.9% to $1.27 million in Santa Clara, declined 3.2%  to $912,500 in Alameda and slid 1.5% to $1.53 million in San Francisco YoY in May.

    The recent softening in the Bay Area market has “created a window of opportunity for a lot of first-time buyers,” said Phil Kerr, CEO of multifamily developer City View.

    Ramesh Rao, an agent with Coldwell Banker in Cupertino, said sales have slowed in tech-heavy neighborhoods.

    And it was only in April when we first suggested that the Bay Area housing market experienced a ‘blow-off top,’ which would likely result in declining home prices for the quarters to come.

     

  • Jeffrey Epstein Has Been Arrested For Sex Trafficking of Minors

    Jeffrey Epstein has been arrested for allegedly sex trafficking dozens of minors in New York and Florida between 2002 and 2005, according The Daily Beast. Epstein is reportedly due to appear in court on Monday, about 12 years after the 66 year old received a slap on the wrist for allegedly molesting dozens of underage girls.

    The new charges claim that “Epstein sexually exploited dozens of underage girls in a now-familiar scheme: paying them cash for ‘massages’ and then molesting or sexually abusing them in his Upper East Side mansion or his residence in Palm Beach.”

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Epstein’s abuse allegations date back more than a decade and have been recently brought to light by his victims and authorities. Up until now, and even in the midst of the #MeToo movement, Epstein has been able to avoid any type of meaningful jail time. 

    In an era where #MeToo has toppled powerful men, Epstein’s name was largely absent from the national conversation, until the Miami Herald published a three-part series on how his wealth, power and influence shielded him from federal prosecution. For years, The Daily Beast reported on Epstein’s easy jail sentence and soft treatment by the U.S. Attorney’s Office, which ultimately scrapped a 53-page indictment against Epstein. An earlier version of Epstein’s plea deal included a 10-year federal sentence—before his star-studded lawyers threatened to go to trial in a case prosecutors feared was unwinnable, in part because Epstein’s team dredged up dirt on the victims, including social media posts indicating drug use.

    Employees and associates of Epstein allegedly recruited the girls for Epstein, and some victims also became recruiters themselves. The girls were as young as 14 and police allege that Epstein knew they were underage. Epstein’s attorney, Martin Weinberg, declined to comment Saturday night. 

    Epstein has been accused of transporting young women on his private jet to facilitate the abuse, according to his alleged victims. For more background on the allegations already made in lawsuits, and in the public domain against Epstein, read the full Daily Beast article here

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Recall, back in 2017, we wrote about former secret service agent Dan Bongino threatening to reveal new details about Bill Clinton’s 26 documented trips aboard notorious pedophile Jeffrey Epstein’s private jet, nicknamed the “Lolita Express.”

    Bongino dropped a ominous-sounding threat at the time: “…people know things not yet released publicly about your messiah Hillary. Don’t poke the bear loser, you may not like the results. #Epstein #EmailGate,” tweeted Bongino.

    For those who are unfamiliar with his story, Jeffrey Epstein is a New York City financier who pled guilty in 2008 to a single count of soliciting sex from an underage girl. He eventually spent 13 months in prison and was forced to register as a level three sex offender (considered the highest risk of re-offending) though stories of his lust for girls as young of 12 have spread like wildfire in recent years.

    Epstein allegedly installed beds in his custom jet, and also purportedly filmed powerful men during romps with underage girls to obtain materials for blackmail.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    According to Fox News, Epstein allegedly had a team of traffickers who procured girls as young as 12 to service his friends on Epstein’s “Orgy Island,” an estate on Little St. James in the US Virgin Islands. Epstein now lives permanently in the US Virgin Islands.

    Clinton chose to continue his association with Epstein even after the lurid trial, according to the Alliance to Rescue Victims of Trafficking, “everyone within his inner circles knew was a pedophile.” Speculation that Clinton was involved with Epstein was noted in “Bill Clinton Was Here”: The Elite One-Percent’s ‘Orgy Island’ Exposed.” An article by the now defunct Gawker titled “Flight Logs Put Clinton, Dershowitz on Pedophile Billionaire’s Sex Jet” added to speculation about Clinton’s troubling relationship with the convicted sex offender.

    Back in 2017, we revealed the full flight logs from Epstein’s “Lolita Express”.

  • Details Emerge In Death Of "Meth-Fueled Orgy Partying" Arab Prince In London

    The 39-year old son of the ruler of Sharjah — part of the United Arab Emirates — was found dead in London this week following what multiple reports described as a “drug-fueled orgy” in an £8-million Knightsbridge penthouse.

    Sheikh Khalid bin Sultan Al Qasimi, ‘crown prince’ of the UAE’s Sharjah emirate, was laid to rest at a funeral service Wednesday attended by UAE dignitaries and his father, Sheikh Sultan bin Muhammad Al Qasimi, but soon after staff at the London-based fashion house that Khalid founded began revealing more details of the prince’s extreme playboy lifestyle which reportedly led to his tragic death. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The crown prince threw wild drug-fueled parties and was often seen with models and celebrities, via The Daily Mail

    The Sun was the first to report earlier this week that Sheikh Khalid “may have died suddenly as a result of taking drugs” after police found an as yet unknown amount of Class A drugs at his apartment after medics were called. ‘Class A’ drugs include anything from crack cocaine to ecstasy to heroin, LSD, to crystal meth and others.

    The Sheikh was well known in wealthy London social circles as frequently hosting meth-fueled orgies filled with high-class prostitutes, according to UK media, and was known for partying “days on end”

    A staff member at the Qasimi Homme menswear brand the prince had founded told The Daily Mail:

    He enjoyed meth because it allows you to have sex for longer. It was the worst-kept secret in the office, he had a real soft spot for that drug. We always knew that he’d been taking it because he’d come into work in a particularly bad mood. His behaviour would be really erratic.”

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The UAE crown prince of Sharjah at a London Fashion Week event, via The Daily Mail.

    “On the whole, he was a nice guy, tough but fair but when he’d been up for several days at one of those parties, he could become quite a monster,” the source said of the prince’s party lifestyle. 

    The Westminster coroner’s office indicated in a statement that toxicology tests could take months as the crown prince was laid to rest in the United Arab Emirates.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Via The Daily Mail: “The Knightsbridge Apartments where the prince was found dead on Monday after a party where guests allegedly took Class A Drugs.”

    The popular prince was buried at King Faisal Mosque in Sharjah, which is the city his father rules over in the UAE.

    Sadly, his brother – who had originally been in line to succeed his father as ruler of Sharjah – had also died of a party-lifestyle in 1999 at the age of 24. He’d been found at the royal family’s £3 million English manor house in Sussex, which resulted in Khalid being named crown prince. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Via The Sun (UK)

    A female staff member who worked closely with the prince told The Daily Mail: “As you can imagine, Khalid was very popular given the amount of money he had and the type of people he knew. There was no shortage of women after him.

    “But he always treated his female staff with respect. He was an incredibly hard worker and very driven, but he also partied very hard. It’s sad, because that’s what killed him in the end,” she added. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    And another staff member, speaking anonymously to the Mail, backed up others’ testimony related to his erratic drug-induced mood swings:

    Khalid could become very unpredictable and we always knew to stay away from him after one of his famous parties. He was the boss so we couldn’t really complain to him. 

    The source followed with: “It was mainly his friends and business associates who were invited to the parties, never us. We just heard about what happened at them.”

    And another had been quoted in The Sun as follows: “Like many young Arab men, Sheik Khalid enjoyed the freedoms he had in London. But it has ended very tragically.”

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    UAE Emirs at the burial Sheikh Khalid on Wednesday, via The Daily Mail

    Though expected to eventually ascend the throne as Emir of the Emirate of Sharjah after his father, Khalid had lived in Britain since the age of nine, and pursued a fashion career. 

    He was also known for pursuing architecture and as an award-winning photographer, and was close to London’s business and celebrity elite. 

  • Russia Declares Continued Support To Venezuelan Army, Debunks "Myths"

    A month ago all appearances indicated Moscow was rapidly drawing down military support to the Venezuelan armed forces, especially given the surprisingly rapid exit of one of the largest Russian state defense contractors, Rostec; however, this week top foreign ministry officials have reaffirmed “Russia will facilitate development of Venezuela’s armed forces,” according to state sources. 

    “We will continue our multifaceted efforts on developing partner relations with brotherly Venezuela,” declared  Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov on Friday. “We will continue to implement projects in various areas, to hold events within the existing agreements that would strengthen the military potential of this country’s armed forces.”

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    In late 2018, Venezuelan Defense Minister Padrino Lopez with Russian servicemen, via state sources.

    However, Ryabkov sought to debunk what he called the “myth” of recent media headlines suggesting Russian military advisers were seeking to prop up Nicolas Maduro amid external pressures from Washington and its regional allies. Moscow has for the past half year sought to cool tensions that could turn to a new US-Russia “proxy” cold war type scenario in Latin America. 

    “Reports concerning Russia’s military presence in Venezuela have been debunked many times. I would like to stress once again that this concerns maintenance of equipment delivered there,” the deputy foreign minister declared.

    At the start of June a Wall Street Journal report was headlined, In a Blow to Maduro, Russia Withdraws Key Defense Support to Venezuela. That report noted the following:

    Russian state defense contractor Rostec, which has trained Venezuelan troops and advised on securing arms contracts, has cut its staff in Venezuela to just a few dozen, from about 1,000 at the height of cooperation between Moscow and Caracas several years ago, said a person close to the Russian defense ministry.

    The report described a “gradual pullout” which has been noticeably ramping up of late, citing sources to say further it’s due to “a lack of new contracts” and crucially “the acceptance that Mr. Maduro’s regime no longer has the cash to continue to pay for other Rostec services associated with past contracts.”

    The oil-rich but cash poor socialist country has long been deep in default on payments to international creditors, totaling in the billions owed to Russia and China alone with oil-for-debt swaps no longer able to keep up, given plummeting oil production over the past two decades since Huge Chavez’s rule. 

    But despite this, it appears Russia will remain active in Venezuela at least in terms of military hardware assistance, which notably involves S-300 anti-air missile deployment and operations outside Caracas. 

    There’s no alarm expected out of the White House over any of this information though, considering President Trump is rumored to have “given up” on pursuing regime change as he’s reportedly “bored” with meddling in this complex Latin America political climate. This despite a few months ago the president saying that “Russia has to get out” of the region amid US efforts to install opposition leader Juan Guaido as “interim president”. 

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Today’s News 6th July 2019

  • Another, Even Bigger, Quake Just Hit Southern California, Gas Leaks/Fires Reported

    Update (1145ET): Less than 12 hours after seisomologist Lucy Jones warned of another large quake, a massive 7.1 quake just hit 17km NNE of Ridgecrest.

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

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    This continues the swarm of aftershocks that has hit all day… (Seismologists at Cal Tech said Friday afternoon that there had been around 1,400 aftershocks since Thursday’s 6.4-magnitude quake, with 17 of those with a magnitude of 4 or above.)

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The quake hit at 2319ET less than 24 hours after the largest quake (6.4) in over 20 years struck the same region.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    It was big enough to felt on the east coast…

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

    The news and accompanying video started to surface on Twitter at around 11:30pm EST on Friday night. The Dodgers even played their baseball game through the quake: 

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

    One person on social media reported feeling dizzy and his dog threw up. Chandeliers and hanging plants swayed. Pools sloshed. Electrical wires rocked.

    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

    Even Northern California residents noted their pools making waves and Vegas residents felt the shake.

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

    NBC LA reports gas leaks and fires have been reported.

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

    Friday night, the power went out in Ridgecrest, a city of 27,600, around 100 miles north of Los Angeles, according to NBC reporters in the area.

    The San Bernardino County Fire District tweeted that calls were coming in from northwestern communities and that people were reporting “homes shifted, foundation cracks, retaining walls down.”

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

    The fire district reported one minor injury and said firefighters were treating the patient. “No unmet needs currently,” the fire department said.

    A major rockslide occurred…

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

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

    *  *  *

    As we detailed earlier, the strongest earthquake to hit southern California in nearly 2 decades has also resulted in an unusual number of aftershocks, seismologists are saying. The quake has already prompted one city to declare a state of emergency Thursday and affected residents from Las Vegas to Orange County, according to the Mercury News.

    The quake registered a 6.4 on the Richter scale and was centered about 150 miles north of Los Angeles. An astounding 159 aftershocks of magnitude 2.5 or greater have been recorded already. This is a higher than normal, with the largest aftershocks registering at 4.6.

    Seismologist Lucy Jones called it a “robust” series of aftershocks and says there’s a 50% chance of another large quake in the next week. She also said there is a 1 in 20 chance that a bigger earthquake will hit within the next few days.

    She commented that earthquakes actually increase the risk of future quakes.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Jones said:

    “It’s certain that this area is going to be shaking a lot today, and some of those aftershocks will probably exceed magnitude 5.”

    “Plate tectonics hasn’t suddenly stopped; it is still pushing Los Angeles toward San Francisco at the same rate your fingernails grow — about 1.5 inches each year… Their motion cannot be stopped any more than we could turn off the sun,” Jones wrote in her recent book.

    Earthquake scientists Ross Stein and Volkan Sevilgen, writing on their blog at Temblor.net said that this quake may have just made things worse for the area. 

    The two wrote that they believe that parts of three other faults — in remote areas of California — were actually “brought closer to failure by the 4th July quake.”

    The area hit by Thursday’s quake likely became loaded with more seismic strain after two previous temblors — the 1872 Owens Valley and the 1992 Landers earthquakes.

    The earthquake, now named the Searles Valley Quake, was preceded by 4.2 magnitude foreshock.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    This has caused the city of Ridgecrest to declare a state of emergency, with the mayor citing five fires and broken gas lines as part of the city’s problems. There were also power outages that affected 28,000 residents. Meanwhile, the forecasted high temperature for the area is 100° today.

    Near the epicenter of the quake, the fire department responded to more than 20 incidents, including fires and medical emergencies. Ridgecrest Regional Hospital was evacuated and about 15 patients from the emergency room were taken to another hospital. The facility is currently being inspected.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    One nearby resident said of the earthquake: “We were panicked trying to get out of the house because everything is falling out of the cabinets, off the shelves, off the walls. … They were flying like missiles off the shelves.”

    Another, directing a Fourth of July kids program, said that the quake startled the 65 children on stage. “It was terrifying,” she said.

    Many residents near the area upset because the city’s smartphone app – set up to warn of quakes – didn’t send a warning in advance.

    The earthquake was also felt in Las Vegas. It was the largest quake to hit southern California since 1999, when a 7.1 earthquake hit in the Mojave Desert. In 1994, a 6.7 magnitude quake hit Los Angeles, causing $25 billion in damage.

  • Escobar: The Un-Submersible US-Iran Stalemate

    Authored by Pepe Escobar via The Asia Times,

    Lost in the submarine uproar, the deadline set by Tehran for the EU-3 to support Iranian crude sales expires Sunday…

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    A thick veil of mystery surrounds the fire that broke out in a state of the art Russian submersible in the Barents Sea, leading to the death of 14 crew members poisoned by toxic fumes.

    According to the Russian Defense Ministry, the submersible was conducting bathymetric measurements, as in examining and mapping deep sea conditions. The crew on board was composed of “unique naval specialists, high-class professionals, who conducted important research of the Earth’s hydrosphere.” Now the – so far unnamed – nuclear-powered vessel is at the Arctic port of Severomorsk, the main base of Russia’s Northern Fleet.

    A serious, comprehensive military investigation is in progress. According to the Kremlin, “the Supreme Commander-in-Chief has all the information, but this data cannot be made public, because this refers to the category of absolutely classified data.”

    The submersible is a LosharikIts Russian code is AS-12 (for “Atomnaya Stantsiya” or “Nuclear Station“). NATO calls it Norsub-5. It’s been in service since 2003. Giant Delta III nuclear submarines, also able to launch ICBMs, have been modified to transport the submersible across the seas.

    NATO’s spin is that the AS-12/Norsub-5 is a “spy” sub, and a major “threat” to undersea telecommunication cables, mostly installed by the West. The submersible’s operating depth is 1,000 meters and it may have operated as deep as 2,500 meters in the Arctic Ocean. It may be comparable to, or be something of an advanced version of, the US deep submergence vessel NR-1 (operating depth 910m) famous for being used to search for and recover critical parts of the space shuttle Challenger, lost in 1986.

    It’s quite enlightening to place the Losharik within the scope of the latest Pentagon report about Russian strategic intentions. Amid the proverbial demonization terminology – “Russia’s gray zone tactics,” “Russian aggression.” Russian “deep-seated sense of geopolitical insecurity” – the report claims that “Russia is adopting coercive strategies that involve the orchestrated employment of military and nonmilitary means to deter and compel the US, its allies and partners prior to and after the outbreak of hostilities. These strategies must be proactively confronted, or the threat of significant armed conflict may increase.”

    It’s no wonder that, considering the incandescence of US-Russia relations on the geopolitical chessboard, what happened to the Losharik fueled frenetic speculation  including totally unsubstantiated rumors it had been torpedoed by a US submarine in a firefight – on top of it, in Russian territorial waters.

    Connections were made between US Vice-President Mike Pence’s suddenly being ordered to return to the White House while the Europeans were also huddled in Brussels, as President Putin had an emergency meeting with Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu.

    In the end, it was nothing but mere speculation.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Submersible incident

    The submersible incident – complete with the speculative plot line of a US-Russia firefight in the Arctic – did drown, at least for a while, the prime, current geopolitical incandescence: the US economic war on Iran.

    Expanding on serious discussions at the Shanghai Cooperation Organization summit in Bishkek – which included Iran’s President Rouhani – and the Putin-Xi meetings in Moscow and St. Petersburg and at the G20 in Osaka, both Russia and China are fully invested in keeping Iran stable and protected from the Trump administration’s strategy of chaos.

    Both Moscow and Beijing are fully aware Washington’s divide-and-rule tactics are geared towards stopping the momentum of Eurasia integration – which includes everything from bilateral trade in local currencies and bypassing the US dollar to further interconnection of the New Silk Roads, or Belt and Road Initiative, the Eurasia Economic Union (EAEU) and the International North-South Transportation Corridor (INSTC).

    Beijing plays a shadow game, keeping very quiet on the de facto US economic blockade against one of its key Belt and Road allies. Yet the fact is China continues to buy Iranian crude, and bilateral trade is being settled in yuan and rial.

    The Instrument in Support of Trade Exchanges (INSTEX), the mechanism set up by the EU-3 (France, UK and Germany) to bypass the US dollar for trade between Iran and the EU after the US unilaterally abandoned the nuclear deal, or JCPOA, may finally be in place. But there’s no evidence INSTEX will be adopted by myriad European companies, as it essentially covers Iranian purchases of food and medicine.

    Plan B would be for the Russian Central Bank to extend access to Iran as one the nations possibly adopting SPFS (System for Transfer of Financial Messages), the Russian mechanism for trade sanctioned by the US that bypasses SWIFT. Moscow has been working on the SPFS since 2104, when the threat to expel Russia from SWIFT became a distinct possibility.

    As for Iran being accused – by the US – of “breaching” the JCPOA, that’s absolute nonsense. To start with, Tehran cannot possibly “breach” a multinational deal that was declared null and void by one of the signatories, the US.

    In fact the alleged “breach” is due to the fact the EU-3 were not buying Iran’s low-enriched uranium, as promised, because of the US embargo. Washington has de facto forced the EU-3 not to buy it. Tehran duly notified all JCPOA parties that, as they are not buying it, Iran will have to store more low enriched uranium than the JCPOA allows for. If the EU-3 resumes buying it that automatically means Iran is not “breaching” anything.

    Cliffhanger

    Iranian foreign minister Javad Zarif is correct; INSTEX, already too little too late, is not even enoughas the mechanism does not allow Tehran to continue to export oil, which is the nation’s right. As for the “breach,” Zarif says it’s easily “reversible” – as long as the EU-3 abide by their commitments.

    Russian energy minister Alexander Novak concurs: “As regards restrictions on Iranian exports, we support Iran and we believe that the sanctions are unlawful; they have not been approved by the UN.”

    Still, Iran continues to export crude, by all means available, especially to Asia, with the National Iranian Oil Co (NIOC) predictably shutting off satellite tracking on its fleet. But, ominously, the deadline set by Tehran for the EU-3 to actively support the sale of Iranian crude expires this coming Sunday. That’s a major cliffhanger. After that, the stalemate won’t be submersible anymore.

  • How Advanced Robotics Will Impact Job Markets

    Robots are set to have a major impact on workforces around the world over the coming years with jobs involving routine manual activity most at risk from automation.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    As Statista’s Niall McCarthy notes, in order to gauge how the adoption of advanced robotics will affect the labor market, the Boston Consulting Group carried out a survey of executives and managers from 1,314 global companies in early 2019.

    Infographic: How Advanced Robotics Will Impact Job Markets | Statista

    You will find more infographics at Statista

    The research found that 67 percent of Chinese companies are expecting a reduction in the number of employees due to automation, along with 60 percent in Poland and 57 percent in Japan. Some companies are more at risk than others with only 34 percent of organizations in Italy expecting reductions by comparison.

  • Power Versus The Press: The Extradition Cases Of Pinochet & Assange

    Authored by Disobedient Media’s Elizabeth Vos, via ConsortiumNews.com,

    With Julian Assange facing possible extradition from Britain to the U.S. for publishing classified secrets, it is worth reflecting on the parallel but divergent case of a notorious Chilean dictator

    Eight months from now one of the most consequential extradition hearings in recent history will take place in Great Britain when a British court and the home secretary will determine whether WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange will be extradited to the United States to face espionage charges for the crime of journalism.

    Twenty-one years ago, in another historic extradition case, Britain had to decide whether to send former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet to Spain for the crime of mass murder.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Pinochet in 1982 motorcade. (Ben2, CC BY-SA 3.0, via Wikimedia Commons)

    In October 1998, Pinochet, whose regime became a byword for political killings, “disappearances” and torture, was arrested in London while there for medical treatment.

    A judge in Madrid,  Baltasar Garzón, sought his extradition in connection with the deaths of Spanish citizens in Chile.

    Citing the aging Pinochet’s inability to stand trial, the United Kingdom in 2000 ultimatelyprevented him from being extradited to Spain where he would have faced prosecution for human rights abuses.

    At an early point in the proceedings, Pinochet’s lawyer, Clare Montgomery, made an argument in his defense that had nothing to do with age or poor health.   

    “States and the organs of state, including heads of state and former heads of state, are entitled to absolute immunity from criminal proceedings in the national courts of other countries,” the  Guardianquoted Montgomery as saying. She argued that crimes against humanity should be narrowly defined within the context of international warfare, as the BBC reported.

    Montgomery’s immunity argument was overturned by the House of Lords. But the extradition court ruled that the poor health of Pinochet, a friend of former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, would prevent him from being sent to Spain.

    Same Participants

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Assange in 2014, while in the Ecuadorian Embassy. (Cancillería del Ecuador, CC BY-SA 2.0, via Wikimedia Commons)

    Though the cases of Pinochet and Assange are separated by more than two decades, two of the participants are the same, this time playing very different roles.

    Montgomery reappeared in the Assange case to argue on behalf of a Swedish prosecutor’s right to seek a European arrest warrant for Assange.

    Her argument ultimately failed. ASwedish court recently denied the European arrest warrant. But as in the Pinochet case, Montgomery helped buy time, this time allowing Swedish sexual allegations to persist and muddy Assange’s reputation.

    Garzón, the Spanish judge, who had requested Pinochet’s extradition, also reappears in Assange’s case.  He is a well-known defender of human rights, “viewed by many as Spain’s most courageous legal watchdog and the scourge of bent politicians and drug warlords the world over,” as the The Independent described him a few years ago.

    He now leads Assange’s legal team.

    Friends and Enemies

    The question that stands out is whether the British legal system will let a notorious dictator like Pinochet go but send a publisher such as Assange to the United States to face life in prison.

    The tide of political sentiment has been running against Assange.

    Before the U.K. home secretary signed the U.S. extradition request for Assange, leading to the magistrate’s court setting up a five-day hearing at the end of February 2020, British lawmakers publicly urged that the case against Assange proceed. Few elected officials have defended Assange (his image tainted by the unproven Swedish allegations and criticism about the 2016 U.S. election that have nothing to do with the extradition request).

    Pinochet, by contrast, had friends in high places. Thatcher openly called for his release.

    “[Pinochet] reportedly made a habit of sending chocolates and flowers to [Thatcher] during his twice-yearly visits to London and took tea with her whenever possible. Just two weeks before his arrest, General Pinochet was entertained by the Thatchers at their Chester Square address in London,” the BBCreported.  CNN reported on the “famously close relationship.”

    Similar affection was also documented between Pinochet and former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger. The Nation reported on a declassified memo of a private conversation in Santiago, Chile, in June 1976, that revealed “Kissinger’s expressions of ‘friendship,’ ‘sympathetic’ understanding and wishes for success to Pinochet at the height of his repression, when many of those crimes – torture, disappearances, international terrorism – were being committed.”

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Pinochet, left, greeting Kissinger in 1976. (Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores de Chile, CC BY 2.0, via Wikimedia Commons)

    Systematic, Widespread Abuse

    Pinochet rose to power following a U.S.-backed, violent coup by the Chilean army on Sept. 11, 1973, which ousted the country’s democratically-elected president, the socialist Salvador Allende. The couphas been called “one of the most brutal in modern Latin American history.”

    The CIA funded operations in Chile with millions of U.S. tax dollars both before and after Allende’s election, the 1975 U.S. Senate Church Committee reported. 

    Although the Church Committee report found no evidence of the agency directly funding the coup, theNational Security Archive noted that the CIA “actively supported the military Junta after the overthrow of President Allende. Many of Pinochet’s officers were involved in systematic and widespread human rights abuses. Some of these were contacts or agents of the CIA or US military.”

    The violence Pinochet inflicted spilled over the borders of Chile. His orders for murder have been linked to the killing of an exiled Chilean dissident, Orlando Letelier, in a car bomb blast on U.S. soil. The attack also killed Ronni Moffitt, a U.S. citizen.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Villa Grimaldi, one of the largest torture centers during the Pinochet military dictatorship. (CC BY 2.5 via Wikimedia Commons)

    More than 40,000 people, many only tangentially tied to dissidents, were “disappeared,” tortured or killed during Pinochet’s 17-year reign of terror.

    Pinochet’s Chile almost immediately after the coup became the laboratory for the Chicago School’s economic theory of neoliberalism, or a new laissez-faire, enforced at the point of a gun.  Thatcher and President Ronald Reagan championed a system of privatization, free trade, cuts to social services and deregulation of banking and business that has led to the greatest inequality in a century.

    By contrast to these crimes and corruption, Assange has published thousands of classified documents showing U.S. and other nations’ officials engaged in the very acts of crime and corruption. 

    Yet it is far from certain that Assange will receive the leniency from the British extradition process that Pinochet enjoyed.

    After the dictator’s death, Christopher Hitchens wrote that the U.S. Department of Justice had an indictment for Pinochet completed for some time. “But the indictment has never been unsealed,” Hitchens reported in Slate.

    Assange’s indictment, by contrast, was not only unsealed, more charges were heaped on.

    Given the longstanding difficulties he has had accessing justice, it’s fair to say that the U.K. and the rest of the Western world are committing a slow-motion “enforced disappearance” of Assange.

  • Carmageddon Continues: New Vehicle Sales Plunge To "Horribly Mature" 1999 Levels

    The auto industry continues to look like a bursting bubble in progress and all around sad state of affairs, despite low rates and the “prosperity” of the stock market hitting new all time highs. Meanwhile, under the surface of those numbers, the actual economy – especially in autos – is telling a different story.

    New vehicle deliveries, combining fleet sales and retail sales, were down 1.5% in Q2 to 4.5 million vehicles, according to Wolf Street.

    For the first half of the year, vehicle deliveries fell 2.4% to 8.4 million vehicles. This puts the pace for new vehicle sales on track to fall below 17 million for the year, which would be the worst level since 2014. Further, it has lowered estimates for the full year to 16.95 million units delivered, on par with a “horribly mature market” in 1999. In addition to a struggling consumer, these lowered estimates are also result of rising interest rates and competition from off-lease vehicles. 

    This has resulted, simply, in fewer customers splurging on new cars.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    As we noted on Friday morning, it’s likely Ford and General Motors are breaking a sweat after the latest slate of economic data hit the wires. Though its overall truck sales held up, those of Ford’s signature F-Series pickup truck fell over last year in June. GM was not as fortunate with sales of its Silverado and Sierra trucks down, especially on the heavy-duty side of the line-up. With the caveat that fleet sales can indeed be trucks and comprised 24% of Fiat Chrysler’s June sales, Ram pickups were nonetheless the standout as a fresh redesign and fat incentives drove sales up over 2018.

    Ford’s sales fell 4.1% in Q2. Car sales at Ford plunged another 21.4% to just 110,195 units, as customers continue to favor new pick up trucks, SUVs and vans instead. Truck sales rose 7.5% but F-series pickups fell 1.3%, cannibalized by Ford’s midsized pick up, the Ranger. However, even the company’s SUV sales look ugly – they fell 8.6% to 215,898 units.

    According to newly released data on Friday, Ford also posted an abysmal quarter in China, selling a total of 154,042 vehicles in the second quarter, a 21.7% decrease compared to the same period last year. 

    General Motors saw sales fall 1.5% in Q2 after plunging 7% in Q1. Fiat Chrysler sales fell 0.5% in Q2 and the company announced that it will abandon reporting deliveries on a monthly basis, following in the footsteps of Ford and GM. Here’s a better look at Q2 numbers for most auto makers:

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    No matter how you look at it, 2019 has been ugly:

    • Year to date, Toyota Motor sales are down 3.1% to 1,152,108 vehicles.

    • Year to date, Honda Motor sales have fallen 1.4% to 776,995 vehicles.

    • Year to date, Nissan sales are down 8.2% to 717,036 vehicles.

    • Year to date, Fiat Chrysler sales are down 2% to 1,096,110 vehicles.

    • Year to date, total GM auto sales in the U.S. are down 4.2% to 1,412,499.

    • Over the first half of 2019, total Ford sales are down 2.9% to 1,240,585.

    To try and continue capitalizing on truck demand, automakers are flooding the market “with efficient and restructured versions of pickup trucks”. And the industry – not unlike most market participants across all sectors in general – is hoping for help from the Fed. A rate cut this summer could help drive more business to dealerships heading into the middle of the third quarter. 

    Recall, we reported just days ago that more than 25% of June’s 41,977 announced job cuts came in the automotive industry, according to Managing Economist for Refinitiv Jeoff Hall. Hall commented on Twitter that the industry’s 10,904 redundancies were the most in seven months and the second most in seven years.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Hall also noted that excluding autos, there were only 31,073 job cuts in June, the fewest in 11 months, in low-normal range.

    About a month ago we focused on layoffs in the auto industry, noting that China, the United Kingdom, Germany, Canada and the United States have all seen at least 38,000 job cuts over the last six months.

    Recall, at the beginning of June we noted that Bank of America had said that “the auto cycle had peaked”. 

    While Bank of America attributed much of the downturn in the manufacturing sector to the ongoing trade war, it singled out the automotive industry as a specific area for concern. Calling the problem a “classic story of demand/supply mismatch”, the bank pointed out that producers continue to ramp up output at a time when demand has softened. It’s easy to see in the two following charts – one showing auto sales topping out and the other showing output and production not falling.

     

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

  • Why Gold Is Money: A Periodic Perspective

    Authord by Nicholas LePan via Visual Capitalist,

    The economist John Maynard Keynes famously called gold a “barbarous relic”, suggesting that its usefulness as money is an artifact of the past. In an era filled with cashless transactions and hundreds of cryptocurrencies, this statement seems truer today than in Keynes’ time.

    However, gold also possesses elemental properties that has made it an ideal metal for money throughout history.

    Sanat Kumar, a chemical engineer from Columbia University, broke down the periodic table to show why gold has been used as a monetary metal for thousands of years.

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    The Periodic Table

    The periodic table organizes 118 elements in rows by increasing atomic number (periods) and columns (groups) with similar electron configurations.

    Just as in today’s animation, let’s apply the process of elimination to the periodic table to see why gold is money:

    • Gases and Liquids
      Noble gases (such as argon and helium), as well as elements such as hydrogen, nitrogen, oxygen, fluorine and chlorine are gaseous at room temperature and standard pressure. Meanwhile, mercury and bromine are liquids. As a form of money, these are implausible and impractical.

    • Lanthanides and Actinides
      Next, lanthanides and actinides are both generally elements that can decay and become radioactive. If you were to carry these around in your pocket they could irradiate or poison you.

    • Alkali and Alkaline-Earth Metals
      Alkali and alkaline earth metals are located on the left-hand side of the periodic table, and are highly reactive at standard pressure and room temperature. Some can even burst into flames.

    • Transition, Post Transition Metals, and Metalloids
      There are about 30 elements that are solid, nonflammable, and nontoxic. For an element to be used as money it needs to be rare, but not too rare. Nickel and copper, for example, are found throughout the Earth’s crust in relative abundance.

    • Super Rare and Synthetic Elements
      Osmium only exists in the Earth’s crust from meteorites. Meanwhile, synthetic elements such as rutherfordium and nihonium must be created in a laboratory.

    Once the above elements are eliminated, there are only five precious metals left: platinum, palladium, rhodium, silver and gold. People have used silver as money, but it tarnishes over time. Rhodium and palladium are more recent discoveries, with limited historical uses.

    Platinum and gold are the remaining elements. Platinum’s extremely high melting point would require a furnace of the Gods to melt back in ancient times, making it impractical. This leaves us with gold. It melts at a lower temperature and is malleable, making it easy to work with.

    Gold as Money

    Gold does not dissipate into the atmosphere, it does not burst into flames, and it does not poison or irradiate the holder. It is rare enough to make it difficult to overproduce and malleable to mint into coins, bars, and bricks. Civilizations have consistently used gold as a material of value.

    Perhaps modern societies would be well-served by looking at the properties of gold, to see why it has served as money for millennia, especially when someone’s wealth could disappear in a click.

  • Japan Is Once Again Inflating A Massive Real Estate Bubble

    Real estate firms in Japan are once again “entering dangerous territory,” according to Bloomberg. S&P Global Ratings said on Friday that the sector’s debt levels are now higher than the nation’s bubble era.

     

    It is bringing back memories of the 1980s, when the grounds of the Tokyo Imperial Palace were being proclaimed as more valuable than all of the real estate in California. This proclamation was then famously followed by a quarter of a century of stagnation in the country’s real estate sector. 

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    S&P said:

    Japan’s real estate market is peaking out and ready to head down. Although the conditions in the office leasing market are solid, there are signs of a slowdown in corporate earnings, particularly among manufacturers. In addition, we expect major upticks in central Tokyo office building supply in 2020 and 2023.”

    <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

    Companies that are said to be most at risk include Mitsubishi Estate Co., Mitsui Fudosan Co., Sumitomo Realty & Development Co. and Nomura Real Estate Holdings Inc.

    Low interest rates in Japan haven’t prevented domestic lenders from seeing their profitability weaken, mostly due to lower net interest margins. These lenders have increased loans to developers because demand from other corporate customers is relatively weak.

    This, in turn, has prompted developers to take on large redevelopment projects and acquisitions. S&P thinks that financial leverage in the sector is only going to increase as firms use more debt to finance its growth.

    S&P concluded: 

    “If banks reduce their loans to real-estate companies as financial conditions deteriorate, they could pull down property prices and push up debt financing costs. This, in turn, could worsen the financial standing of real estate majors.”

    1. Corporate America's Virtue-Signaling Is Opportunist, Dangerous, And Undermines The Spirit Of Capitalism

      Authored by Robert Bridge via RT.com,

      Once upon a time, the raison d’être of US companies was to simply make a buck. Those days are long gone. Today, corporations are in the business of radicalizing the country by taking sides in cultural standoffs.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      Just in time for the Fourth of July festivities, which this year celebrates the 243rd anniversary of America’s independence, Nike decided to ignite a political firestorm the size of a Chinese fireworks factory, thereby further dividing the nation.

      The Fortune 500 tennis shoe maker, with $30 billion in annual global sales, announced it would cancel the release of its ‘Air Max 1’ trainers after former NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick told the company “he and others” found the Betsy Ross-era flag that adorned the sneaker “offensive.” Why? Because the symbol was stitched at a time when slavery was still part of the fledgling nation’s experience. And since a handful of right-wing ‘white supremacist’ groups have reportedly been seen waving this flag (as well as former President Barack Obama, incidentally), which celebrates the original 13 US colonies and their successful fight against the British crown, suddenly it is deemed toxic and unworthy of the mighty Nike.

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

      According to this warped logic, anything that came to fruition when slavery was still a thing – up to and including the Declaration of Independence, signed on July 4, 1776 – is eligible for eradication in history’s great dumpster fire.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      So who is Colin Kaepernick, and why should Nike kneel to his demands? It might be better to say what Kaepernick is not. He is not a historian, he is not a marketing executive, and he is not even a professional football player. Today, Kaepernick could best be described as an activist and an agitator. In 2017, after a year of refusing to stand during the US national anthem in protest against police brutality, he opted out of his NFL contract, eventually settling with the league in a confidential agreement rumored to be worth many millions of dollars.

      Incidentally, the ex-athlete starred in a 2018 Nike ad where he was featured before a huge American flag as the narrator said, “Believe in something even if it means sacrificing everything.” Does “sacrificing everything” include the very country of your birth, as well as the very flag it represents? Is that really the sort of controversial message a US corporation, built on the solid foundation of American freedom and ingenuity, should be endorsing?

      In any case, the bigger question here has little to do with Colin Kaepernick. The real question is: why do so many US corporations feel the need to take sides in the nation’s ongoing culture wars, triggered by political correctness and ‘social justice’ theory gone stark-raving mad? After all, this is not the first time America has passed through the fires of an existential challenge without the need for corporate sponsorship. In the 1960s and 70s, the country nearly tore itself apart during the anti-Vietnam War and Civil Rights battles, when violence on the streets between protesters and police was a daily occurrence. These social volcanoes brought to the surface a number of great orators and leaders, like Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X, individuals who did not cheapen their messages and work by appearing on TV with a Coca Cola, for example, or Nike footwear.

      Without subscribing to any absurd Illuminati conspiracy theories, it would seem that the largest US corporations have an agenda that goes far beyond the simple capitalistic ambition of turning a profit. Much like the Silicon Valley titans of tech, many Fortune 500 companies simply cannot resist expressing their political views, especially in these turbulent ‘Times of Trump’ when so many otherwise intelligent people have lost their minds. After all, what could be the purpose of a corporation endorsing a fiercely contestable message that alienates at least 50 percent of the American population, not to mention their consumer base? 

      The Gillette Company provides perhaps the best example of a corporation abandoning its primary mission – in this case, selling razor blades and shaving cream – to endear itself to the social warrior lunatic fringe.

      Despite a massive public outcry (1.4 million thumbs down and counting) following Gillette’s puke-inducing lecture ad on ‘toxic masculinity’ which showed American men abandoning their backyard barbecues en masse to (finally) teach their malevolent male offspring that bullying is bad, they waded back into the deep end of the public swimming pool, this time to make a pitch for transgender lifestyles. Without venturing into the politics of the idea, which essentially says that men and women can become the opposite sex regardless of their biological sex at birth, it is enough to wonder exactly what the company hopes to gain by appealing to an infinitesimal segment of the population that risks – once again – alienating millions of dedicated consumers who just want a close shave.  

      Even ice cream companies now feel the need to flash their political identities while diving headlong into the cultural bloodbath. Ben & Jerry’s ice cream, for example, last year unveiled their ‘Pecan Resist’ brand, handcrafted to appeal to those Americans who are “fighting President Trump’s regressive agenda.” Yum! And just like that, the subsidiary of the globe-straddling Unilever Corporation alienated millions of US Republicans who just want to enjoy a good bowl of ice cream, much like their Democratic counterparts. Again, the question must be asked: what kind of corporate strategy actively aims to lose half of its consumer base? Or have these corporations morphed into such vast money-making empires that they can afford to not give a good damn?

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

      In these dizzying days of political correctness a company can get embroiled in a cultural imbroglio without even trying. In 2012, for example, Jack Phillips, the proud owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop in Lakewood Colorado, refused to make a wedding cake for a gay couple over his religious convictions. The couple sued and the case went all the way to the Supreme Court. Phillips was eventually found within his rights to refuse the request on the basis of the freedom of expression. That is a far cry, however, from a Fortune 500 company that actively dumps its ‘personal beliefs’ on the political landscape.

      For better or for worse, corporations today have come to dominate nearly every aspect of our waking hours, to the point that it is nearly impossible to imagine performing the simplest tasks without them. Now it seems these monstrosities have become confident enough in their economic and political power that they can lecture consumers on modern issues now dividing the nation. That approach seems to have very little in common with the spirit of capitalism, itself a complicated and controversial project, without the need for gratuitous virtue signaling that exasperates so many people.

      Considering everything that is at stake, it would seem far more expedient for corporations to stick to the capitalist credo of making a profit and distance themselves from the cultural battles now raging across the land. Nothing less than the very survival of American democracy, which provides the groundwork for free markets and capitalism, is at stake.

    2. Technological Dependence And The End Of Freedom

      Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.com,

      Technology can be dazzling but also debilitating to real human progress, and when I say “progress” I do not mean advancements in the world of machines but advancements in the world of people, and one does not necessarily lead to the other.

      <!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>

      First, I fully recognize that whenever anyone attempts to criticize technological innovation they take the risk of being labeled a “crackpot” or an “outdated fossil”, a barbaric relic of a foregone era. However, this attitude is an ignorant one. It assumes that the path we are on as a species is one of perpetual improvement as long as we continue to follow the great technology god; but what if this assumption is completely wrong? What if we are actually devolving rather than evolving?

      I’m not here to grunt and shake my spear at the wheel and the combustion engine and the programmable computer – I like all these things. But, what I don’t like is the dark future I see when humanity turns machinery into a great metal, polymer and digital “nurse maid” and we lose our ability to take care of ourselves. Dependency is the cornerstone of slavery, and our civilization is becoming increasingly dependent.

      In my time on this earth I have had the privilege and suffered the pain of watching the digital age come to fruition. I’ve witnessed the creation of the home computer, the birth of the internet, the proliferation of cellular technology, and now the spread of “artificial intelligence” and 5G. I have also seen the decay of an entire generation of millennials into uselessness and despondency, lacking any practical skills of production or survival and completely reliant on digital technology for everything, including building up illusions of friendship and intimacy. I have witnessed the pussification of America.

      The counterarguments against this will vary. Some will say that our society has simply become more convenient and more comfortable, and this is a good thing. Others will claim that skeptics like myself are afraid of the social changes that come with the globalization that the digital age brings. Still, others will maintain that centralization and dependency are “natural” extensions of man’s evolution; that it is inevitable and so we should embrace it.

      These are also the classic arguments of the Futurists, a subculture of ideological zealots who believe that all old ideas and ways of living must be treated as obsolete and thrown out to make way for all new ideas and ways of living. The notion is that all new ideas are an automatic improvement; that each new generation is superior to the one before it as they supposedly have access to more knowledge, and thus they are more wise. But knowledge is not the same thing as wisdom and it is often misused to achieve rather brutal and vulgar goals.

      What the futurists will never admit is that there are very few new ideas in the world, only old ideas rehashed and recycled and repainted to look different. In the grand scheme of history, freedom as an idea is very old, but it’s social application on a grand scale is something entirely new. Centralization, whether by force, manipulation or technological entrapment, is hardly a revolutionary concept. It is the oldest of philosophies.

      The trend today indicates a path to swift centralization, and according to the evidence this is not a natural progression but the consequence of a deliberate agenda by elitist groups that wish to remain in power for centuries to come. The advent of many technologies today is not necessarily the problem, it is how these technologies are being applied in our society that is infantilizing the masses.

      Let’s discuss some specific examples…

      Communication Overload

      Cell technology and the internet have changed the world. With a web connected computer in your pocket, you will always be able to communicate with others, you will rarely get lost, and you can even record video of everywhere you go and everything you do – instant memories. Who knows how much time this technology has added to a person’s day, or how many lives it has saved. But let’s consider the darker side…

      First, attention spans of Western nations have shortened to less than that of goldfish since 2002; right around the time that cell phone and internet use began to explode. According to overall research the average person now spends up to 4 hours a day just looking at their cell phone, and combined with daily social media use at home and at work I expect that this number increases dramatically. In fact, American adults spend approximately 11 hours per day interacting with various media. That’s most of their waking life being distracted by minutia.

      The parts of the world that have instant access to this technology are being zombified and they don’t seem to realize it. Over-saturation of information and instant gratification trigger an oxytocin and dopamine response in the human brain similar to the response we get when we socialize normally, but there is evidence to suggest that the strength of human interaction has a lot to do with the level of pleasure we receive through a dopamine response.  Social media interactions are a poor proxy for real relationships. So, social media creates a near constant flow of dopamine, but also weaker and less significant. This has led to a new form of addiction, perhaps more invasive than any chemical drug in existence.

      Interaction with other human beings without social media or instant gratification has become unthinkable, but the real world does not function according to personal whims, and so, people have begun to discard time when functioning away from the web; they become grossly impatient, like small children.   When forced to do the “remedial tasks” that are required for survival they grow frustrated and complacent.  They avoid the pauses or quiet moments in life, refusing to ponder experiences and explore the deeper meaning behind the events they read about briefly each day in their news feeds. All the information is at their fingertips, but they have no clue how to absorb it and apply it critically.

      Inviting The Watchers Into Your Home

      People do a lot of stupid things in the name of convenience, including opening their homes to surveillance and tyranny under the guise of easy living. While a cell phone is essentially a listening device, video surveillance device and tracking device in your pocket that governments and corporations can exploit anytime they wish, the problems do not stop there. The future of technology is fully interconnected homes in which everything is digital and everything is linked to the “internet of things”.

      We have seen some of this exposed recently with controversies over Amazon’s Alexa tech, which is essentially a large and sensitive listening device which people pay for with their own money and voluntarily place in the middle of their homes. Amazon has been caught on multiple occasions collecting vast amounts of data from their Alexa network, including recordings of customer conversations which employees and even the government then have access to.

      But this is a less subtle example. Consider having ALL your home appliances linked to the web and what this would mean? Government surveillance of daily electrical usage and appliance usage; which means they would know when you are home and what you are doing at all times. This might not seem like a big deal if you think you “have nothing to hide”, but in a world where carbon Nazis are attempting to dictate every aspect of our lives over fraudulent global warming claims, your electrical usage might become a legal issue one day. Not to mention, if every single device in your home is voice activated for convenience, then this means your every private word becomes subject to bureaucratic scrutiny.

      Take this a step further and consider a society in which digital connection is required in order to live.  Cryptocurrencies and blockchain technology are building the foundation for a cashless economic system in which privacy in trade becomes a long forgotten memory.  Every transaction can be tracked, and and monitored.  And while crypto is being sold to the public as “decentralization”, the reality is that it is even more centralized than fiat currency, as all trade must flow through a government and corporate dominated internet and be recorded on the blockchain in order for the cryptocurrency to proliferate.  Not only this, but many crypto innovations are being accomplished by people deeply connected to government surveillance agencies like the NSA, and the infrastructure is being built by globalist corporations like JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs.

      Privacy is the foundation of freedom. All tyranny relies first on the invasion of privacy and the removal of private spaces. The 4th Amendment exists for a very good reason. The argument that “if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear” is a very foolish one. Governments are commonly made up of fallible people who are often corrupt or psychopathic, but frankly NO ONE has the objectivity and wisdom necessary to oversee the private actions and conversations of millions of citizens and then judge them fairly. Politicians and bureaucrats are the least qualified and yet we give them the most power to oversee our lives, all in the name of technological convenience.

      Artificial Intelligence And Automation

      When it comes to technology the mass surveillance issue is the subject most discussed, but there is a problem that concerns me even more – automation. There are plenty of menial tasks in this world that probably should be handled through industry and robotics, but some things should be required learning for every person. For example, do we really want the complete automation of food production in our society? Well, that is the goal of corporations, and it could destroy our ability to provide our own necessities in the future simply by removing the knowledge from our social memory.

      The ability to grow food and harvest food, as well as collecting seeds for future harvests, is integral to human survival. The concept of hunting and gathering is so far removed from the average person’s daily life that it is almost a lost art form, but we have not lost all knowledge of food production yet. What I see though is a bleak future if the current path of technological centralization continues.

      Imagine a world in which nearly everyone is hyperconnected to media, to the point that they wear their devices like clothing at all times. Imagine a society where the average person is so enveloped by data that they no longer pay any attention to the tangible world around them and almost all human interactions are achieved through the middle man of the internet. Imagine people so infantilized by convenience that they no longer know how to do ANYTHING for themselves. They no longer know how to produce goods. They no longer know how to fix anything that is broken. They no longer know how to grow food or find water, nor do they even know where it comes from. They are completely dependent on automation.

      They live completely on the grid – they are born on the grid, and if you were to pluck them from their life of comfortable slavery and place them in the middle of the woods surrounded by food, water and potential shelter they would still die. Now realize that this is basically reality today for many people, and the virus of dependency is spreading.

      Technological advancement serves no purpose to humanity except as a crutch or a cage unless it serves the purpose of liberty and is tempered by the conservation of ancient knowledge and skills passed down through generations. The two ideologies must balance each other out. Those who say otherwise are trying to con you into trading your freedom for a fantasy.

      *  *  *

      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.

    Digest powered by RSS Digest